This review gives a lot of points for eye candy, one thing I don't care about. I buy and fly a plane simulate flight, not a ramp rat attaching a GPU or tug. Window icing is nice, if you are dumb if enough to let it ice up. :-lol

I (and hopefully we) also appreciate your effort in reviewing the plane. Although I disagree with some points, you do deserve some thanks for the effort, as I think this is the first review.

>> PMDG->>Minus for the fact that there are some issues at this point towards >>flying this bird by hand.>>Ariane->>This bird flies like a dream by hand,thumbs up for that.Interesting statements. I'm not into the 737NG for a while (bit bored with AP and FMC buttons), but I had a -700 Copilot test fly the PMDG half a year ago. Using PFC Jetliner Yoke and other high-end equipment. He mentioned it the best flight model for FS so far and found a lot of stuff really well done. But in the end he said : "I'm scratching my head, because the real thing is much easier to fly".Could be, Ariane scored well in this regard. Would be interesting to have him test fly the Ariane now, but that won't happen. I'll certainly not buy it for that price.Mike

:)LOL:)Well i repect Eric.Though he is from sweded.:-wink2 Just kidding:)But he is beeing a little subjectiv of course.To be honest,that was the first that hit me too,when trying the ariane aircraft.Actually i sent some really harsh emails over too Ariane,stating clearly what i felt upon this activation crap,the price tag,and some other issues i was unsatisfied with.(I know,this was kind if immature)But all of the sudden it hit me,that the reason i was upset upon ariane regarding this,was the fact that i at the moment couldn't use the aircraft.(Had to reinstall)To be said is also the fact that i waited 3 days,before receiving an answer.I thought...2 emails sent from ariane was filtered straight into the junk mail folder,during the last 2 days before:)Not really cool:(

Svein,all respect for the courage to stick your head into this nest and making this review! Despite the "attacks" you're keeping a polite and nice attitude. Keep it up, Svein!/Jan Bergwall(Sweden)

"the real thing is much easier to fly"Well, this is a quite common finding when real pilots are confronted with FS, I think (I'm not a pilot, but I've read similar statements in forums, reviews etc. many times), and it probably has nothing to do with how PMDG, or Ariane, have implemented the flight model per se.In FS, even with high-end equipment and controls, a pilot probably has a higher workload than in real life: the ergonomics are entirely different, and in addition to the normal tasks, he/she'll have to work-around the limitations of a small screen, 'virtual' panels etc.! 1-Looking around you in flight simulator just isn't as intuitive as it is in real life. You have to work at it, move your hand from the controls to the mouse, learn key combinations etc. The field of view on a monitor is much smaller than in real life, and the pilot probably cannot duplicate his own regular instrument scan exactly. You simply cannot flick your eyes from one instrument (say the throttle quadrant), then to the outside to check traffic, then back to the main instruments etc. 2-Locating switches and buttons on the various panels also takes getting used to. To access the overhead, you cannot simply look up and reach out, you have to call up the sub panel or use the mouse to swivel about in the VC. 3-perhaps most important of all: No motion feedback! This will tend to make the pilot over-control, simply because the airplane does not appear to be responding in an intuitive manner-and that in itself would make the flight dynamics appear to be more difficult to control too.4-normally, a 737 pilot would be assisted by his co-pilot.Even if everything is spot-on, it will still appear to be 'off' to a RW pilot who is not used to a PC-based sim like MSFS and its limitations. Martijn

Nice mini-review, and helpful to those of us who have not seen the Ariane NG up close!You did, however, gloss over the fact that the Ariane plane has no 2d cockpit.. where most of us do the majority of our flying.It is fine to compare the VC implementation in both aircraft, but the excellent 2d cockpit in the PMDG version deserves mention, since it is top notch and offers several selectable views (as detailed in the Avsim review, hint, hint.. :-) )Last, but not least, the 2d cockpit does not suffer from the instrument lag that all VC cockpits have in common, some more than others..

