I recently bought the new A340 released by PSS, having had a very nice experience from their a320 and dhc-8, probably two of my mostly used payware a/c:s. But I have to say that I'm really disappointed in their a340. The 2D-panels and the exterior model are OK i guess, but the VC leaves a lot to be desired. Missing textures, switches not moving, some grave modelling errors like missing polygons et.c. are just a few of the disappointments, and even though these things are taken care of in future patches, the VC still feels like a quite badly modelled rush job.Had this been released by anyone else than PSS perhaps I wouldn't mind so much, but that PSS released such a poorly executed design makes me really disappointed since it doesn't live up to their previous achievements. I really hope they take care of this, or PSS has lost all my confidence.rgrds/fredrik, a somewhat disappointed pss-fan...

I agree, I just hope they come along with that A320 patch. Another thing that is disappointing is their reluctance to update the old 777/747 2D panels to work with FS2k4... Ooh well, hears hoping the A330/340 gets fixed and the A320 patch released before Holloween.

PSS won't upgrade their 777/747 packages because the product was originally made for FS2000 and patched for FS2002 as was Dreamfleets 737-400 and PIC767 packages, so it's not really reasonable to expect developers to keep creating patches for software that is getting long in the tooth not to mention that it can be more work trying to get older packages to function properly in FS2004 than it would be to create all new ones. With that being said, all of the aformentioned packages are being recreated from scratch and I'm sure all will be high quality packages taking full advantage of FS2004's features, especially PIC767v2 as it will have network gauges which will be a first and the realism and immersion factor will be that much higher.Regards,Van LatendresseYeoDesigns/AFG GroupPanel/FDE Designer

Don't expect too much from PICv2 if Eric Ernest isn't involved, remember we're dealing with Wilco here. Eric was the backbone of that project not to mention at the time he had just recieved certification as a real 757/767 First Officer for American Airlines. I personally don't think we'll see another PIC of the same quality from Wilco... Another thing Van that troubles me is will we be able to use the 2D panel with Posky's jets. Think about how bad the PIC default 767s were on framerates, think about how PIC A320....

Dillon, please be careful, I think you are spreading misinformation. It's my understanding that Wilco is not involved in this project. In anycase, I don't think it's fair to badmouth the project with very little or no information, which is what you are doing.

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame29.htmlPaulhttp://www.strontiumdog.plus.com/sbird.jpgOfficially licenced by British Airways plc for use of name and logo[p]AMD XP2800+ Barton, Gigabyte GA-7NNXP nForce2, 1Gig Crucial PC3200 DDR 400MHz, Gainward 128 MB GF4-4200, SB Audigy, 3 x WD Caviar SE[/p]

>I could care less who agrees with me or not. Avsim usually>locks threads when people stop discussing and start arguing>and attacking people.well...golly goo...looks like you just started to attack people:what else would you call your initial post?you attack those guys,you slam them into the ground,and as if that isn't enough,you kick them as well.SHEESH "censored">I don't see anything wrong with what>I've said here and my point of view is just that my point of>view.yes,but the problem lies in the fact that your point of view is usually negative,and written in such a way that people with as much(or as little) braincells as you agree,which is very stupid,imho. >If you agree cool if you don't that's cool too.Who>ever wants to sit here and speculate the product is going to>be awesome is just as bad as me stating it most likely won't>be, problem is we'll all just have to wait and see.i do certainly NOT agree with you.further,i'm not going to speculate,and IF i were to speculate,i would most certainly take into account the fact that the initial product is STILL the one used for comparing all the others.and,there is no problem,except you. >I thought>we could get a discussion going that would go both ways for>the sake of conversation, in the end we all come away with>hopes that the product will be good.sorry,but to me it read as:it will not be good,eric does not cooperate anymore,why waste my time etc etc...in short:a FLAME post. >Any suggestion about>merging the new panel with Posky's birds (if that would be>possible) would have been cool as well. no you just said you don't want to speculate...but what is this called then?>I know the developers>read this form (maybe that's why the air is so tense) so at>least they could hear what we would want and what expectations>people have for a follow up to such a great design. Without>constructive arguments many new ideas wouldn't even be thought>of.what exactly is YOUR constructive argument?...in all the time i've had the disadvantage of stumbling on one of your posts,there's never been a truly positive comment from you.if i were a developer,i'd be really angry by now.>It seems to me that many hear don't take the time to read a>whole post and understand what someone is trying to say (let>alone keeping things in context). Can someone show me where>the developers said that Wilco will not be the publishing>company for the new PIC???i've taken the time,and frankly,it made me sick.useless attention dragging...too bad it worked.>This is why I wanted Avsim to delete the post. Now if all you>guys want to sit here and call me everything under the sun,>feel free to, I still get paid tomorrow and we'll see in the>end how PIC will turn out. I

Since you want to continue this Tom van der Elst,"Well thanks for updating me on that fact (who's publishing what)... Now can you point me to the link that is either straight from the developers or PICv2's website so we all aren't speculating here (who's going to be on the team etc.).. If all people can give me is "it's been said COUNTLESS times", is no better than what I'm being accused of here. Word of mouth doesn

Posted by Wade Chafe in the announcement thread:"It will not be called "767 Pilot in Command" because that name is owned by WILCO."That pretty clearly implies Wilco will not be publishing the new plane. After the fiasco that happened with the beta FS2002 patch being availiable on a public Wilco FTP etc I believe the team stated they wouldn't be working with them again.What I want to know is where did you you get the information that Eric Ernst isn't on the team anymore? I follow the PIC forum pretty closely and I never saw that announced.Ryan

http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...21232&mode=fullthere ya go,and since Wade IS deloper of PICV2 i hope you can now stop telling misleading things,if not throw filth all around you.i sincerely hope you will be banned from this forum.

Thanks Tom,I hope you get banned as well...

I said 'if'... I have never seen any official word on the subject so I posted saying 'if' because he has produced some great panels over the years. His work inspired PIC...Thanks for the info...

as long as you go down with me,it's okay with me ;-)

...Smile...

So exactly what was the point of all this conjecture then? Wade said "THE TEAM" is working on a new version - why would you suddenly take that to mean Eric Ernst was no longer a member of said team? Try actually reading the PIC forum once in a while - it's been clear for quite a while that the team was not going to go with Wilco again. (my bet is on Flight1, which would be awesome)Ryan>I said 'if'... I have never seen any official word on the>subject so I posted saying 'if' because he has produced some>great panels over the years. His work inspired PIC...>>Thanks for the info...