Sorry to play Devil's advocate here but;

For the life of me I cannot understand CS's logic here. They make a really stunning PAX cabin (one of CS's strong points and a major selling point), and then make it so that its unusable in flight (OK I guess you could get that model up in the air using some of the 2D panels, but without a radio and overhead panel I don't know how one would do this). But that just defeats all the amazing realism built into this cabin model anyhow.

OK so a cropped version will be offered with the flight deck; So why make the entire PAX cabin in the first place then? As an advert for what CS can do, for looking at while standing at the gate?

So much effort; The number of animations in the PAX cabin is not listed in the manual, so I made a count;

Exterior doors  = 8
Lav doors = 7
Crew rest room door = 1
Windows shades = 122
Armrests = 248!
Overhead Bins = 103!
First Class Seats reclining to beds = 12
First Class Entertainment screens pop-out/stow = 12

513 animations (give or take some I may have missed)! Wow!! but Why?

Together with the hundreds of animations in the VC and External model, + FSX limitations, no wonder its tough to have one model (beside the poly count).

Do we really need all those PAX cabin animations. Every armrest and window shade? Why not just some, say at over-wing seats where, if ever anyone is going to use them, that would be most likely where. Who really is going to open and close every overhead bin?

So maybe if one CS can cut down on the animation count (also help with the poly count?) we could get most if not all of this cabin with the VC in one model?

Just my 2c worth, but I for one would rather CS had put all that effort into systems modelling if it was going to end up like this i.e. nice pax cabin, but sorry can't go with the VC (or only a part of it anyhow)!

Robin