I am very pleased now with this bird. Prior to the 4.3 update, it was very nice to look at both inside and out but was buggy and had a less than functional FMC. It also required me to install an older copy of FSUPIC just to get the autopilot to work properly. Since the 4.3 update I have flown about 30 hours and have been very pleased. I used to fly almost exclusively the LDS767 but I find the virtual cockpit in the CS757 to be a little more convincing and have not flown the 767 since.

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

Hello Al,I wanted to point out that with the CS757, you don't have to use the hotspots that are right on the dials with most functions. Place your mouse on the Altitude, Speed or Hdg display numbers and left click on the + or - (left or right side). I find that to be the easiest way to working it. Hold the mouse button down to spin the numbers fast.With Ariane's X2, the knob function is intuitive if you think of it as left click to turn the knob counter clockwise and right click to turn it clockwise. It is set up the same as the RealityXP units.

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.

Don't be too concerned :( . The CS757 is absolutely awesome since 4.3. Very few, very minor things that I have found work less than expected. This plane seems to have all of the systems functioning correctly, beautiful textures and good frame rates, even in airports with heavier traffic. The FMC works great now and will download and save flight plans without crashing, although it still doesn't seem to calculate CG and sticks with 27% for any load. The VORs, which didn't work before, work perfectly. It taxies and takes off very smooth and follows the FMC flight plan using both VNAV and LNAV very good. It uses the latest FSUIPC perfectly and will switch from auto pilot to manual very smoothly on final approach.I'm loving it :(

I've had a chance to fly this thing on a 'proper' flight now. I took it on my favourite test route, which is from EGCC Manchester UK, to LEAM, Almeria Spain. That being a route which Monarch B757s travel.There's no denying that the CS 757 puts pressure on the frame rates, so all that eye candy comes at a price, but to be fair I did have everything on full throttle graphics-wise and stuck with it, so it wasn't intolerable.The CDU is nice to use. It has a lot of functionality and is actually a bit better than most at picking the right VOR out of similarly named ones on your flight plan, so there seems to be less need to correct mistakes of that nature, although one or two waypoints on the FSX flight planner version of the plan which I initially put into FK's ACARS were not present in the CS 757's database. But nothing major was missing, just a couple of intersections over the Bay of Biscay near Bilbao, so it wasn't really a problem. I took the opportunity to test putting both ACARS and the new CS Weather Radar into the thing, and they both go in just fine and the new CS Weather Radar does not clash with the one that comes with it, but is obviously a bit flashier, so I think it's going to stay.It was nice to see all the SIDs for EGCC were there in the CDU, and I got to fly an unusual one too, since I used real world weather which is a bit odd here in dear old Blighty at the moment (very humid). From looking out of the window earlier this evening I saw aircraft were departing to the East from Manchester Airport, which is less common from there, and FS real weather faithfully replicated that at Manchester by giving me runway 6L to set off from.I'm not really that familiar with the 757, so it was a bit 'learn as you go' where finding various bits and pieces were (I'm more used to the 737 and ATR-72), but even so, most Boeings are fairly similar so it wasn't that hard to figure stuff out. some of the dials and switches are a bit clumsy, and as Bob above suggested, I did end up clicking on the digits of the MCP to change things, as it was just too much of a pain in the &@($* to use those dials. The thing taxies quite nicely, it's not the best, but there's a reasonable attempt at the inertia of a big jet on the roll, so it is fun to drive about. Lined up on the runway, TOGA refused to kick in, and I'm fairly certain I did everything right that would be necessary to have it do so, which means I ended up doing the throttles manually for take off, but once off the deck it was on with VNAV and LNAV and it did all that okay, although because I'd not played around with the bank angle limits it was really racking things around in the turns. The engine sounds are a good emulation of the high bypass engines on the thing and not the default FS ones, so that was pretty enjoyable on the ears and with a fairly light load it was up to 36,000 feet well before the English Channel showed up.It holds headings and altitude well, even on 4x accelerated time (although I didn't up the time for long stretches, just enough to see how it handled things). Descending for the approach to R26 at Almeria there was a lot of cloud over the Sierra Nevada mountains (great place to go in real life incidentally - they filmed all the famous Spaghetti Westerns there, such as The Good the Bad and the Ugly and A Fistfull of Dollars, and the set for them is still intact if you ever find yourself in those parts). Back up at 5,700 feet though, it gave me a good chance to see how the CS 757 rides turbulence, which is common over there, and it was pretty convincing. I got an ILS approach from ATC and since I was not that clued up on how it all works in the CS 757, I was initially going to cheat and bring it in manually, but the weather was crappy right down to 1,800 feet so I went for the ILS approach, fortunately the old Boeing commonality means there's nothing much different about it from a 737, other than the course dials not being up on the MCP.This is where a problem that others have noted showed up; the thing was rocking from side to side on the localiser and there was only a 5 knot crosswind, so it should have done better than it did, but that might have been down to me using too much flaps, so I'll see if that was the case another time. With the glideslope captured and all three autopilot command buttons lit up, it was still shimmying away as the PAPI lights showed up through the clouds, and I did briefly consider knocking the autopilot off and taking over, but I thought I'd see what transpired. With 'don't sink' blaring away it was wobbling down to the threshold, but at the last seconds it sort of stabilised, although it did look to be going a bit high. It didn't exactly flare very nicely and I was thinking FSX might detect touchdown as a crash, but apparently it was okay, although it was what I would describe as a bit of a 'filling rattler' of a landing. Were it not for the fact I was kind of testing things out, I reckon I'd choose to land it manually if that is any indication of the autoland.So, it works, it's pretty, fun to fly, easy to suss out and with more gizmos than a Rolls Royce. Bit heavy on the old FPS and that ILS handling is not the best, but it is certainly not bad for 25 quid. I think I'd recommend it to anyone with a graphics card that can handle it, as it is a good intermediate between the 737 and the 747 if you fancy a flight of that length.Al

