Captainsim 767

[Guest WarpAir]

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.

[AlphaInfinity 13]

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.

[Guest WarpAir]

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.

[Tim_Capps 474]

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).

[Guest WarpAir]

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

[kiwikat 506]

Keep your LDS767 and wait for the LDS757. :(

[David Roch 1,980]

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.:--)

[Benjamin J 751]

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.

[Guest WarpAir]

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.

[ahinterl 1]

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

[David Roch 1,980]

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

Hi Andreas,You don't have the CS767 but it is simply a mocked up CS757 with all its bugs and weaknesses.Is it really fair to judge a product that you don't own?CS products are well known for their bugs and lousy flight dynamics, so how can someone filter these facts out?No bug with the 727, no more bug with the excellent C-130 and the 757/767 are definitly flyable despite some remaining minor bugs.I 100% second what Thralni said:CS767: Great visuals, the option to look at your entire plane from the inside, Intermediate system complexityLDS767: Lesser visuals but nice exterior model, plane that handles very realistically, advanced systems and extra features, like option to save panel state

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

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 slot

I have REX2 and UT2... very happy customer, no problems what so ever. I don't understand why would you say those addons are disasters. REX2 makes FSX so much visualy better. I wouldn't fly without it.I also own LDS767 and love it! Besides that I also own CS757... hm... no so happy with it... frames are low, flight dynamics are a bit strange. I don't say it's a bad addon.. but LDS is much better. CS is great for screenshots ;)

[Guest Heavy_Driver]

REX2 is a "disaster"?...???Oh my.Never bought a better add-on for FSX in my life.

[Tim_Capps 474]

The Captain Sim 767 is better than the 757, and the 757 is pretty darned good as it is, speaking at least of the FSX version.If you like to dump your fuel, go with the LDS 767. If your computer has the grunt to handle the graphics and you just want normal flight operations in a beautiful 767, go with the Captain Sim. Either way, you're going to have a nice airplane, but the reality is that the LDS is painfully graphically dated. Not said critically; it's a classic that has stood the test of time. If you don't mind the graphics, it remains a good choice. Captain Sim has been extremely aggressive in patching the 767, but I can see how one wouldn't know that if he doesn't have the product. P.S. I do have the Captain Sim 767 with hours in three digits. I used to have the LDS 767. That's why we have a market with more than one company. Different products will suit different people better. Read the 99 page FMC manual and then come back and say it is no better than a default airplane. I fly it without a force feedback joystick and don't fly it manually except shortly after takeoff and on final if I feel like it. Since I do a lot of 10 hour flights in real time (8 of which when I'm at work) I don't really need to hand-fly it more.And what's wrong with REX 2?

[Petraeus 147]

And what's wrong with REX 2?

...or UTII?