I was over at Airliners.net and checking out some Airbuses, which is something I don't normally do (check out Airbuses that is). I don't want to get into a Boeing vs. Airbus debate, but you can't deny that the 340 is an interesting-looking airplane. In fact, to me the Airbus A340-300 is the best looking airliner out there and kind of reminds me of looking at an old 707-320b. It's very proportionate, the four engines break the monotony of the typical looking two engine airliner, and it looks like it is in motion when it is motionless.However, the cockpit views are (as are typical of Airbus) much less interesting and lack (as most of you know) the good ol flight yoke, and the number of gauges appears less than on our beloved Boeings. I'm a big RFP 742 fan (which is quite the antithesis of the glass cockpit A340), but I can't help myself but inquire.Do any of you have the an A340 in your sim line-up? If so, who makes a good, and how do you like flying it when compared to the the Boeings? I sure would not mind giving it a try if the majority of you think it is worth it. Again, the A340-300 is a darn good looking jetliner (the best in my opinion). I'd be interested in hearing from some of you with a number of FS2004 sim time with airbuses in general, as well.Thanks!RH

Hi there :)I agree that the a340 is a good looking airliner, although on the 200 and 300 series the engines just look...small...:)As for an A340 for FS Project opensky do a really good version (200 and 300 series) and it's availiable here on avsim, with plenty of repaints too. Combined with panels by Pasquale Rinaldi or Eric Marciano (is his panel free??) it's definatley a solid package. Now, I haven't flown it extensively, but when I have flown it it's been great

I have the pss a330 and a340 package. IT is great for a long distance hop, and quite fun to fly.

I personally love the A340-300. It's really the most elegant and graceful looking airliner ever created. I find the cockpit to be very appealing. It's all subjective. The older generation will always have an affinity towards "steam-driven" gauges, but that doesn't mean the newer glass cockpits can't be appreciated. Having sat inside the A340 cockpit on a number of occasions both on the ground and in the air, I can attest to the fact that it is a very pleasant environment: spacious, quiet and dazzling with technology. It's a very interesting cockpit, particularly the sidesticks and the clear uncluttered layout of the screens. I don't think having more gauges makes a cockpit more interesting. The main thing is, the amount of technology and innovation built into the Airbus cockpit is what makes it interesting.Unfortunately, there are no good Fly-By-Wire Airbuses for MSFS. Some people might point to the PSS buses, but it certainly cannot compare up to add-ons like PIC/LDS-767, RFPB 747 and PMDG737. I would however still recommend it for lack of a better alternative. Dreamfleet was GOING to do an A340, but they abandoned the project, ostensibly because PSS was already doing an A340 and there would be too much competition. One year later, after the lukewarm efforts of PSS and aviograsf (in all fairness to aviograsf, they seem to be genuinely dedicated to patching/improving their product), Airbus enthusiasts are still waiting for a decent A330/A340.In the meantime, this is what I fly in MSFS to get my "fix" -- A heavily modified PSS Airbus http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/101952.jpg.Thomas

I think the only thing good about the airbuses is the milage. They seem cheap to me. From front to back.JimCYWG and BOEING

> I don't want to get into a Boeing vs. Airbus>debate>Thanks!>>RH>>Then why did you ask this question? For your information, I own PSS's A 319/320/321, the A 330 an the A340. With the help of good forum people, I've tweaked the aircraft files to my satisfaction. Am very happy with the products. I also own the various Boeing addons (RFP, PMDG, [747 and 777 for FS 2000] -and guess what? I like these, too!Ricardo

I'd have to agree with Thomas here mostly. I have the PSS A340 and the PMDG 737-6/7/8/900. The PMDG puts the PSS machine to shame with systems simulation and overall handling qualities, mainly in terms of robustness - the 737NG is so forgiving of an arrival rwy change or on the hand flying side of things. Still, I like the PSS A340 because it is the best available for now and gives me an alternative to the boeing style of flying. I love the autotuning of ILS frequencies on the airbus (how hard can it be Boeing? - you tell me the ILS freq in the FMC for the selected landing runway anyway, how hard can it be to tune it as well?), and the pause at TOD feature of the PSS airbus is good when I can't guarantee I'll be back to finish the flight. Still, a solid "save flight" feature is lacking on both implementations.Truth be known, I'd like a PMDG or PIC-style implementation of one of the airbus series to balance up my fleet. I know PMDG has the 747 coming "real soon" tm, but it has been a looooong time between drinks (FS2002->FS2004 and another year) that a really descent modern "heavy" has been offered up to the masses. Gary

GaryHow exactly do you activater the pause on TOD? I looked thru the manuals and nothing.

