Sign in to follow this  
Guest

PSS A320 or the new Wilco A320 PIC?

Recommended Posts

Hello guys from the sunny Italy. I'm a real life pilot and of course a virtual pilot with FS2002. A couple of weeks ago I had to chance to fly the incredible 15 milions $ simulators at Alitalia and I was stunned and breathless for the A320 they have. So I wanted to buy the simulation for this airplane. I know nothing can be compared to theirs but at least I would like to study this plane. I have seen that the two chances for the A320 is PSS and Wilco. Now the question: what's the best of them? I know they are somewhat different but can you please help me to choose with your advices?I know both companies are great although I own some PSS aircraft (747-400 pro and Dash-8). From Wilco I just have the Airpots series.Hope to read from ya soon?Michael, Italy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I dont know about the PIC A320, but i can tell you that the PSS A320 is absolutley amazing, and the Customer service from PSS is great. I own every product by PSS and have never had an issue with any of them, they provide great manuals and you can get lost of free user repaints for the A320 from their site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you man for you advice. I know PSS too and they are excellent.Willl keep this in mind.Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not big on the PSS version although it gets the job done and the panel is good although make sure to download the "landing panel" or what ever they call it. As for the Wilco A320, it's a newer technology and has just got it's first update, but many find the new virtual cockpit "only" a real hindrance. There is also a frame rate issue with many users with anything under a 3 gig rig. The patch addressed many issues with preformance and detail errors but will not address frame rates. As for support, well in PSS's forum, they PRE SCREEN your posts and while Wilco's forum does not, chances are only users will help you out.[h5]Best Wishes,Randy J. SmithSan Jose Ca[/h5][h3]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"[/h3]AMD [pink]XP[/pink] 2200 |MUNCHKIN 512 DDR RAM |ECS[/b ][i] K7S5A MB[/i] |GF3 64 MEG @ 215/545|WIN XP PRO |MITSUBISHI DIAMOND PLUS 91 19"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Michael, here's another MichaelI'm sure you will get a lot of different opinions, so here is my take :It somewhat depends on the PC hardware you have available.PSS 320 simulates Airbus systems to a remarkable extend, but the flight feeling of a 320 is not well represented, it's a kind of Airbus/Boeing mixture with partially rough Autopilot reactons, that lack a big jet behaviour. From the optics point of view (cockpit graphics, outside model) it's well done and you get good framerates with moderate PC hardware. To make it short, very good 320 system simulation, but more a toy when it comes to 320 flight.320PIC has a new technology to operate everything from a 3D cockpit only. That means you don't get e.g. an MCDU or center console slammed into your 2D panel, you'll find all the stuff in it's correct 3D environment. That requires time to adjust to it and memorize the different clickspots, but after some learning time it's very immersive. However, I can well understand those, that still prefer 2D panels, so it all depends what you like.The 320 flight is much better represented. You get the Airbus FlybyWire philosophy simulated to an extend FS allows and you get a IMO believable and heavy big jet feel on Autopilot (smooth banks and intercepts). Also you get the best Autoland ever, even with max. certified crosswind for the 320 it works like a charm. It still has some edges that need polishment, but the developers are very dedicated to it and it's alrady very enjoyable in it's current state. For me 320PIC will be THE long time classic after the planned 2nd patch.Both PSS and Wilco operate Fora here, additionally you can also reach the 320PIC developers in their own forum ( http://www.anticyclone.be ).The downside of 320PIC is, you need powerful hardware. To ensure smooth flying, at least a P4 2.0 GHz is recommended or you must be willing to reduce FS details considerably. Additionally I would recommend reasonable stick hardware. The 320 stick (and generally all real yokes) have much bigger travel and forces than PC sticks, you might have noticed that in the big sim. Sticks like e.g. the Thrustmaster Cougar with tough and adjustable springs can compensate for that a little. A sloppy stick makes enjoying of any PC Airbus much more difficult.So, again to make a long story short, I also have some A320 real sim hours and to get as close as currently possible to your A320 real sim experience, I would definitely go for 320 PIC. Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be a kind of bad boy here....and my comments only commit me...but as per my own experience I would say none of them until you have tried the Eurowings professional package.They have an A319 (you may also download an A320 in their site) and having been testing all 3 of them, I tend to think that their panel is by far the greatest I have seen for an A319/A320 aircraft.Only bad point, landing light not visible so far from cockpit view (like DF734), but a service pack is under preparation which will include new items such as virtual cockpit and passenger/cargo doors and cockpit landing lights, amongt many improvements.Their panel is the most user friendly and easy to use of all A320s I have seen, and, in addition, you will get two great ATR42/72 and a BA 146 aircrafts with many liveries,plus 5 european airports sceneries.This is the best aircraft package I have seen since the legendary DF734 which was a revolution in its concept.To be fair, I must say that PSS product is great too but frankly I dont like the concept of their panel where default view is not user friendly. On the other side, they have a great support team and a huge choice of additional liveries that can be purchased from their sites. Regarding Wilco, it can really affect your FPS if you have a slow machine and, personally, I cannot get used to the virtual panel concept only which I find very unuser friendly. I think they have been going to far regarding today's pc capabilities. Same for their new airport 2002, burning all you FPS...Conclusion, all of them are great products, but if I would have to choose one of them, and taking into account framerate and user friendly issus, no doubt, I would take EW PRO.My comments might be marginal, and I must add that I am not paid by EW pro, but I just wanted to share my enthusiam for this product with you.Have a nice day Michael, and good luck for your choice.Patrick Geneva

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Michael,I've been flying with both PSS aswell as the PIC A320 and as mentioned before, both have their pro's and con's.PIC 320: I really love the concept of the 3d cockpit although it has major flaws. The gauges update is the biggest issue for me. The instruments really lack fluidly in their movement wich make prescion flying rather difficult. Also the framerate is an big issue. I need to fly the PIC320 without AI and other sliders cracked back to have good framerates. BUT, the airbusfeeling is just GREAT! It flies like a bus and not like a boeing! Also, with the latest patch many issue's have been corrected.PSS 320: Very good model and i like the panel very much too. Good framerates and all options working. Biggest flaw for me is the poor airbus flight caracteristics. It just flies and feels like a boeing. (DF734)I cannot give my opinion on the Eurowings 320 but so far as I know, it uses the DF734 FMC wich is a boeing type management computer and functions really different as Airbus's MCDU. (please correct me if i'm wrong)Conclusion: for now, buy PSS's bus. BUT, with FSCOF and the 2nd PIC320 coming up, this might be just the A320 for the future... .(also check out this great A310 at www.simsoftworkshop.com)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw in my 2 cents. I have been learning this PSS 320 bird over the weekend. Once you get Boeing de-programmed out of your head (if you have a problem with that :) ) you will be fine.I learned Boeing from the start in simulation and I had a terrible time getting used to it. But, once you do, you won't regret flying this machine. I find the PSS A320 a remarkable bird, however it does act like a fighter bird when turning in autopilot, as someone else also mentioned. The frames are very well acceptible in the PSS model. The one thing I have heard about the Wilco 320 is that is DOES take a massive machine to run full bore :( I have a AMD Athlon 2600+ 333 FSB with RAID and all that so it isn't a problem for me, however for a guy with anything less than 1800 you may have a problem with the Wilco bird.-----------Wilson HinesChief CaptainBush Logistics Corp.http://heavylhc.comAOL IM: dal276wh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were you I'd get the PSS A320, I don't know what or why others are speaking so highly of the Wilco bird but if you like slide shows by all means go with the Wilco product. Wilco's visual model is way off and you'll find yourself doing alot of tweaking to get the virtual cockpit to work correctly. Seeing that FS2004 is around the corner I would play it safe and go with the PSS version. I'm sure the half baked way Wilco has tried to produce a clickable virtual cockpit will all get thrown out in the next version of Flight Simulator anyway. PSS's version looks better and works right out of the box (or download). Forget the comment that it flies like a Boeing aircraft. You be the judge of that since you have time in the real simulator. None of us are really qualified to make that statement unless we've flown the A320 in real life. I for one think PSS has done a great job and the plane does not handle anything like a Boeing 737 in FS or the realworld and/or otherwise (Class D simulators). Like someone mentioned above, unless you have a 3gig processor I'd stay with the PSS Airbus, you won't regret it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Eurowings package too, and I have found one minor issue, no animated thrust reverse on their Airbus. The package is great however the Amsterdam scenery is not as the real Schiphol is. The parking spots are not assigned as in real.This is also minor and it just extra, the airports. The visual model of the PSS is not as real as the Eurowings model, but that is just for people flying spot plane every now and then. Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The A320 PIC simulates the airbus systems better than the PSS A320...I have not ever flown a a real A320 or a Level D sim, but I have studied the airbus systems and fly by wire (CBTs and some other training resources) and I can tell you that, A320 PIC provides a much more realistic airbus simulation.However, you need a fast computer to run A320 PIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,I am using the Project Airbus A320 (www.avsim.com/projectairbus) together with the PSS panel a very good combination I think.BrgdsEugen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The A320 PIC simulates the airbus systems better than the PSS A320...To be honest with you, I have never seen a PSS plane that was even close to the real plane, ever. From the 747-400(my first PSS I got, and I have all of them, Airliner wise) on, they haven't come close.I have not ever flown a a real A320 or a Level D sim, but Ihave studied the airbus systems and fly by wire (CBTs andsome other training resources) and I can tell you that, A320PIC provides a much more realistic airbus simulation.Doesn't suprise me, PSS puts more into outputting planes very fast, with nice visuals, as opposed to fully realistic sytem sim planes. The 767 PIC development cycle was something like 2+ years, if memory serves me, and that is the defacto standard for FS planes. IIRC, PSS development team does FS addons for a living, and they can't afford to not put out planes fast.However, you need a fast computer to run A320 PIC. Sounds like the best reason to get the PSS Bus :) How many of us out there really have the 3+ gig puters? Surely not me.:-beerchug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A320 PIC was just way ahead of it's time - give it another 6 months to a year, when everyone is running 4Ghz CPUs with 1.5GB of RAM and GeForce FX2's or Radeon 10200s and it's gonna run great. The issue is that it's simulating so many real life internal Airbus calculations that it slows down on most current systems...I have both though, and they're both good. (though I don't feel the flight modeling of the PSS is anywhere as close to the real thing as the PIC one is) You could get the PSS now though and then buy A320 PIC after PC's have caught up to it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Eugen, are their any details on how to properly merge the panel and the Project Airbus birds? This looks interesting :)>Hi,>>I am using the Project Airbus A320>(www.avsim.com/projectairbus) together with the PSS panel a>very good combination I think.>>Brgds>>Eugen-----------Wilson HinesChief CaptainBush Logistics Corp.http://heavylhc.comAOL IM: dal276wh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of information, use the forum search function. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well guys, In general, I got the "need to proceed" out of reading this thread. So I purchased the Wilco A320 PIC today. What a package. I must say the United 320 aircraft physical model is more appealing than my United PSS 320. Quite to the contrair of what one guy said in here about PSS being very apt to push a product out the door quickly and the evidence residing in the visual quality, I find that totally nuts. I have everything they have made except the Vulcan and the physical models always seem blah to me (IMHO). So, the Wilco model is darn "pretty", to use a girly term :). I must say that if I hadn't spent the past four days in the PSS Airbus, I would have been one lost arse of a human being in that Wilco cockpit. WOW, what a dang information overload. The biggest problem is you have to redo your joystick and throttle assignments and you have to go into the key assignments and change a few things or at least get familiar with some differences(PIC has a special key assignment utility seperate from the FS utility). Some examples of keys being very different from any other aircraft are: barometer setting, gear, brakes, flaps and 100 others !LOL! It should also be brought up that this bird has no 2d panel whatsoever. This may be a good thing....in 1 month of just flying Wilco alone and nothing else after you are entirely used to it. It is awkward, but I honestly think it will be something anybody could get used to and probably, finally, one day, learn to love :). I only took off from KORD headed for KATL in the Wilco, that was all I had time for. I got within 45nm of Nashville on the RMG2 arrival and I had to go away for a little while so I just shut everything down. I CAN"T imagine landing this bird in the V.C! As much as you have to work, especially when A.T.C (VATSIM or AI), I think the APPR and Landing will be very intersting...to say the least. Having two monitors is a HUGE advantage with the Wilco bird over anything I have ever seen. It gives the ability to click on a gauge and the gauge will pop out and you can move it to the other monitor(s) and resize as you wish. This is nice when your having to look into one area of the panel and keep an eye