Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

fwerff

Captainsim 767

Recommended Posts

Hello,Been a long time user of the Level-D 767 and when the FSX upgrade was made available, I didn't hesitate for a second and purchased it.The aircraft is clearly a port-over from the FS2004 version, but due to its qualities it didn't matter. I was (and am!) happy with it.Lately I've been gazing at the screenshots of the Captainsim 767. They look amazing. I've purchased the CS 757 for FS2004 and I have always had a love/hate relationship with it. Love the graphics, hate the buggy systems simulation and the not-so-great flightmodel. It has kept me from taking a look at the FSX version of the CS 757, as I'm patiently waiting for the Level-D 757.I would like to get some opinions on the CS 767 compared to the LDS 767. Should I invest the 50 euro's (basepack + freighter expansion) or should I stick with the LDS 767?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

You'll lose some FPS with the Captain Sim 767, compared to the LDS one, or even the CS 757.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FPS hit yes, about 20%. Not good on the ramp.Grafically superior to LDS but NOT where avionics fidelity goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,Been a long time user of the Level-D 767 and when the FSX upgrade was made available, I didn't hesitate for a second and purchased it.The aircraft is clearly a port-over from the FS2004 version, but due to its qualities it didn't matter. I was (and am!) happy with it.Lately I've been gazing at the screenshots of the Captainsim 767. They look amazing. I've purchased the CS 757 for FS2004 and I have always had a love/hate relationship with it. Love the graphics, hate the buggy systems simulation and the not-so-great flightmodel. It has kept me from taking a look at the FSX version of the CS 757, as I'm patiently waiting for the Level-D 757.I would like to get some opinions on the CS 767 compared to the LDS 767. Should I invest the 50 euro's (basepack + freighter expansion) or should I stick with the LDS 767?
HelloThe LDS 767 is NOT a port over, just check the Mdl file.FS9 version MDL8MDLHFSX version MDLXMDLHOr consider the fact that the FSX version has a seperate interior mdl , as do all native FSX aircraft.What leads you to believe that it is a port over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HelloThe LDS 767 is NOT a port over, just check the Mdl file.FS9 version MDL8MDLHFSX version MDLXMDLHOr consider the fact that the FSX version has a seperate interior mdl , as do all native FSX aircraft.What leads you to believe that it is a port over?
Just the fact that the graphics from FS9 and FSX look identical; the FSX version was released within weeks of MS releasing FSX and nothing was updated compared to the FS9 version.Maybe some small things were done, but I'm quite convinced that the FS9 and FSX version use a lot of the same parts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both the FS9 and FSX version of the LDS 763 and, ported or not, they look the same to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just the fact that the graphics from FS9 and FSX look identical; the FSX version was released within weeks of MS releasing FSX and nothing was updated compared to the FS9 version.Maybe some small things were done, but I'm quite convinced that the FS9 and FSX version use a lot of the same parts...
HelloThe LDS 767 was originally ported to FSX within weeks you are correct .But later it was released with a completely new model made with the FSX Sdk as I have shown above.Check your version, If it does not have a seperate model file and the mdl file header shows MDL8MDLHthen you need to download the latest version and reinstall.Making a completely new model for FSX as LDS did is not "some small things" it was a complete rebuildBut lets not let facts get in the way. as long as you are happy and "quite convinced" that's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HelloThe LDS 767 was originally ported to FSX within weeks you are correct .But later it was released with a completely new model made with the FSX Sdk as I have shown above.Check your version, If it does not have a seperate model file and the mdl file header shows MDL8MDLHthen you need to download the latest version and reinstall.Making a completely new model for FSX as LDS did is not "some small things" it was a complete rebuildBut lets not let facts get in the way. as long as you are happy and "quite convinced" that's fine.
