Do you have FSX SP2 installed? I'm asking because there is big difference with it, and it is minimum system requirement for CS 757.

yeah, got sp2 installed....

Anyone having problems with cockpit switch sounds? The sounds work great for the first few minutes then nothing, switch sounds are no longer audible. Thanks,Robert

Well I ordered it today and hope for the best. I bought the CD version from PC Aviator. I checked Just Flights web site and they are working on the latest patch(4.3) to work with the boxed version. So I'll have to wait to update it. CD comes as ver.4.2.

Hello Tim,I went as far as the Panama Canal and had to go to bed.

Heh, I dozed off and when I woke up at 2 a.m. I was over Mexico City, but too tired to finish the job. That's a flight that needs to be started a little earlier. Aside from the beautiful views the 05R MEX1A approach is interesting.About frame rates. I don't know what the trick is on my computer. Since I am getting good FPS I don't think it is the product per se. Granted, I have a decent computer, but no better than many, and worse than some. This is a Dell XPS 430 2.5 Core 2 Quad 6 MG RAM GeForce 9800 GT. My settings are just "high" with the water turned down. The only advice I can give, besides the usual defragging, etc, is to run the airplane by itself, with no add-ons like 3d party weather. Pick the lowest settings and see what you're getting, and starting working up from there. I use nHancer to control my Nvidia card. Maybe that helps, or some video cards are not handling it very well.It would be interesting find the common denominator for poor frame rates. I assure I get very good frame rates and it is not because I have the latest water cooled Alienware computer or am the Tweakmaster.

Anyone having problems with cockpit switch sounds? The sounds work great for the first few minutes then nothing, switch sounds are no longer audible. Thanks,Robert

I notice that my ding dongs don't work in cruise.

some of the controls respond erratically to mouse input (try using the scroll wheel to change SEL speed or barometric pressure: you'll need to click on the "other side" of the control to stop the thing spinning),

That's true, but probably more a case of getting used to it than anything else, although there are one or two switches which certainly have fairly small mouse hotspots. Selecting PPOS on the overhead when you align the IRS is a good example of that - it's really very fiddly and not well implemented at all.Different developers have different approaches to how they model VC mouse interaction, and there is no 'wrong' way to do it, but there are clearly some methods that are better than others. I was initially a bit bemused by the way the MCP dials functioned with the mouse in the CS757, but I think it is quite a novel approach they have gone for, which ultimately, could be one of the better methods, so I daresay I'll get used to it and probably end up liking it.That was one of the things I noticed when I got hold of the Ariane FSX 737; some of the mouse wheel movements for adjusting MCP settings in that thing are in what I would regard as the reverse sense, and I reckoned it took about two-three hours of using such different controls to feel comfortable with them. I will say that the hotspots and click points in the CS757 are not as generous or generally intuitive as they are in that Ariane 737 though, so it might not be perhaps as friendly when on Track-IR in turbulence, but to be fair, this is one of the very major strong points of the Ariane, so I'm comparing the CS757 to what has proved to be one of the better ones at that sort of thing when staying in the VC.If anyone has the Aerosoft PBY Catalina, they will know what I'm talking about with regard to good implementation of mouse button and wheel interactivity in a VC, because that's another one which certainly gets things done in an admirable fashion. To be completely fair to CS though, there's a lot less room for switch hotspots in a 757 than there is on a 737 or a Catalina, so for at least some areas of the panels, they may have been somewhat restricted in what they could achieve.Back with overall performance however, clearly the texturing in the CS757 is something of a tour de force, and I found that it is generally when one switches views that the frame rate backs up a bit, as it has a lot of stuff to load in at short notice. This again is something where different approaches can have a significant effect on overall enjoyment. With the view out of the main window on short finals being something where the screen display is rapidly changing, this could potentially be an issue if you like flipping to external views to check stuff out as you come in for landing.When I was reviewing that Ariane 737, the exterior textures came in for a bit of stick from me (texturing fidelity is probably one of the reasons why they called upon the services of McPhat), but I did also point out that the lower interpolation and DPI of them in comparison to some other flashier aircraft add-ons was probably a deliberate choice in order to prevent such potential FPS problems, and there's no denying that if FPS is what you are after, then it is a smart choice. So despite my complaints from a purely visual standpoint, I nevertheless drew a positive overall conclusion because of that. I suspect in comparison to the CS757 and what its flashy textures apparently lead to, with both of them attempting to favour an overall 'cockpit experience', then texturing is something which needs to be carefully considered by developers. It's one thing to be pretty, but can you fight?It's early days yet for me, since I've only just got the CS757 up and running, but I'm a little concerned that the high level of texture detail combined with the less deep systems modeling may be two things that are a little at odds with one another when hitting the target which was aimed for by the developers. There is no denying that the texturing and modeling of the CS757 is something to behold, but as many have already pointed out - and I think I'd agree - you'd better be sure you can make use of that on your computer if you have in mind to enjoy it all.Al

