Suggest:1) we sticky this2) we use normalised numbers, e.g. using the CRJ700 as a base reference of 1.0 (FPSnew/FPSref)That way we can add more benchmarks as we go along and still compare apples and apples. I do have some addons that I can add to the list but because my machine specs are different only if the figures are normalised would they be useful. If everyone chips in we'll have a bigger sample size as well. I suspect most GAs and twin props would have a rating of close to or above 1 for payware and default Microsoft. I hereby christen this the "Petraeus Rating". :(

Suggest:1) we sticky this2) we use normalised numbers, e.g. using the CRJ700 as a base reference of 1.0 (FPSnew/FPSref)

I'm not in a position to be able to do 1, but 2 is an excellent idea. I don't have every plane in my hangar, but others will have the missing ones, so they can contribute.During the course of the next week I'll reissue the passenger plane numbers (including the PMDG 737-600/700 that I've just ported across to FSX), but normalised to the CRJ700 as you've suggested. Then hopefully others can chip in with Ariane, PMDG 747-400, others like Overland etc. After that I'll do my GA planes, so others can do likewise.I'll also suggest in the Review Forum that they do likewise.

I hereby christen this the "Petraeus Rating". :(

If that were my real name I'd decline on the grounds that it's too egocentric. :( But as it's only a pseudonym, why not? :(

I'm not in a position to be able to do 1, but 2 is an excellent idea. I don't have every plane in my hangar, but others will have the missing ones, so they can contribute.During the course of the next week I'll reissue the passenger plane numbers (including the PMDG 737-600/700 that I've just ported across to FSX), but normalised to the CRJ700 as you've suggested. Then hopefully others can chip in with Ariane, PMDG 747-400, others like Overland etc. After that I'll do my GA planes, so others can do likewise. If that were my real name I'd decline on the grounds that it's too egocentric. :( But as it's only a pseudonym, why not? :(

Excellent Petraeus. I will send you some numbers over the course of next week and you can update that master Excel file (it would be a good idea to include sample size as well). If we can't sticky this let's figure out a way to post this somewhere on the Net (such as a blog, but we'll discuss offline). I still think it's a very useful exercise. :(

May I suggest that the base Petraeus Rating be 100 instead of 1.0 (ie New FPS/CRJ700 FPS x 100)? Whole numbers are always easier to grasp than fractions.