By latest version, you mean with Servicepack? That's the only one I can find. Need to check if I have that installed :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubted whether I should have started a thread on this, because I have just returned to the LDS767 from the CS767. Honestly, the CS767 is a remarkable aircraft. Beautiful, and the ability to walk from the cockpit to the very back of the plane is great. I greatly enjoyed the CS767, but ultimately, it misses one thing: you can't save panel states. I want to fly long distances, and so I need to save panel states. Plus, the fidelity of the simulation of the LDS767 simply is a lot better. Frame hit is also less, but I wouldn't worry too much about the frame hit. I really didn't think it was as big a problem as people made me believe.So, in short, while the CS767 is great, a lovely simulation that looks and feels absolutely stunning, I felt the need to get back to the LDS767 for its advanced feature, of which one is the ability to save panel states. By all means, get the CS767, it is a great product. I will use it for shorter flights. For long flights I'll have the LDS767 by my side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By latest version, you mean with Servicepack? That's the only one I can find. Need to check if I have that installed :(
HelloJust get the latest wrapper from flight 1 and reinstall.what does your mdl file reveal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HelloJust get the latest wrapper from flight 1 and reinstall.what does your mdl file reveal?
Can't check right now. I am currently in the transition to my new computer system.But I will download the latest wrapper and use that. Thanks for clearing it up.As for CS's 76, I think I'll wait for a while to see how the LDS 757 turns out. I sincerely hope they also model the freighter version, since that's what I'm missing the most on their 76'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HelloThe LDS 767 is NOT a port over, just check the Mdl file.FS9 version MDL8MDLHFSX version MDLXMDLHOr consider the fact that the FSX version has a seperate interior mdl , as do all native FSX aircraft.What leads you to believe that it is a port over?
Hi,How do I check this .. where is it located?I have never checked it prior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was one of first people to get CS767, great cockpit cabin and external views. The FMC Vnav and LNav work just great, and systems simulation in general is 75% good.But there are some major bugs.1 - Very crapy flight dynamics bugs has left many cs767 users having to tweak aircraft.cfg just so the plane can stop some rocking and rolling that it does, and also seems to have something against ILS capture, sometimes the plane captures ils then starts rocking and rolling. I have had to tweak aircraft.cfg to improve these isuess but by no means fixed it.2 - The LD767 manual is far better 767 manual than the cs manual, so even though i dont have ld767 , use the manual along with the cs767 manual for the cs767.3 - There is also the issue of the plane wanting to crash if you have had it running for up to say 5 hours, i pause flights and return later to continue, it was on one of this occasions that i also ran into this bug that others complain about.generally cs767 is nice plain, but be ready to start tweaking cause the plane has bugs of the kind you will not expect from an a/c that is not freeware. This is what i found as of latest cs767 patch 1.3, i think this plane needs about 2 more patches before it will match the standard of a proffesional addon aircraft.Also the plane has no facility to do key mappings so get ready to do everything by mouse clicks, after takeoff i have to hold joystick with my left hand so i can use right land to enable LNAV / VNAV.I think the plane is under 50$, sure worth the price, but whne the a/c gets to your hanger, you are highly likely to add tweaking just so the plane is worht your fly time, for example i have had to get TSS 767 sounds in placxe of cs767 sound, cause cs767 sound gives you engine running sound even when engines and batteries are switched off.If you are one of those that have accepted the fact that, since microsoft has stopped flight sims, fsx addons are likelly to be less professionally made, then cs767 will not be a dispointment, but something that is nearly there, but you have to take through to the final mile, even though you paid.With cs767, there is going to be lot of folks sharing and comparing aircraft.cfg, cause the plane just does not fly right out of box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was one of first people to get CS767, great cockpit cabin and external views. The FMC Vnav and LNav work just great, and systems simulation in general is 75% good.But there are some major bugs.1 - Very crapy flight dynamics bugs has left many cs767 users having to tweak aircraft.cfg just so the plane can stop some rocking and rolling that it does, and also seems to have something against ILS capture, sometimes the plane captures ils then starts rocking and rolling. I have had to tweak aircraft.cfg to improve these isuess but by no means fixed it.2 - The LD767 manual is far better 767 manual than the cs manual, so even though i dont have ld767 , use the manual along with the cs767 manual for the cs767.3 - There is also the issue of the plane wanting to crash if you have had it running for up to say 5 hours, i pause flights and return later to continue, it was on one of this occasions that i also ran into this bug that others complain about.generally cs767 is nice plain, but be ready to start tweaking cause the plane has bugs of the kind you will not expect from an a/c that is not freeware. This is what i found as of latest cs767 patch 1.3, i think this plane needs about 2 more patches before it will match the standard of a proffesional addon aircraft.Also the plane has no facility to do key mappings so get ready to do everything by mouse clicks, after takeoff i have to hold joystick with my left hand so i can use right land to enable LNAV / VNAV.I think the plane is under 50$, sure worth the price, but whne the a/c gets to your hanger, you are highly likely to add tweaking just so the plane is worht your fly time, for example i have had to get TSS 767 sounds in placxe of cs767 sound, cause cs767 sound gives you engine running sound even when engines and batteries are switched off.If you are one of those that have accepted the fact that, since microsoft has stopped flight sims, fsx addons are likelly to be less professionally made, then cs767 will not be a dispointment, but something that is nearly there, but you have to take through to the final mile, even though you paid.With cs767, there is going to be lot of folks sharing and comparing aircraft.cfg, cause the plane just does not fly right out of box.
