I remember when this bird first came out it got a lot of stick, things were said like: "how can you do a payware model of a plane that isn't flying yet?" "How can we know if the FDE is right?" "Bad move I wouldn't by a plane that isn't in service yet, there's plenty of freeware ones."I realised something the last few days, having waited until May to purchase this lady, and I've only dragged it out a couple of times. I watched the real one fly on Sunday at Farnborough, and that thing is seriously nimble. So last night, I pulled the Wilco bird out for a quick spin at KOSH. Now for all the critisism that was levelled at Wilco over this bird, I think it's the nearest to handling of any Airbus I've yet seen, she is light in the air, which the real one appears, still not perfect and although some of it may have been me I couldn't do all the things as tightly as the real one do Sunday. But at least they seem to have got close. It was the same with their A400M which although I haven't seen this fly yet, does seem close to the numbers published by Airbus.Sure neither have all the bells and whistles we've normally come to think of as 'de rigeur' nowadays, but still both are good solid versions of the planes they represent, and I just felt that it was time somebody defended them for a change.

G'Day John, You have summed up the thoughts I've had for some time. I really wanted an A380 back then and bought the Wilco version after researching all available at the time. I read all the criticism and couldn't really understand why, as I found it quite ok. Not exactly PMDG or LDS quality but I was still satisfied. The panel is certainly the best available, even today. There is a better model available now (Overland). My only disappointment is that many of the liveries are inaccurate, and despite the inclusion of a paintkit, no one has done any new ones for it. So count me as a satisfied user of the Wilco A380.Warren

Hi Guys:I was one of the few who stuck my neck out and said I liked the Wilco A380 as well, and promptly got it chopped off by all of the "experts" and myopes who still insist on flying 727's and yet another 737. The joke is that the new FSX will feature the Garmin 1000 all glass panel, similar to if not exactly the avionics sweet that will be featured in the new Boeing 787, which may force simmers to look ahead to the future of aviation and the simplicity and reduced work load offered by the new planes and panels. Of course there will always be people who would rather fly steam gauges and triangulate VOR bearings to figure out where they are. Great. Try doing that online in a real ATC session some time! But don't get me wrong, I personally love taking the Carenado Staionaire out for a VFR trip in nice scenery, or flying an F-16 inverted under the Eiffel Tower, but when I fly an airliner, which is most of the time, I want the most modern and efficient technology to help ease the burden and maximize the safety of getting 400 tons of aluminum, plastic, rubber and wire, along with it's most precious (virtual!) human cargo to where we are going in most any kind of weather, anytime of day. I embrace the future, with all due respect to the past....Regards,http://www.my-buddy-icon.com/Icons/objects/red_3d_plane.gifAlex ChristoffN562ZBaltimore, MD

I too got this one early on and thought it was ok. I got the Level D 767 around the same time. Then the PMDG 747. Then the Feelthere 737, Then the PSS 777. Well, you get the Idea. I left it in the Hangar and never flew it again since I had all those other high quality airliners. Maybe I will give it another look. I also have the Overland and flew that one a couple times. The Wilco panel is much better.Regards, Carlos

John,Don't overlook the fact that these displays are carried out with very small amounts of fuel aboard as that is all they need for the time they are expecting to be airborne, hence the agility of an empty airliner.They did the same thing last year with an A340.N.B. No television coverage this year, wonder why?