I agree with this assessment. I would just add that it is not quite as "complete" as the PMDG and Level-D models, on my PC anyway. I've noticed a few things but the main ones are that some of the text on the 3D cockpit is extremely (and I think unrealistically) small, not all parts of the cockpit are modelled equally well (though the good bits are really very good indeed), some of the controls respond erratically to mouse input (try using the scroll wheel to change SEL speed or barometric pressure: you'll need to click on the "other side" of the control to stop the thing spinning), the approach mode is not quite right (there is a tendency towards un-realistic GPWS warnings), neither is the autoland flare, the tendency to roll in response to yoke movements is a little exaggerated (IMHO) and the weather radar - which is a very nice feature - doesn't seem to work without switching to the 2D cockpit to get things going. There is no friendly co-pilot (or other Vr call-out etc) and there are no airline or other customisable options so far as I can tell (eg, no speed tape option - though I don't know whether this is because the 757 was never manufactured with airline options).Framerates are on a par with the PMDG MD-11X on my PC: maybe just a little slower but not so as to notice.My personal ranking is the PMDG MD-11X, Level-D 767X, PMDG 747X, then CaptainSim 757 v4.3. But while there is little to choose between the quality of the first three (although after getting used to the PMDG products, the 3D cockpit in the 767X is beginning to show its age) I feel the 757 still has some way to mature.Tim

I'm wondering which printing you find too small, although I have the luxury of a big monitor. In any case it seems proportionate. I can run everything comfortably at 40 or 50 zoom. I do zoom in close for the MCU (or you can use the 2D popup). I never have to use the CRT popups. If you mean the RMI (is that the singe / double arrow gauge?) yeah, that is getting hard to see the numbers. I usually have to zoom in for certain things in any vc, though. At least you can perform the entire preflight without ever resorting to the 2D panel.What parts of the cockpit do you think suffer from undermodelling?With so many add-ons providing call-outs and even some with checklists (Coolsky Super 80 Pro) I agree that you miss it when it isn' there at first. But you do get a number of different messages from both captain and flight attendant which adds to the ambiance. All things considered, I can live without a disembodied voice calling V speeds. Same with airline options. On the ones that have them, I pick one I like and get used to it and never change anyway. I forget if some of the voice packs for FS Keeper have v speed callouts.The knobs issue is a strange one. The last flight they behaved perfectly, but the implementation is inconistent. Some you can use your mousewheel, others left and right button, still others +/- click spots. I've had times where they would not advance with holding the mouse button down; you had to keep clicking. And prepare to have something to read setting the 7316 feet for Mexico City on the cabin pressure :-) Now last night was great. The alt setting responded great to clicking and holding to the left or right of the display (not the knob). The "runaway knob" issue seems to happen when I use the mouse scroll wheel instead of clicking. Perhaps I am just getting used to the idiosyncracities, but when you look at the care some companies put in to the basic interface you use for everything, with standardized control options, the hodgepodge CS has created does seem disappointing. If I had to pick on thing about the airplane I didn't like, that would probably be it.I have used the 2-D pop up for radar while in the vc. Everything else seems to work from the VC, so I'll try the radar.I don't notice any handling issues at all; perhaps a change in your joystick settings would help. Handling is one of my favorite things about the CS 757. I'm not sure about the autolanding and flare, either. This is something I want to keep looking at until I decide one way or the other. It is so much fun to land manually, though, it hard to resist. This is a very nice hand-flyer.I like the PMDG MD-11, too, and there is no doubt they have done an incredible job on its depth and presentation. I have not flown it since I converted to the vc camp, so I'm interested in seeing what I think now. They did a great job on the 2d panel, with task-oriented popups making operation very convenient. When it comes to just getting things right, PMDG is hard to beat. On the other hand, the 757 just drips character. The vc is modeled to represent an airplane that has been "rode hard and put away wet." That really helps in the immersion. It reminds me of the star of those "Most Interesting Man Alive" beer commericals. I just prefer the CS aesthetics, and I think it is clear that's where their priorities lie. In the end, beyond framerates and modelled depth, I dislike comparisons, because, depending on what you value, good-quality payware is hard to compare because the designers set out to do different things.It's like the classic-romantic split in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance :-)Getting back to framerates and other weirdness, starting FS after a computer restart, running Alacrity and loading the default Cessna 2D and turning everything off before changing aircraft to the 757 is a habit I've gotten back into. The 757 seems to like that.

