Yes, in my opinion, 747 has the best external textures from all PMDG planes for FSX.

If you want more real and detailed textures , hop over to McPhatThey have HD texture packages for several addon aircraft, like the PMDG MD-11, that will make it look more realistic than the PMDG B747-400 with the "normal" textures, which are already good.Also they are working on a PMDG 747-400 package , but that one has been delayed , so within the next 6 months it won't come out... Here PMDG MD-11 texturesHere with McPhat texture

I dont know why you guys keep suggesting the MD-11, the poster aleady says he has it.As far as the choice goes, I have the PMDG 747 and love it, but you will need to keep in mind that your taking some airports out of the mix if you buy it due to the length of runway it requires to both land and takeoff when loaded. When I bought my PMDG 747 if PMDG had had their 737NGX out at the time and was going to buy one a/c I would have chosen the 737 because I like the versatility of being able to fly it into more airports, however I do love their 747 and fly it a lot anyways into major hubs since that's more of what its suited to. I also wouldn't be afraid of the FPS. I hadn't bought the 747 for a long time because I heard it hammered FPS, but once I finally took the plunge and bought it, I found that using their FPS tuning tool to adjust refresh rates and other options, I get really good FPS with it. In fact, even on my older rig, I posted some pics here a few weeks ago flying into FSDT's KJFK and was able to maintain 30+ FPS in the VC with a fair amount of traffic.If your interested in the 737, the boss over at PMDG said in a thread yesterday that they will be making an announcement pretty soon as to a calendar date of the release, so you have another option as well if your interest in their style of a 737.Personally, the 737 has always been my favorite airliner and I am glad that after waiting about 3 years from the release of FSX we finally have one on the market and another one around the corner.

Do you like to simulate actual routes that the aircraft might fly?   If so, do you actually fly the long routes a 747 would fly (7 hrs+) ? If this is true get the 747 .. If you dont fly 7hrs+ flights .. get the 737.   Its very unrealistic to startup a 747 for a flight from NY to Detroit. 

I dont know why you guys keep suggesting the MD-11, the poster aleady says he has it.

I missed the follow-up post, sry.The 747 is not as good as the MD-11 on frames, but if you have a recent computer you should be fine. The 747 is a beautiful airplane.

If you dont fly 7hrs+ flights .. get the 737.   Its very unrealistic to startup a 747 for a flight from NY to Detroit. 

Not necessarly (not refering to NY to Detriot).If you sort flightaware by 747's you can find a surprising amount of flights in the US that go from places like KDFW to KORD, KDFW to KATL, or other very short routes as they continue on to other desintations overseas. I think I have even seen a few KATL to KORD 747 flights which is pretty short, so its not that uncommon. There are a lot more, but no need to post them all, but a few that I mentioned are ones that I see fairly often.

Do you like to simulate actual routes that the aircraft might fly? If so, do you actually fly the long routes a 747 would fly (7 hrs+) ? If this is true get the 747 .. If you dont fly 7hrs+ flights .. get the 737. Its very unrealistic to startup a 747 for a flight from NY to Detroit.

Load the Air Force One livery, and you can realistically fly anywhere you want anytime you want ;)Not to menition JAL or FedEx and other transport companies.

Well they sort of did, at least visually with the ability to remove the winglets. Personally I don't understand the 400D variant. It had less power, it's fuel load was only about 5000 gal less than a regular 400 and it's MTOW was about the same, yet it's range was cut by about 75%. If they used a regular 744, it would have been much more efficient as to go the distance of a 744D would only use 1/4 the fuel, If they wanted to make a new variant, they could have just reduced the size of the fuel tank to match the different range, and probably save even more fuel, as the plane would have been lighter.

