>Is it me or does the panel look a bit plain?>>Compared to the Version 2 (black panel with a worn look, which>is what I saw when I flew a real one) the version 3 looks a>plain panel with the gauges on, or is that what its supposed>to look like?>>GrahamI suspect the Archer III is based on the a newer model. I don't know anything about these planes though.Either way, I like the new one better. Less clutter, nicer panel color, better 2D appearance, ect...ETA: Yup, Piper has an Archer III, so it's not just DF's naming, and the new Archer looks like that. A pic of the panel can be found here: http://www.newpiper.com/aircraft/archer~iii/gallery.asp

>Is it me or does the panel look a bit plain?>>Compared to the Version 2 (black panel with a worn look, which>is what I saw when I flew a real one) the version 3 looks a>plain panel with the gauges on, or is that what its supposed>to look like?>>GrahamThat is exactly how bland the latest version of the real thing looksSee the difference in clutter between the newhttp://www.airliners.net/open.file/1077458/M/and the oldhttp://www.airliners.net/open.file/1112846/M/Actually bland is probably not the right word, it's mych more comfortable viewing than the old version where gauges could seem to run into one another.This is a cracking little model, been a long time coming! Notice how, wehen you take the wheel pants off for operation on grass strips the performance changes? How cool is that!? And finally a proper landing panel view where the bitmap and gauges are both lower down, AND closer to the eye - mimicing a pilot sitting up in the seat to get a better view over the nose!And I like the reading lights in the back!Allcott

Looks awesome to me. With that pic from the Piper site I'd say they nailed it right on :-)

Lou photographed Chuck Robert's Archer (that's the red and white one) for this so the panel looks just like his.

My FS9 budget is way over spent, as it was when I bought the A36 Bonanza but I absolutely have to have this, right now.Sure glad I bought that case of Kraft dinner at Costco last week.

This plane is just like the one I fly.My flight school has 2 Archer 3's but they have duel Garmin 430's in them.I have about 100 hours in them now and they are great flying airplanes.I am about to start my instrument cross counties and I will do them on FS9 first with the Archer then for real. Jeff

An great bit of work it is. Flies wonderfully and the performance of the VC is outstanding. Gauges are very, very smooth. I highly recommend!

Great plane! I'm not usually inclined to purchase slower flying GA's, but this plane looked too good to pass up. I figured for the price, it was a great deal. Well, I just completed a 1.4 hour flight and am happy to say it flies like a dream.

I am dissapointed. The VC guages in this are Bad. ITs not even round.:(Mannyhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/167811.jpg

Manny,I think you ought to stick with renting a real Archer III if you find the Dreamfleet one unacceptable. I happen to think your opinion is not shared with the majority of simmers.BTW thanks for posting a close up of the VC, I'm not allowed to since I was beta on the project.

Here is the Flight1 172 VC for comparison. Look at the VOR. IF its going to be the same in FSX... The default VCs will knock the Archer over 10 fold!I loved the old Dreamfleet archer.. The only thing I thought would improve on it was the VC. This needs rework!Mannyhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/167814.jpg

Something I've learned as a real pilot . . . . if you have your face THAT bloody close to the gauges . . . you are either under the hood during an unusual attitude recovery about to eat the yoke or yer just plain not flying the aircraft.But since we have that screenshot . . . . the only thing that doesn't look perfectly round to me are the metal strips around the ADF and VOR gauges . . . but I can tell you those strips look in a LOT better condition than the poor old strips in the Cessna 172 I fly.Advantage, though -- one of the strips is loose but not too loose, so now it holds an index card with the local airport frequencies :-)

And thanks for posting a comparison shot Manny. The Flight1 Cessna 172 is one of my favorites and it's VC is a very good one too. Just so you and others can understand the differences though, the methods used to construct each of those VC's is quite different. The three latest Dreamfleet releases, their Baron, their Bonanza (since r3) and this Archer III use a single entry in the panel configuration for the virtual cockpit. This directly effects the ability for the sim to generate smooth gauge movement. The rough maximum FS2004 will refresh the gauges in the VC is 18 fps per VC panel entry. The very careful use of space and placement by Dreamfleet's design team has allowed the full panel and all simulated gauges in the VC to be placed onto a single panel entry allowing for this full 18 fps and a fluid gauge movement when flying from the VC. Flight1's excellent Cessna 172R uses 4 entries for its virtual cockpit, limiting the gauges in the VC to a maximum refresh rate of 4.5 fps. If flying from the 2d panel you are not restricted to this limitation... you also don't notice the cutout gauge openings which are what are giving you appearance of pixelated circles.

I would like to thank Dreamfleet for this EXCELLENT addon. I have VERY high standards for addons and I can say without a doubt that the close shot of the gauges above is nothing to worry about. There is no reason to make a gauge any sharper than they are in the Archer III and if you fly like a normal pilot from a standard distance, you will have a beautiful panel. Performance also counts and I can't see a point in oversharping a gauge and then ending up with a lot slower FPS on both the gauges and FS itself. In my opinion, DF has made a perfect compromise and everyone interested in GA should NOT skip this.The plane is a full simulation in all aspects and the sounds (both inside and outside) are top notch. Some of the best I've heard in FS so far. Flight dynamics are pretty much as real as it gets in FS. I have quite a bit of PA28 and P28R experience so I have something to compare with :)While old planes are good, I especially like the feel of a brand new airplane.I'll go get the plane warmed up now.

Here's the view from a normal flying zoom in the VC. Some of the detail is lost from the resize.http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/1547/ar03fx2.jpgI think it looks fine.