Oh boy......
Why just one?
This is tough one....Bang for your buck. PMDG747!Remember that the upper deck goes all the way back,Just a V/C on the 767.
More clicky things in the PMDG747.....Not so many in the 767.
The 767 seems to be easier to manage. 747 very complex!
So I lean toward Bling and complexity!

Jeff T.

Quote:

Actually they are almost equally complex and have very similar systems on board. The LEVEL-D 767 Flight Management Computer is actually more complex than the PMDG 747 one.

These are both great aircraft, pretty much equally as complex and very similar by manner of operation.
This is a tough call, both their virtuals are of similar quality, lest the PMDG one a bit more interactive as you can move back the seats, faold armsrests etc.
You will also find them to be pretty similar in frames, about the level of the PMDG 737 but the LEVEL-D a bit heavier, particularly in its virtual cockpit. Still, both are very gentle on frames.
I guess it comes down to which plane you like more, really. If you cannot yet do so, you have to learn to use the FMC, IMO it is sad how some people buy these complex addons then navigate with the GPS GN500.
Have fun with whatever your choice will be! (and post some shots in the payware screenshots forum!)

Alpha 

Quote:


Same here, I have both but 4/5 long haul flights of mine are in that 767.

I don't have the 747 but do have the lds 767.  Great aircraft fun to fly and handles great.  FMC isn't to hard to figure out pretty much just common sense once you learn it the first time and repetiton.  The liveries are a plus and the overhead panel is nice.  Some say it has the best VC ( I really don't use the VC but when I do, rarely, I admit it is awesome)

Your call.  Also the 747 is more expensive if you want to save some, but if you'll use this jet almost everyday/week for a year you will definetly get your money worth IMHO

Wow......See I told you that this is a tough one. So youll' just have to get both!

They are both super great airplanes.Each one has it's own high points. But neither has any thing to make anyone say dont' buy it!
Rocket bird......Which ever one you choose, You won't be sorry!


Jeff T.

Quote:



Then why spend all that money on something that you can download for free?

Quote:



Well of course you will program it but sometimes its fun to just fly around. It is also excellent with the fmc and all the other little goodies

I think hes talking about P2P 

You cant say the iFly guys did a bad job, its the best freeware 747 that exists.

However, you're right Jeff, the PMDG 747 is so much better.

I doubt that jrpilot was referring to P2P, and I hope he wasnt. It takes the **** out of me that others are stealing these planes and flying for free while we pay for them. Just my two cents. 

Thanks for the opinion guys.  Both are very great aircraft, im sure when I get one ill drool on the other too

I was talking about just flying around no flight plans.

Quote:




I was talking about Freeware..next time don't jump to conclusions 

Just google it Jeff, thats what I always do when I dont know something! 
I'll even do it for you! 

From google: P2P: A method of file sharing over a network in which individual computers are linked via the Internet or a private network to share programs/files, often illegally. Users download files directly from other users' computers, rather than from a central server.

Peer to Peer P2P

Like Kaazaa and stuff

You could always order the RFP 747-200 Next Generation, which was totally revamped for FS-2004 from the 2002 version which I have.  It's very complex, you have to be a flight engineer also on that one.  Also, you can download CIVA from simufly.com and the optional 747-200 panel.cfg to add a triple installation of the CIVA system.  If you think FMC's are quirky try navigating with INS driven by mechanical gyros which drift and require occasional DME updating and triple mix mode on 3 unit systems for most accurate results.  You would spend as much time working with the INS system as you would with the 300 plus other functional switches, buttons and gauges.  On the 767, one thing that bothers me is that they carried over the "artistic liberty" on the 2D main panel and placed the standby gauges on pop-ups while eliminating them from the main panel view and sqweezing the efis in toward the main flight instruments, just like the old PIC from wilco.  I guess I'm picky but I want my panels whether 2D or VC to look as exactly like their realworld counterparts as possible even if it is an in-convenient arraingement to do so.

I know it's not 100% but in some ways though it does require more attention than an FMC.  An FMC is as complex or simple as the user wants it to be. If one flies it as I do, it's nothing to do the perf init and then enter a basic LNAV flight plan.  I fly under ifr with commercial planes.  So, when ATC gives me routing changes or altitude assignements I find it much easier to just disconnect the CMD and fly on heading hold and select my altitude hold and descents as required. Basically, that fnacy FMC isn't doing a lot more for me than a Carousel would the way I set it up.  The INS on the other hand is what it is.  It does one thing.  But, on a long flight, if you want to be anywhere close to your target you do need to update it periodically.  Even in triple mix it can wander up to 10 nm from one side of the "pond" to the other.  Also, it can only hold 10 waypoints.  If you have more, you have to add them and at that it would be cycled back to waypoint 1 and onwards.  You don't need to worry those things with an FMC.

Yeah but arent those guys waaay inaccurate... 
I may be wrong, but the only good payware airbusses I know of are Phoenix.

Quote:


I've said it to you before...the CIVA is an inferiour INS. I've seen the actual ARINC box and I'm very well aware of how they operate  
But the newer INS with lasergyros, with near perfect stability (unstable platforms causes drift), can hold some far more waypoints, and has a superior torquing process.

Torquing is a feedback process that keeps the stable platform level with respect to local vertical. Because a platform aligned in JFK wont really be vertical aligned in Argentina, right? And a gyro that is aligned parallel to the surface appears to tilt over time due to the earth's rotation (15 degrees/h)
What the ring laser gyro do is simply to create a wave pattern which changes as the plane tilts. The changing pattern information is sent to computers, where corrections are made electronically to maintain a level platform.

What can I say, just read 400pages+ study book about Inertial Nav  8) (that's why i remember all that stuff  )

Nexus, what's an ARINC box?  Is that similar to the Delco Carrousel?  The only INS systems I am familiar with are the Delco and the Litton, more so the Delco thanks to the add-on.  I've heard about the Litton systems and that the later models were fairly advanced and used laser gyros.  I wish somebody familiar with both code and the realworld Littons would create an add-on version of that one to.  I heard the Russian equivilant of CIVA has been done for FS but the link I followed took me to avsim.ru which is entirely printed in Russian/cyrelic of which I have no knowledge at all.

Unfortunatley, CIVA is the only reasonably well represented INS add-in that we have right now albeit inferior as INS systems go.  But, because it was an early system, it fits well in classic airliners.  I wish somebody was able to code an accurate Litton INS.  They were fairly prolific and I'm sure there are some in use today.  It is a decent size hole in our avionics inventory.

Sorry, don't agree. The LD 767 panel is very good and has some 'voice stuff' to add to the environment but some of the displays are very hard to read. The PSS 777 has loads of flight dynamics problems. See their forum on AVSIM for more details.

Although the PMDG 747 is very complicated, I find the panel very easy to use. The panels are 'zoomable' so you can see them better and the frame rates are pretty good for such a complicated aircraft.

You do know that the PMDG panels are zoomable right? If you ditch the PMDG panel and add another, there is no point in buying Payware in the first place. There are plenty of reasonable models out there, the reason must of us fork out money for payware is the improved and more realistic flight environment and panels. If you remove the panel you may as well be in a POSKY 747 which is free!

Is the CLS A340 out? I've heard good things about that.