They released a patch as part of a KB article recently that is suppose to resolve quite a few of the autopilot bugs and stability problems during IFR approaches. "Please check-in to Your Profile and use Customer Support > Search KB > KB# 4065 to follow instructions how to resolve the problem."I just installed in on Friday and I have not had the chance to test it fully. I can say that the CS 767 can be a little rough on the framerates with the CS WX turned ON. Turning it off during climb and descent procedures seems to help me with +5-9 FPS. Also, increasing the sim rate to 8x is not a good idea with this aircraft. It tends to become very unstable during flight(more so than with other payware aircraft I own). They responded to that issue as well and state that it is a core MSFSX issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They released a patch as part of a KB article recently that is suppose to resolve quite a few of the autopilot bugs and stability problems during IFR approaches. "Please check-in to Your Profile and use Customer Support > Search KB > KB# 4065 to follow instructions how to resolve the problem."I just installed in on Friday and I have not had the chance to test it fully. I can say that the CS 767 can be a little rough on the framerates with the CS WX turned ON. Turning it off during climb and descent procedures seems to help me with +5-9 FPS. Also, increasing the sim rate to 8x is not a good idea with this aircraft. It tends to become very unstable during flight(more so than with other payware aircraft I own). They responded to that issue as well and state that it is a core MSFSX issue.
Thanks for the heads up regarding the 4065 update, As for flight dynamics issues you have at x8 , i have 2 things to say1 - I fly mostly at multiplied sim rates in fsx, and this pushes the planes stability a bit, try increasing roll , pitch, and yaw stability in aircraft.cfg inside the flight tuning section of the file. This will generally make the plane more stable at high sim rates.2 - Increasing the sim rate is like increasing the speed of the a/c, you need to reduce the sim rate in bad weather or rough air generally, else a little osscilation is all it would take for your a/c to loose control.For example i only use sim rate x8 during cruise in good weather, and generally not below 35000 feet.Sim rate is like speed increase, you not to be carefull how and where you use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lastest patch mentioned above corrected the light porpoising I found occasionally at cruise, but at the expense of an occasional too-aggressive roll into banks. Nothing major, just less than perfect. Captain Sim has has three major upgrades and, what, three expansions, since July. I think they are taking it seriouisly. As far as I am concerned they beat the rock 'n roll issues with the Freighter and have exported the solution to the others now.You can't dump fuel and set failures, but it does a good job on normal operations.It is superior graphically, as one might expect from a much more recent product and from Captain Sim, who takes more care with graphics than most devs.Frame rates will always be an issue, although Captain Sim has now included options to remove window reflections and the full-length cabin to save some FPS. On my off-the-shelf Best Buy special, I can get smooth frames by moving sliders to the left of where I would usually run things.I actually think the Captain Sim manual is excellent. There are five volumes and the FMC alone is 99 pages. It lacks a tutorial, though, which is always a downfall with CS. On the other hand, one volume is essentially an extended checklist.Both are excellent airplanes, but I would not call the CS 767 an "upgrade" to the LDS 767. They are different products, each with strengths and weaknesses. Both are excellent, however. If you must have the last word in systems fidelty (speaking of course of a toy airplane) then the LDS is the best choice, especially if you want to simulate abnormal ops like in a check ride. If graphics are more important and you are just interested in normal, realistic flights from Atlanta to Moscow, then the Captain Sim 767 is a good choice.I have not found crashes to be a problem on long flights, but I don't use time accelleration or pause, so