on something else. However, this is a disadvantage with the FMC. I don't like how you have to interact with the FMC, basically like the other gauges. You click on the screen and it pops up. You then have to hit your "+" and focus your POV (point of view) off of your stick until you can see the line selectors and key pad on the FMC while still being able to view the actual screen. It can get frustrating to the least, but I will give them credit on a novel idea here. :)I have the following machine:Athlon XP 2600+ Gigibyte Triton KT400 333FSB512 DDR 400MHz RAMWestern Digital 120 GB 8MB buffer HDSPlantronics Headset/sound19" NEC Flat and 17" Compaq monitorsI must say that with this machine I found the performance just as acceptible as the PSS, with keeping in mind we are talking about the V.C. Viewing in TWR and Spot Plane modes was just as good as the other.As far as systems being reproduced. I found both of them almost identical in reproduction of the systems. I basically learned the Airbus systems in the PSS and when I got in the flight deck of the Wilco I just started turning switches and everything worked fine and dandy. I have some screenshots and will share them once I a finally do a complete flight. By that time, we can probably take the comments in this thread and make a real nice dang review to be posted on somebodies site out there :) Maybe even http://heavylhc.com :)-----------Wilson HinesChief CaptainBush Logistics Corp.http://heavylhc.comAOL IM: dal276wh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson,Interestin mini review. I would go out and get Wilcos A320, but I am not sure that my XP 1700 would take it. :)I think your right, the VC concept is a hard one for many(including myself) to swallow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to each his own Wilson... I don't know if you work for Wilco or your just a very satisfied customer but PSS wins hands down for me. Glad to hear your injoying the bird. I for one feel the visual model is much better on the PSS side of the tracks. I can't comment on flight model performance, but I'd love to see how this addon will standup after FS2004 is released....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson,some things I don't really understand :>> Some examples of keys being very different from any other aircraft are: barometer setting, gear, brakes, flaps My key assigment in 320 PIC is e.g. G for gear, B for brakes, F6/F7 for Flaps up/down. Why do you say very different since it's all configurable anyway ?>> you have to interact with the FMC, basically like the other gauges. You click on the screen and it pops up. You then have to hit your "+" and focus your POV (point of view) off of your stick The way you have to operate in real life is to look to the right and down to your FMC and turn your head away from front view, it's exactly like that in 320PIC. Program your complete FMC view to a button, hit the "+" and hit your button for your self definable front view, and you are back very fast. You can store your own views and program them to buttons. I have six views and can switch them just like in a 2D panel, just e.g. the FMC is in it's real environment and not somewhere on top of the 2D front panel and half in the scenery window. Additionally the view scrolls, and if you imagine a turning head with this, it's very immersive.You can even make a landing view to your liking.The only challenge to operate things fast is to memorize the different clickspots. I bet I am faster than anyone with a 2D panel to click a switch on the overhead panel and be back to normal view. You don't have to close subpanels in 320PICMichael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I don't know if you work for WilcoNope I don't work for them at all. I am just glad to be here like anybody else, however I do reviews for SimFlight, but that is totally unassociated with this.>I for one feel the visual model is much better on the PSS sideof the tracks. Well, IMHO that is a matter of "O" :) Everybody has likes and dislikes when it comes to visual models. I must clarify this, I am still a PSS fan on the A320s for one reason, I can get in the cockpit and get going in a matter of minutes. I spent three hours on the ground at KORD just clicking around and getting used to the way things are and scanning the forums trying to figure some road blocks out (like you have to do with any good payware for the first few days). Like I said in the post, the time spent in the PSS bird prevented that 3 hours from being 3 days. The systems were basically the same . But, to sum this all up, I would still rather fly the PSS :)>but I'd love to see how this addon will standup after FS2004>is released....That, my friend, will be interesting to see. However 2k4 is suppposed to add more function to the V.C so it may thrive.