Al, you are a natural born reviewer. I think when you were first born, you must have grabbed the doctors pen on your way out and wrote a review on it. :( Something that is a real nice tool for taxing with the CS757 is the fact that it has an IRU 2d pop-up. Undock the Simcon, so you can use it in VC, then when you are taxing click in the IRS popup, then turn the display switch to TK/GS which will show ground speed. Now you can keep your ground speeds realistic when taxing very easily.Remember with the 757 and 767, you don't have the normal TO/GA (located on the throttle) button that you can program to your throttle. 757/767 uses an EPR button (I think it is called "N1" on the 767) on the MCP. Run your throttles up to around 70% N1 and push the EPR button at close to, but not after 50kts. You will get the "Thrust Set" message on the PFD.To eleminate the yaw or rocking on approach speeds go into the aircraft.cfg and look for the following line and change the values to the numbers shown here (using the numbers from the v4.2 which didn't have any problem like this):The numbers from the v4.2 file are: AP_Roll_speed=3.92; AP_Roll_window=5.5; and AP_Roll_controlstep=2850This information was taken from the Captain Sim forum.Bob(I also know how to get rid of the wabbit :( )

Hey, I'll give that fix a shot, thanks Bob.Not too bothered about the Rabbit, but I do need to alter the large no smoking sign on the passenger cabin bulkhead, not only is smoking allowed on my flights, it is actually compulsory :( Al

Hey, I'll give that fix a shot, thanks Bob.Not too bothered about the Rabbit, but I do need to alter the large no smoking sign on the passenger cabin bulkhead, not only is smoking allowed on my flights, it is actually compulsory :( Al

:( :( B)

Wow, then you definitely don't want to add FS2Crew (although there isn't one for the 757). That captain goes nuts on smokers, threatening them with meeting the FBI for attempted murder!!!The Rabbit is gone. I thought about continuing the Russian theme with something more appropriate for my flying skills, an icon. But we've gone into texture files nowadays that I don't know how to edit, nor do I think Paint will do the job. Al, at least you are going to have the decency to smoke in the lavatory, aren't you? The door closes and everything.

Okay, that's the smoking signs done, and I took the opportunity to replace the boring in flight magazine with something more entertainingAl

Okay, that's the smoking signs done, and I took the opportunity to replace the boring in flight magazine with something more entertainingAl

What is with this airplane and bunnies?

I hear it's lite weight fair. True?

I hear it's lite weight fair. True?

You wish, Mower. Errm, did you mean the price? It's really good for this package.Dirk.

No, by lite weight I mean simplistic compared to say the LDS 763 or PMDG 744.

No, by lite weight I mean simplistic compared to say the LDS 763 or PMDG 744.

Then that's what I said first. This package @4.3 is among those you mention. Cheers,Dirk.PS - only viper forever! lol.

Then that's what I said first. This package @4.3 is among those you mention. Cheers,Dirk.PS - only viper forever! lol.

I don't think subjective opinions are as valuable as comparing specfic features. It is not light weight when it comes to starting procedures, the functional FMC, fuel usage, etc. It is modelled well for normal flight operations. I would not put it on a par technically with a deep sim like the Maddog. It is definitely not light weight for modelling, and a great vc and extra animations are Captain Sim's strong suits. I don't think it is meant to be a competitor to the Level D 767 as far as abnormal operations go. If configurable surprises and abnormal operations are what you are interested in, this is probably not the product for you. If you are interested in a 757 that is a faithful representation of the airplane for enjoyable flights in a beautiful environment, then it is very good. I think they are both good products for their different audiences. It is like trying to compare the Maddog and the Super 80 Pro. Both are very nice, and I enjoy both, but one is going to be better for some people than the other one.

I wouldn't regard the CS 757 as at all simplistic compared to the PMDG 747-400, in fact I'd say there is not much to choose between them. The 747 pushes things in some areas in comparison to the 757, but the CS aircraft does the same thing in comparison to the PMDG offering in other areas, and for the price, it's a real bargain in that respect.Al