I can't say they don't happen.Color me surprised that this thread has remained so cordial. If a discussion of the relative merits of the LDS 767 and the Captain Sim 767 can be cordial, then AVSIM civility has a bright future indeed ! :-)There is a review waiting on the editor's desk (said editor probably still re-writing my introduction lol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The lastest patch mentioned above corrected the light porpoising I found occasionally at cruise, but at the expense of an occasional too-aggressive roll into banks. Nothing major, just less than perfect. Captain Sim has has three major upgrades and, what, three expansions, since July. I think they are taking it seriouisly. As far as I am concerned they beat the rock 'n roll issues with the Freighter and have exported the solution to the others now.You can't dump fuel and set failures, but it does a good job on normal operations.It is superior graphically, as one might expect from a much more recent product and from Captain Sim, who takes more care with graphics than most devs.Frame rates will always be an issue, although Captain Sim has now included options to remove window reflections and the full-length cabin to save some FPS. On my off-the-shelf Best Buy special, I can get smooth frames by moving sliders to the left of where I would usually run things.I actually think the Captain Sim manual is excellent. There are five volumes and the FMC alone is 99 pages. It lacks a tutorial, though, which is always a downfall with CS. On the other hand, one volume is essentially an extended checklist.Both are excellent airplanes, but I would not call the CS 767 an "upgrade" to the LDS 767. They are different products, each with strengths and weaknesses. Both are excellent, however. If you must have the last word in systems fidelty (speaking of course of a toy airplane) then the LDS is the best choice, especially if you want to simulate abnormal ops like in a check ride. If graphics are more important and you are just interested in normal, realistic flights from Atlanta to Moscow, then the Captain Sim 767 is a good choice.I have not found crashes to be a problem on long flights, but I don't use time accelleration or pause, so I can't say they don't happen.Color me surprised that this thread has remained so cordial. If a discussion of the relative merits of the LDS 767 and the Captain Sim 767 can be cordial, then AVSIM civility has a bright future indeed ! :-)There is a review waiting on the editor's desk (said editor probably still re-writing my introduction lol).
I compared the cs767 folder before and after installation of the cs767 rocknroll patch.All the changes in cs767 folder are in aircraft.cfg1 - Some of the a/c weights were changed2 - Also the custom autopilot section was changed.I have tweaked my cs767 file by comparing it with fsx defualt a/c of the same size, and here is what i have ended up with for cs767.Much improved with my changes, this might help anyone still having issues with cs767 stability.sections i changed below.[autopilot]autopilot_available=1flight_director_available=1default_vertical_speed=1800autothrottle_available=1autothrottle_arming_required=1autothrottle_max_rpm = 96autothrottle_takeoff_ga=1pitch_takeoff_ga = 8max_pitch=10.0max_pitch_acceleration=2.0max_pitch_velocity_lo_alt=2.0max_pitch_velocity_hi_alt=1.5max_pitch_velocity_lo_alt_breakpoint=20000.0max_pitch_velocity_hi_alt_breakpoint=28000.0max_bank=25.0max_bank_acceleration=1.8max_bank_velocity=3.00max_throttle_rate=0.10nav_proportional_control=16.00nav_integrator_control=0.25nav_derivative_control=0.00nav_integrator_boundary=2.50nav_derivative_boundary=0.00gs_proportional_control=25.0gs_integrator_control=0.53gs_derivative_control=0.00gs_integrator_boundary=0.70gs_derivative_boundary=0.00yaw_damper_gain = 1.0[flight_tuning]cruise_lift_scalar = 1.0parasite_drag_scalar = 1.0induced_drag_scalar = 1.0elevator_effectiveness = 1.0aileron_effectiveness = 1.0rudder_effectiveness = 1.0pitch_stability = 1.4roll_stability = 1.6yaw_stability = 1.0elevator_trim_effectiveness = 1.0aileron_trim_effectiveness = 1.0rudder_trim_effectiveness = 1.0[jet_engine]thrust_scalar = 1.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Color me surprised that this thread has remained so cordial.