the less deep systems modeling

Al, I've been using this term, too, but I don't want to give the wrong impression. For most people, they are going to be able to follow realistic start-up procedures, and details like the left fwd fuel light going off when the APU starts running due to fuel draw show some attention to detail. (Is it actually using fuel? I don't know; for as little time as I usually have it running I don't think it is enough to worry about.) The IRS has function options you don't find in a lot of payware. You can enter holds and fixes into the MCU, but it will also show you every flight plan in your FSX folder to choose from without having to rename anything, AND you can save company routes separately.But I agree that people who want maximum fidelity and lots of failure and reliability options are going to probably want to look elsewhere, where people who want to fly normal operations in an extremely good-looking piece of equipment will want to take a close look at the 757. The only thing that might hold some back is the frame rate issue some people are having. I wish there was a magic bullet for that.

That's a fair comment. I've not used it enough to know from my own point of view whether it does have less fidelity than other stuff (it seemed pretty comprehensive to me), I'm merely going off what others have said on that point, so take my view on that score with that in mind.In reviewing that 737 a short while ago and doing the research necessary for it, I found that the things which some people desire in an airliner add on 'for realism' are actually rather pointless from a realism standpoint. Circuit breakers is one, most of the time the crews are told to leave them well alone if something goes awry and they speak to the company ground engineers, unless the thing is dropping out of the sky in which case they may be advised to trip or reset one or two of them.It might be a staple of action movies to have the Captain going into the avionics bay to mess with stuff, but it's usually just a plot device and not especially realistic, guess we'll have to await a 'snakes on a plane' add-on from PMDG for that. I'd buy that. :( Al

guess we'll have to await a 'snakes on a plane' add-on from PMDG for that. I'd buy that. :( Al

If we can have the "Save the Baby Rhino" mission in FSX, I don't see why we can't have Snakes on a Plane mission. There may be others, but Wilco is the only company I've seen that actually uses missions with their payware. I don't know why that hasn't caught on more in FSX. Can you imagine the missions you could have with the CS C-130? There is a very nice newsletter dedicated to the MD-80 in connection with a virtual airline. There is a story discussing failures, and it is amazing how rare they are. Even when they happen, they are hardly every serious: things like packs and lighting. Given the amount of hours the average simmer spends flying, we would have to have the worst maintenance crew in the world to experience failures. http://md88online.com/Newsletters/15%20Mad...il_May%2007.pdfNow, of course, I'm happy my pilot knows what to do if one does occur. So I can see the point of the people who want more than just being competent to fly an airplane only if nothing goes wrong. Handling an inflight emergency is one of the things we pay pilots to be able to do, even if they never have to. Knowing there is a possibility of a failure keeps you on your toes. FS2Crew is fun, too, in that way, because it introduces emergencies like sick passengers.

Yup, absolutely agree that the mission feature is much underused. It was in fact me that did the Wilco Aviation and Mission review for AVSIM and I found that it demonstrated just what can be done when it comes to teaching you how to operate complex airliners.It could have gone even further than it did, but for a first foray into that territory it was somewhat a case of Wilco dipping their toe into the water, and a worthy effort. I know they have similar products planned for their other add-on aircraft.I think to balance things up against the 'save the baby Rhino' mission, there should perhaps be a 'club the baby seals' mission incorporating the ski plane and using its skids to hit them :( Al

I think to balance things up against the 'save the baby Rhino' mission, there should perhaps be a 'club the baby seals' mission incorporating the ski plane and using its skids to hit them :( Al

Or Shooting Wolves from An Airplane mission more likely, or how about When Geese Attack (since FSX does birdies) requring you to do a water landing in the Hudson River? Now that was some flying.

I think someone did make that Hudson River mission if I recall correctly.Al

Anyone having problems with cockpit switch sounds? The sounds work great for the first few minutes then nothing, switch sounds are no longer audible. Thanks,Robert

Go to .......\Microsoft Flight Simulator X\Captain_Sim\757. Open the sound.ini file with notepad and edit the file so that it reads "SoundOffWhenSimIsSlew=0" (by default this is set to 1). That should solve your sound problem.

Go to .......\Microsoft Flight Simulator X\Captain_Sim\757. Open the sound.ini file with notepad and edit the file so that it reads "SoundOffWhenSimIsSlew=0" (by default this is set to 1). That should solve your sound problem.

Thanks! I was having some sound problems too and this may also solve mine. Much appreciated! :(

Default must have changed. Mine was already set that way and I still have occasional loss of ding dong at altitude.