What happened to the long haul?

[Guest]

What happened to the quality long haul add-ons for MFS? Their are NO large jets for FS2002 that feature the same realism as Dreamfleets 737, PMDG's 737/J41, or Captain Sims 727. Do you all think that their will be say a 777, 747 or MD-11 or other longhaul jet being developed in the future with the same realism as these other short haul add-ons.Not a complaint mind you, I am really looking forward to the 737NG by PMDG.cheers

[Guest]

The PIC 767 is considered by many as the best airliner add-on available (I don't have it, so I don't know. PSS also sells a good B747 and B777. I understand that the panels from these three can also be combined with POSKY models. Of these three, I have the B747 and I think it is well done. None of these are brand new, but they still work great and can hold their own.http://www.jktaylor.com/flightsim/jkvato1.jpg

[Guest]

Thanks, I had PSS 747 and it was good for its time but it is not really the same as some of newer add-ons. I was really meaning somthing designed specifically for Fs2002.

[Guest]

Because the 3 mentioned have the market just about cornered, there is not enough demand to create something brand new.It just wouldn't sell enough to warrant the investment needed.Dreamfleet did research making an A340, but that one was cancelled because it was not deemed economically feasible. I doubt the situation will be different for other companies.Maybe with FS2004 we will see new longhaul addons, IF the current ones can no longer be upgraded (else we may see upgrades for sale, as well as upgraded versions of the originals).

[Guest SIX]

Let me answer your thoughts about PIC 767. I first had the PSS 747-400 and the 777-200. Then I got the PIC 767. I heard all the pizaz about PIC and was really exciting, thinking it may actually be better than anything PSS put out, however, nope, it wasn't. It is just not the same quality. There are good and great things about it and I wouldn't not have the PIC. If I fly a 767 it will be the POSKY with the PIC panel. But, you can't really compare it to the PSS 747 or 777 and definatly not to the A320 from PSS. The PSS planes, all of them, are just more detailed.-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC EditorAOL IM: dal276whBush Flying Unlimited: SIXUVI014 "Heavy"http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[Guest SIX]

FS2k4 is going to show a whole new ballgame for developers. I, of course, don't have any inside info, but just think about it for a second: 1. PSS 747 & 777, PIC 767 all originally were made for FS2000 and patched to FS2k2. 2. Scenery: there was SOOOOO much scenery made for FS2000 and patched up for 2k2.With those thoughts in mind, and from what a PSS insider has said, the community is ripe for some "fresh" inovation as soon as 2k4 comes out.-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC EditorAOL IM: dal276whBush Flying Unlimited: SIXUVI014 "Heavy"http://avsim.com/hangar/air/bfu/logo70.gif

[Guest]

How is the new site coming along.. heavylhc.com that is?

[Guest sidewinder]

I too wana see a 747-400 as good as 767 PICMaybe 747 Pilot in Command *hint* *hint* to Wilco

[Guest Thomas K]

SIX,You've got to be kidding, right? 767PIC is MANY times better than the PSS panels. This isn't PSS bashing, but 767PIC is in a completely different class of its own. Its become a classic in its own right and a benchmark for other developers. PSS products tend to be for the casual simmer who wants to learn about the workings of an airliner but aren't necessarily serious or hardcore about it whereas 767PIC is for serious simmers who want absolute realism. I fly the PSS A320 myself and find it to be a decent simulation of the real A320 but you are dead wrong when you say that 767PIC doesn't measure up to PSS because thats just non-sense. PSS tends to develop products to satisfy market demand whereas 767PIC was in development for over a year and a half by a team of very dedicated people including a real-life 767 pilot. 767 PIC has systems modelling, failure simulation in addition to a top notch panel, all of which are non-existant in the PSS panels. If you think you're getting the real deal with PSS planes, think again. Their A320 is all right (after many months of tweaking) but their 747/777 is child's play compared to 767PIC. The 747/777 was good in its day but times have changed. Again this is not PSS bashing, but an objective and realistic opinion of different products with different target audiences and credit should be given where credit is due.Thomas

[Guest Lobaeux4]

I tend to agree with Thomas about the PIC 767 being the definitive add-on for FS2K2. But I think the earlier poster was saying how much better the visual models of PSS were than Wilco's and I've got to agree. Granted I don't use anything but the PSS Airbus model and visuals, but the PSS 747/777 had to go and they were replaced by POSKY, and the same with PICs.Lobaeux

[Guest flightpro08]

No good heavy jets?767 = Pilot in Command 767-300 by www.wilcopub.com777 = PSS 777-200 Package bye www.phoenix-simulation.co.uk/747 = PSS 747-400 Package by www.phoenix-simulation.co.uk/DC-10 = DC-10 Package by FFG Not to mention numerous other heavy aircraft (Simubuild's A340 just to name one.)I don't know about you, but my "heavy jets" hanger is pretty full. ;-)Ryan-Flightpro08 :-cool VATSIM Pilot/ControllerZLA ARTCC Senior Controller (C-3)SAN TRACON Lead [link:members.cox.net/santracon/home|SAN TRACON Homepage] [link:www.taxiwaysigns.com|Taxiwaysigns.com] Scenery Designer-----------------------------My "Home Made" System Specs:Intel Pentium 4 2.2GHz ProcessorTurbo Gamer ATX Mid-Tower with 420W Power SupplyEPoX 4G4A Motherboard with Intel 845G ChipsetVisiontek XTASY GeForce4 128MB Ti4600 (Det 30.30 Drivers)512MB PC2100 DDR RAM40GB Matrox 7200RPM Hard DriveWindows XP Home Edition SP1*No CPU or GPU Overclocking*3dMark2001SE Score: 11298-----------------------------Click [link:ftp.avsim.com/library/esearch.php?DLID=&Name=&FileName=&Author=Ryan+Fretwell&CatID=Root]Here to Download my New American Eagle POSKY CRJ-200!

[michal 44]

>You've got to be kidding, right? Thomas,I think SIX must be kidding or he wants to inject some humor. So far nothing has been designed with greater fidelity for the FS platform than the PIC. Case closed. Michael J.

[Guest kdfw]

SIX,What???I have PSS744 and it's pretty good. But 767PIC is the state-of-the-art in its category. Everyone now uses the PIC with the POSKY external model, but the panel and flt dynamics are what makes the simulator great. If you spend most of your time looking at the airplanes from outside, then you may have a point: PSS744 looks better than the default PIC external model.Perhaps you were put off by the complexity of the panel, which is quite understandable. 767PIC is not for everyone.Pat

[Guest jase439]

Is there a good FS2K2 tri-engine (DC-10, MD-11, L-1011 class) panel that you'd recommend. Ahlberg's panel is a bit dated.J

[Guest groundpounder75]

My two cents...I have been waiting for someone to bring up this topic because I didn't want to sound like the bad guy, but I definitely think that if someone else came out with a PANEL, not a model, but a panel for the 747-400 that resembled the functionality of the PIC 767, it would sell like no tomorrow. I love the PSS 744 and it is what I fly primarily but I always crave more realism. I am on the verge of dropping FS2K2 all toghether and changing to Aerowinx 744 simulator and calling my sim. I am a 744 junkie and I want it to be as complex is can get!!!!! I am sure someone will crop up out of the blue that is hardcore for the 744 and make a new panel that will be absolutley awesome.