The 400D has more changes than you list, which go to explain why it suits the role: Most noticeably, the 400D has extra windows on the upper deck which provide a clue to a large difference; being intended for short haul, it does not need the extensive galley facilities of the long-range variants, as it is for 'island hopping' in Japan with high-density seating rather than flying across the Pacific (i.e. the 400D is a short haul special), so that change is reflected in the fact that there is more seating in that area, hence the windows. Short and medium range aircraft also perform more cycles than long range ones do, so they need to be strengthened to take that into account. The cockpit area is also different, since there is no need for a large crew rest area on a short haul aircraft; two crew alone operate the 400D in the cockpit.Where this is relevant for us simmers, is that more people buy short haul aircraft than long haul ones because of the time factor needed to accurately simulate a long haul flight as opposed to a short haul one. You can see this in PMDG's more recent output, where the 737 and J41 - both short/medium range aircraft - have been the focus. Over at FSL, they are doing an A320, and of course iFly and Captain Sim have entered into FSX 737s too. So the 747-400D would be a good thing for PMDG to add, since it means short haul fans would buy a heavy, and most of the work for it is already done. That is in fact why I also bought the AeroSim 747, since it has a 400D in the package.Al

Not necessarly (not refering to NY to Detriot).If you sort flightaware by 747's you can find a surprising amount of flights in the US that go from places like KDFW to KORD, KDFW to KATL, or other very short routes as they continue on to other desintations overseas. I think I have even seen a few KATL to KORD 747 flights which is pretty short, so its not that uncommon. There are a lot more, but no need to post them all, but a few that I mentioned are ones that I see fairly often.

Am dating myself here, but the first time I ever flew on a 747 as a passenger (in the summer of 1970), it was from KFJK to KORD. That was the first leg on Northwest Orient Flight 7, which then continued on to Seattle, Tokyo and Hong Kong.It was nearly empty on the KORD leg, and the next year, Northwest dropped the Chicago stop, so this may not be the best argument for short-haul 747. But it is history... :(

I was lucky, as I picked up the 747 at Best Buy at $29.00 USD. But I had a $25 gift card so I ended up spending something like $9.00 (with tax), for the bird! Not bad considering the price it came out with. So now I got a PMDG in my hangar so I think I will try the iFly for the 737. Perfect timing as I just purchased my first "pro panels" from GoFlight - the MCP Pro panel and the EFIS panel. I just found out that GoFlight is releasing in a couple of weeks a new software version to work directly with iFly as a "plug-n-play". Sweeeet! I understand it costs something like $90 to work with PMDG. Not so sweet.

Regarding VC click spots - here's the thing. iFly has crammed every available polygon into the Vc, that means big fat 3d toggle switches some of which overlap when 'sitting' in either seat. You simply have to 'move around' a bit to access some click spots. I have the same issue in the 744, you simply cannot 'reach' everything without moving (Track IR, Activecamera, fsrecorder, or even default fs commands).Just like the 744 I have created fsrecorder vc view presets - 'problem' solved.

One issue that might factor in the OP's decision--iFLY 737 for FSX or PMDG 744X--is the availability of a widescreen 2D panel. The iFLY 737 has it, the older B744 does not. If one has an old 4:3 monitor or flies in the VC exclusively, it's probably not a factor. I spend a lot of time in the 2D panel, and widescreen is where it's at for me now. Aside from that, they're both good add-ons with different strengths and representing different flying missions.

Box version of the PMDG 747 can be had here for $45....http://www.jr.com/aerosoft-n-a--ltd/pe/AEF_10271/

I got the PMDG 747-400 Queen of the Skies at London Drugs, Computer Section...that's a Canadian chain eh! for $29.99 CDN some time ago. Checked today and it's still available.I wonder if you can buy it from them online for the same price? Anyway a really good deal.

Hi Guys,I'm more into heavies than light airplanes and I am now un-decided if I should get the PMDG 747-400 or the 737 i-Fly. I know they are different aircrafts (and no doubt on the top quality of PMDG), but this month I only want to get one a/c and I want one that has great graphics and great functionality.-- Also, what variants como with the i-fly 737... 737-600 ?Thanks,Johnny

I would choose both because different aircraft different experience :-)That's the beauty in our FS world you can fly different aircraft without type ratings and long studies...

Well, ladies and gentelmen... I went with the i-fliy 737 and I am loving it. Never, thought I would be intrested in a 737 but this changed my mind completly. These guys placed some serious talent, knowledge and effort into this product. wouldn't be surprised if it becomes the new No.1 in the Sim World.Got-to-love-it !Superb graphics and funtionality ! Congratulations I-Fly !Johnny

Congrats on the IFLY purchase. I agree with your assesment as I love mine. I have uninstalled my other payware including the 747. I either fly the IFLY 737 or the Real Air Duke.