PS1.3 or FS2002 for 747 training?

[bochen2k]

What do you think I should used for my 747 -400 training ,
PS1.3 or MS FS2002? which one is overall better for realism?

[Gin Slinger]

bochen2k:

I can't answer your question, but I just want to say that after the crappiest of afternoons, your post made me smile ;)

Do you have a B747-400 job lined up? ;)

[v1rotate]

PS1.3 is by far the better software. Microsoft Flight Sim is still a toy/game, even the professional version.

[faacfi]

I asked the same question 3 weeks ago , I wanted to learn how to use a FMC or get a better idea.
PSS 1.3 costs around 300$ and you need 40 G hard drive (not for a laptop),instead I found a software for around 50$which is an additional software for FS2002.(planes sold with the fs2002 pro really suck)
after 4 days, woooow, I learned so much that if I have been in a school to learn what I know now, it would have cost me a fortune.
Now I know how to use the FMS, flight plan, index cost, entrypoint, TOD,TOC, speed restriction, CAT1/2 app,fuel managment..., SID/STAR through the FMS, open climb, eco descent, flight cruise,APU...

it s not like a real plane, but when I "was" in the cockpit, this software showed me what a big airliner is.this software is really good.it worths my 50$.

if you wish to know the name of this software, please write me.
[email protected]

sorry!!,
my e mail adress is [email protected]

[18-Wheeler]

As mentioned above, FS200# is a toy/game, PS is the real thing.

I have it on my laptop and it only takes up maybe 5 meg or so, nothing like needing a 40 gig drive.
Its FMS ops are superb.

[Cornish Jack]

No question which is the better - PS1.3, by a mile......... but, and it's a BIG 'BUT', there are SOME technical discrepancies, e.g. fuel system and autoflight. These are not major in terms of the total package but do not operate on the basis of "if it happens in PS 1.3, it will happen on the real aircraft" (It MAY do)
One further point to make, which comes from a few years as tech instructor on the 744 and others - while a GENERAL familiarity with your intended aircraft type prior to your training course is useful, getting too deeply into the systems on a self-taught basis is, more often than not, counter-productive. 'Un-learning' something which has been misunderstood is much more difficult than learning from scratch. :(

[faacfi]

18 weeler,
u say 4 giga bytes, that s interesting.
why their website says u need 40 giga free on your hard drive?

shame this software costs so much!

[18-Wheeler]

18 weeler,
u say 4 giga bytes, that s interesting.
why their website says u need 40 giga free on your hard drive?

No, I wrote 'about 5 megs'.
I don't know why on earth they'd exagerate the need to have such a huge hard drive when the program is really not that big.

[Jhieminga]

I borrowed an older copy of PS (v1.2 I think) off someone on just 3 or 4 floppy-disks!!!!

Runs like a charm on my ancient laptop, while I cannot even get anything newer than FS98 to run on it from the microsoft stable. Easy choice I'd say.

And still: MS FS2002 is indeed still a toy. Flight dynamics often a shambles, system architecture missing, or a sorry spin-off from a Cessna system etc. As I'm not playing with FS2002 regularly this may have improved, but I'm guessing it won't come close to the options and accuracy of PS1.3.