-----------Wilson HinesChief CaptainBush Logistics Corp.http://heavylhc.comAOL IM: dal276wh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>> Some examples of keys being very different from any other>aircraft are: barometer setting, gear, brakes, flaps >>My key assigment in 320 PIC is e.g. G for gear, B for brakes,>F6/F7 for Flaps up/down. Why do you say very different since>it's all configurable anyway ?I understand it is "configurable" however I was just simply saying that it was "more different" right out of the box than any other aircraft I had previously used. With every other add-on, F6-F7 is flaps, B is Barometer and several other examples. It was different, that is all :)>>> you have to interact with the FMC, basically like the other>gauges. You click on the screen and it pops up. You then have>to hit your "+" and focus your POV (point of view) off of your>stick >>The way you have to operate in real life is to look to the>right and down to your FMC and turn your head away from front>view, it's exactly like that in 320PIC. Program your complete>FMC view to a button, hit the "+" and hit your button for your>self definable front view, and you are back very fast. No doubt about the realism here with the FMC and having to look away. Again, I am just saying that I am used to the FMC being like the 767 PIC or PSS products as a seperate gauge. It is different, but it is workable and I will probably learn to like it.>>You can store your own views and program them to buttons. I>have six views and can switch them just like in a 2D panel,>just e.g. the FMC is in it's real environment and not>somewhere on top of the 2D front panel and half in the scenery>window. Additionally the view scrolls, and if you imagine a>turning head with this, it's very immersive.>You can even make a landing view to your liking.I didn't know that, thanks for the tip. I will look into that ASAP :)>>The only challenge to operate things fast is to memorize the>different clickspots. I bet I am faster than anyone with a 2D>panel to click a switch on the overhead panel and be back to>normal view. You don't have to close subpanels in 320PIC>Some of the click spots are down right freaking impossible :( But, again, I will eventually get used to it. Every bird, payware or freeware, has it's problems and "attitude" with certian aspects.-----------Wilson HinesChief CaptainBush Logistics Corp.http://heavylhc.comAOL IM: dal276wh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a mouse with a scroll wheel to zoom in/out is very helpful in the 320 PIC VC. You can conveniently 'slew' yourself inside the cockpit to look at things at a better angle using the numberpad. I use the default assignments throughout and they're perfect, for me anyway.If you're annoyed that you find yourself switching your right hand (assuming you're not a leftie) from joystick to keyboard to mouse all the time, remember one thing: in the real 'bus, the PF has the sidestick on the left!If the FS aCoF VCs have been implemented in a similar fashion to this one, I'd be very happy indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many have stated both PSS and PIC have their strong and weak points. I have used the PSS bus since it was released. I like the panel a lot. But I'm not sure about the flightmodel. I have no real world/real simulator experience. But I have to agree with many others: it's most likely that the PSS climb- and bankrates are not releastic. Aspecially right after takeoff it's almost like flying a military jet. Besides this it's a real good package.I recently bought the A320 PIC and am very impressed so far. Sure it takes time to get used to the VC-only way of flying. But...once you do get used to it, the experience of being there is great! The flight dynamics of the PIC seem more realistic (passenger friendly ;-) ) to me. At least I do not get the 'jet experience' here. I'm still learning the PIC. Strange, as one would expect both versions would be operated equaly. There are however some minor yet important differences in the way things are done. And the FPS: yes, the PIC needs a powerfull PC. I'm running an AMD 2600+/333, 512MB, Asus A7N8X Deluxe, ATI 9500 Pro 128MB. My FPS is absolutely acceptable (in VC average 20-25FPS, FPS locked at 25) with all sliders maxed except for the PIC specific ones.One more point to take into consideration is future development. PSS has stated in public they will not make any update/patch for the Airbus package. PIC, however, is focusing on their bus a lot. They already came a long way. Let's hope they (Wilco and Anticyclone) actualy get where they want to be: builders of the most advanced and real as it gets Airbus for FS...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson,This is a fair mini review IMO."As far as systems being reproduced. I found both of them almost identical in reproduction of the systems"i'd like to add that PIC systems are "failable" and more complex than PSS (200+ systems elements can be failed separately, i.e. engines fires, electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, IRS, Pitots etc.).Not to tlk about the perfect autoland even with XWind, realistic flight by wire, realtime IRS alignment and drifting, Offset feature in the FMGS, CO RTE, SEC FPLN.Anyway PSS is a good introduction to the Bus systems (FMGS programming, autopilot) and more fps friendly (not amazed, the PSS VC is a collection of bitmaps with a few 3d objects and buttons). Its also cheap (less than $20 for d/l version) and manuals are excellent.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this