As has been said here, while not on a par with PMDG or the good ole PIC767, the PSS A340 is a pretty nice panel. I use it in combination with the (far superior) POSKY external models, which makes for an altogether enjoyable simming experience. The PSS external model is pretty lousy IMHO, so just buying the base pack online for the panel and sounds and hooking it up with the free POSKY model should not damage your wallet too badly. Misha

Na Man, I think the engines on the 500 and 600 series are too big. My reference to a good looking, four engined airplane is the 707-320. Thanks for the info.RH

Do you get the sense the extra technology takes too much away from a pilot's job to reduce him to a system's monitor? It's interesting that you have been abl to sit in the A340's cockpit. I have only ever seen them from pitures on the web. Is it like the 777 where you don't have to apply back pressure when you make turns (a fly-by- wire function of the 777 and the main reason I will never have one of those on my computer). Anyway, I just think it is a super looking jet.RH

How is the PSS A340 in terms of hand flying? The thing about Airbuses is that they seem to be to be too computerized. Is there any decent form of hand flying even possible in an Airbus A340? What's this autotuning of ILS frequencies? I hope this is not another function that has been taken over from a pilot by an onboard computer. Overall, though, the A340-300 is quite easy on the eyes, and I'd like to learn how to fly one to give me a larger perspective on how they work when compared to the Boeings. Anyway, thanks for the info.RH

Another thing Gary -- What kind of cooling fan and sink are you using to overclock your Winchester Athlon64 3000 to 3800? I have been doing a little checking into a possible ugrade. That Asus AV8 is supposed to be one of the best A64 motherboards out there for overclocking, so it is definitely on my list since the Winchester A64 3000+ is the best CPU now for overclocking. I see that you have it up to 9x270. What kind of voltage are you applying to that CPU?Thanks RH

Hi Ricardo -- I asked the question of what people thought about the Airbus A340 not to get the folks into a debate. I would just like thought provoking answers and insight. From the look of it, you have quite a few add-ons. RFP is my favorite at the moment.RH

>How is the PSS A340 in terms of hand flying? The thing about>Airbuses is that they seem to be to be too computerized. Is>there any decent form of hand flying even possible in an>Airbus A340? What's this autotuning of ILS frequencies? I>hope this is not another function that has been taken over>from a pilot by an onboard computer. Overall, though, the>A340-300 is quite easy on the eyes, and I'd like to learn how>to fly one to give me a larger perspective on how they work>when compared to the Boeings. Anyway, thanks for the info.>>RHWell of course you can completly hand-fly any Airbus, but in my opinion this is not a very rewarding experience. To me, that's one major downside of Airbuses. It's nice to do all the high-tech preflight stuff, program the MCDU, activate Flex-thrust and roar down the runway. But engage the autopilot at 200ft and that's it. Your job's done. Computers will control the rest of the flight for you. (Of course, in reality you would have to comply with ATC instructions, check the weather, react to failures etc...)So why is hand-flying not very rewarding? Assuming that PSS's flight dynamics are realistic, I think that the busses behave somehow... well.. soulless and too predictable, if you know what I mean, especially compared to some older Boeings. Additionally, I prefer "traditional" yokes over small joysticks (of course unless it's an F-16, hehe..)Besides, I don't like the thought of being watched by some computerized "flight envelope protecion" that will take control when I screw things up. Might be reasonable from a passenger's point of view, but then why are those faulty humans still sitting in the cockpit?Oops, I guess this turns into an Airbus vs. Boeing debate if I continue so I better stop it here :) Just to prevent flame-wars: Both are building nice & technologically advanced airplanes, it's just a matter of personal taste.So, conclusions:- From a technical point of view: if you're into systems programming and watching a beautiful airplane, go for the A340 (of course the PSS package, it's the best)- If you're into actual hand-flying and a cockpit philosophy that's designed for 'real' pilots (and lacks ILS autotune sometimes, mind you)... "If it ain't Boeing it ain't going", right? ;-)My 2 cents...Holger.