The author of the 767 Systems book has taken the time to write and publish a company response to Angelique.... "I've made it abundantly clear that the reply is by no means an attack on either AVSIM or Angelique and I hope this is something you understand and can convey should you be asked about it."http://lrops.com/blog/

Well, somehow I digress from the point of view that the writer of the book is trying to convey. Personally, I found that I would've written something similar to what Angelique wrote.If it's not a more detailed guide to the 767 systems than what's already available, I miss the point of publishing a book that just "repacks" some of the things one could find easily (and free).Just my 2c

I tend to agree with what Angelique van Campen has written in the review regarding this book.From my point of view its not really a good Boeing 767 systems guide, you are better off reading the Level-D manuals (which I think are pretty good and detailed).

If it's not a more detailed guide to the 767 systems than what's already available, I miss the point of publishing a book that just "repacks" some of the things one could find easily (and free).

I agree.

I tend to view these guides as a simpler, more straight forward approach to learning a complicated airliner like the 767, and so I certainly do see that it's useful. It doesn't mean that the actual LDS767 should be neglected, but you should use them in conjuction to one another. I say, start with the LROPS, and whenever you feel you want to know more, you can look at the actual LDS767 handbook. That will spare you trudging through a book as thick as the Origin of Species, yet you'll mostly get all the info you need. Sure, I might be completely wrong (I didn't review it, just been looking at the product page), but that's the impression I'm getting. In the end, nothing beats the tutorials, of course.I think that, in the end, this is all quite subjective (sure, every review is, but these books especially). Angelique might not like the layout, for me it's fine. Various of these things can be found in the entire review. So, somehow the negativity pains me, although I understand where it comes from.So, I'm agreeing with both of them in ways, disagreeing with both of them too, however.

I don't personally see any problem with creating a product that largely collates information from various sources, even if it is freely available elsewhere, since one is paying for the efforts of others in collating that information and placing it conveniently in one package. Not being in possession of the product in question however, I don't know if that is the case here, or if it also contains other completely original material in large quantities too. Since we are talking about technical data, it is often difficult to make stuff read differently from that of other sources, as the facts about a piece of equipment are just that, and will often come across as similar to other writing on the same subject.I'm also not in a position to judge the organisational structure of the product, for similar reasons, but what I can say is that I honestly don't know of any Avsim reviewer who is anything less than honest when they write a review, and if Angelique got a less than favourable impression of the product when she examined it, then I would expect her to convey that impression in her review, since all Avsim reviews do state at the very bottom of the page that this is what they are about.Nobody I know would take pleasure in doing a product a disservice, but since most people use the Avsim reviews to help them make decisions about what to buy, it is often the unpleasant task of the reviewer to make such things known if they feel it is warranted. Anyone who thinks writing reviews is going to win them any popularity contests, is labouring under a misapprehension!It seems to me that the obvious course of action would be to take on board any criticisms that may be valid, tweak the product to address them if need be, and then re-submit it for an updated review. Unpopular criticism does not always have to be simply refuted, it can also be taken on board to improve a product, and in that sense, all such criticism can be viewed as constructive if it leads to a better product.Al

Hi,Just wanted to add my opinion, since it seems the only ones who have responded to this forum topic are AVSIM Admins and/or Staff.Very nice response Al and I agree with you. I truly believe Angelique gave an honest review of a product that she found lacking. I hope the developers of the LROPS 767 Systems Book 1 take this as constructive criticism and use this oportunity to improve the product.

I don't personally see any problem with creating a product that largely collates information from various sources, even if it is freely available elsewhere, since one is paying for the efforts of others in collating that information and placing it conveniently in one package. Not being in possession of the product in question however, I don't know if that is the case here, or if it also contains other completely original material in large quantities too. Since we are talking about technical data, it is often difficult to make stuff read differently from that of other sources, as the facts about a piece of equipment are just that, and will often come across as similar to other writing on the same subject.I'm also not in a position to judge the organisational structure of the product, for similar reasons, but what I can say is that I honestly don't know of any Avsim reviewer who is anything less than honest when they write a review, and if Angelique got a less than favourable impression of the product when she examined it, then I would expect her to convey that impression in her review, since all Avsim reviews do state at the very bottom of the page that this is what they are about.Nobody I know would take pleasure in doing a product a disservice, but since most people use the Avsim reviews to help them make decisions about what to buy, it is often the unpleasant task of the reviewer to make such things known if they feel it is warranted. Anyone who thinks writing reviews is going to win them any popularity contests, is labouring under a misapprehension!It seems to me that the obvious course of action would be to take on board any criticisms that may be valid, tweak the product to address them if need be, and then re-submit it for an updated review. Unpopular criticism does not always have to be simply refuted, it can also be taken on board to improve a product, and in that sense, all such criticism can be viewed as constructive if it leads to a better product.Al