>But in the end he said : "I'm scratching my head, because the>real thing is much easier to fly".This is what airline pilots, specially those not used to MSFS simulation tend to say. I don't think this however has anything to do with fidelity (or lack of) in simulation of flight dynamics. It is rather reflection of rather restrictive simulation environment (small screen, keyboard, etc). A good counter-example is our prominent moderator Ken Salter who coming out of pure simulation experience and then starting taking his first flying lessons reported something else - he found simulation much easier than real life flying. At least he made this comment about landings. So here you go - it all depends which environment you got used to.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

Hello All,Well, I have to agree. In flying the CS 727, (I won't even get into the 737 tussell), I find that I work much harder than I did in the left seat in real life.Then again, in real life I had a Co-pilot and a flight engineer and all I had to do was take care of the important stuff. And it is true, that the 'sensual' parts of real life flying are missing, but after you play with FS long enough, something seems to replace some of that . . . however, I can tell you this, FS will get a real world pilot into trouble once in awhile, as you do tend to pick up some rather bad habits just flying a computer. I had a friend who use to fly with me years ago over to the ranch a few months ago and he and I had a go at the 727 . . . right off the bat he found 4 things I was doing which would have been a real 'no-no' in real life. Oh well no one's perfect!Best to allClay

We cant have of both worlds i think,and the selling point of ariane does not lie here.For me,its good enought to have decent working FMC which can track the route,an autopilotOk. Tell me how to engage the autopilot. I've flown from cold and dark onwards Dreamfleet's 737 and all of PMDGs planes. I start Ariane's up from cold and dark, program the FMC, get her up but the autopilot will not engage. The LNAV and VNAV light up but the AP will not engage and thus I have not as yet been able to get the plane to fly the programmed flight. What's up with this? I've shelved the plane until someone tells me what's up with the autopilot and LNAV VNAV.

Yes,there are issues to be solved there.I have suffered from similar things.Radios cant be tuned,autopilot does not engage,lightning not working.What i have found is that sometimes when starting up FS with Ariane selected,this happends.This might just be some of those "need-to-startup-using-default-aircraft" bugs in FS,that sometimes occur with 3rd party addons.Ariane is aware of this.

>> it will still appear to be 'off' to a RW pilot who is not used to a PC-based sim like MSFS and its limitationsYes, maybe. But he was more or less used to FS and he did nothing else than hand flying. It's strange. Real pilots are always useful for "tested by real pilots" ads. But if they critisize something, they are blamed "unable to handle FS".I'm still wondering what would be more worth. A flight model which would not lead a RW pilot to that "RW easier" statement, but does not that closely match performance tables. Or one that has all the bells and whistles from performance tables, but has handling flaws ?I often get the impression (I fly in RW myself, just not commercial), FS flight models have to be made "handable" by Autopilots and their constraints. I tend to think in RW it's the other way round :D.Maybe the Ariane plane is easy to hand fly, but I almost bet the behaviour on AP might be much worse. Probably a matter where the developer puts the focus.Mike

Well I believe the pilot question is in regards to pilots who are not regular flight simulator users. Obviously real world pilots can and are also flight sim enthusiasts and see it the way many of us do. Flight dynamics should be left to those who actually have flown the real aircraft. It's true we who have training aids can comment upon what should happen in regards to function, commenting upon how *easy* something is is a very subjective statement even from RL pilots.Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4][h3]P M D G's 747-400[/h3][h4]coming to a runway near you[/h4][/font color]Caution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

The way i see it:We must face the fact that this is a PC simulator,made for entertainment.Although many developers have done an incredible job pushing the boundries further away from the entertainment "stamp" given.Even a full motion "class D" simulator,using Eric's words stated earlier on:),will not "feel" like the real thing.This has to be taken in considerations,not only when pilot states "almost as good as the real one",or reviewers state that this air file feels like the real thing.These are subjectiv opinions by several individuals.To draw the line further,i would almost bet that different real life pilots even have their own opinions on how the aircraft feels.Now if anything is to be compared against real life,i suppose that we use just that fact;"This is my opinion how this aircraft flys within FS."FS cant simulate the feeling you get when lift is pressing your bottom towards the seat cushin,neither the turbulence which is trying the reorganise your interior.I sometimes find my self sitting in front of FS,flying a decent aircraft with a decent airfile,and i start to think of what could make this sim more "realistic" to use that word.Given the fact above...well i find that visuals are the only thing that could make me feel more of flying.Be able to look out the window,getting the feeling of height and speed.Visual impressions towards actually beeing in a plane.Thats me view of it.

>Yes,there are issues to be solved there.>I have suffered from similar things.>Radios cant be tuned,autopilot does not engage,lightning not>working.>What i have found is that sometimes when starting up FS with>Ariane selected,this happends.>This might just be some of those>"need-to-startup-using-default-aircraft" bugs in FS,that>sometimes occur with 3rd party addons.>Ariane is aware of this.I never had that one with the Ariane. But there is a A3xx which does that, always. LoLCheers