Hi Tim,The reason is very clear to me: both the Level-D and the CS 767 are excellent airplanes.:--)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Tim,The reason is very clear to me: both the Level-D and the CS 767 are excellent airplanes.:--)
Indeed, the trick is to see what you want most:1) Great visuals, the option to look at your entire plane from the inside, Intermediate system complexity?2) Lesser visuals but nice exterior model, plane that handles very realistically, advanced systems and extra features, like option to save panel state?1) = CS7672) = LDS767I personally use the LDS767 whenever I do long flights, and short flights I can always do with the CS767 if I want, because what I miss there is the option to save panel states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now tried and tested the cs767 with the new Anti RocknRoll patch.After 3 official patches and this anti rock roll fix , all i have to say is, on my system, the verdict is, CS767 is virtually unflyable.I am realy put off by the fact that whenever the plane is ordered to turn, its conflicting with the force feedback on the joystick and turning in a very jerky shake jerky way, trying to break my force feedback joystick in the process.Disabling the Joystick when Autopilot is enabled seems to fix this problem, but that is not a viable solution, and i dont disable joystick for any other of my 20 fsx addon aircraft.My verdict as user not affiliated by a million miles to CS, AVSIM or any other addon developer is that, if you buy CS767, its a real hit and miss if the plane flies well on your system , or if it flies like a horrible heap of crap with very nice graphics. I am parking this one till cs can fix all the aerodynamic issues with this plane. There have been four patches and each one seems to fix some issues,whilst introducing new issues of its own, for example i never had this issue of the plane trying to break my force feedback joystick when AP is making a turn in version 1 or 2 of cs767 , only in version 3, i would revert back to version 1/2 but they crash fsx quite often.If you want to go blow your hard earned cash on that frustration be my guest, cs767 joins the line of recent fsx addon disasters like1 REX22 UT23 CS7674 ------------Next Crappy FSX addon will take this slotGetting reasonable flight dynamics in FSX is not a new technology its been there for years, even the defualt planes all do a good job of flight dynamics, but the cs767 feels like trying to fly something not made for the sky.Dont encourage developers to release half baked prodcuts if flying is what you want to use FSX for rather than tweaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cent: I don't have the CS767, but I have the CS757 and the LDS767, and that's pretty much of a reason to never ever buy the CS767.If you're a serious simmer who puts function over form (i.e. FDE, systems etc. are much more important than any graphical gimmicks), the LDS767 is lightyears ahead of the CS767, and one thing is for sure: CS is never ever capable to reach LDS' standards.The CS767 is simply a mocked up CS757 with all its bugs and weaknesses. CS doesn't get their 757 patched to a reasonable level, so don't expect this to happen with their 767.If you want (almost) perfect systems simulation and excellent flight dynamics, go for the LDS767. If you want better visuals but a bug laden systems simulation and lousy flight dynamics which render the bird unusable for hand flying, choose the CS767.I cannot understand how someone can honestly compare the LDS767 with the CS product, they're lightyears apart (with CS playing in the low-level arena)! CS products are well known for their bugs and lousy flight dynamics, so how can someone filter these facts out? The LDS767 is a mature product and one of the rare materializations of one of the best airplanes ever created for FS! The CS767 is for eye candy lovers, not for serious simmers - who cares for great visuals if it doesn't even fly stable on autopilot, let alone hand flying is a disaster? It's as if you'd say the FSX stock Airbus is way better than the PMDG MD-11. Simply ridiculous. Enough said. The CS757 is the only product I ever purchased from CS, and I won't buy anything from them in the future, no matter what they produce.Andreas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites