capt sim 767 and 757

[MindYerBeak 73]

Sorry for the subject "bogu" I wanted to edit it but it wouldn't let me :( . Mods could you please edit it for me.Thanks.Anyways..I went ahead and bought them all. 767,757,727 and c-130.Originally I didn't want to buy the c-130 but it was too good an offer.My reasoning behind this buy-them-all npw was that at that price if 3 of them sucked and only one was good it was as if I paid one plane full price and if they were all bad well I lost all my money.I tested the 767 and the 757 so far.2 flights with each.The 767 is ,visually, good. Too heavy on the frames tho.Even if the cs767 looks better i prefer the lds767 _no_ doubt about it.The 757 was a disappointment.It felt and flew like a brick.On approach to lfpg my fps hit 8s !!!I had problems with both the 767 and the 757 when switching from VC->wingviews and back to VC.When i went back to VC the scenery outside disappeared and it was all grey for 5 or 6 secs which was kind of annoying. Any fix for this ?I would not buy them full price for chit.I'm off to test the 727 and c-130.Finger crossed.My specs: i7 980x,gtx 480, 2X 300gb raptors

[sargeski 16]

You get 8FPS at LFPG (one of the largest airports) and where are your sliders at? and what other addons are you running? do you have jetway animations active? Like any other complex model you need to tune FSX to it. Just because you have an i7 and a GTX 480 does not mean you can run max settings in all situations with all aircraft.

[MindYerBeak 73]

You get 8FPS at LFPG (one of the largest airports) and where are your sliders at? and what other addons are you running? do you have jetway animations active? Like any other complex model you need to tune FSX to it. Just because you have an i7 and a GTX 480 does not mean you can run max settings in all situations with all aircraft.

I get good fps with my pmdgs 747and md11+lds767 and all other addon planes I have at lfpg and no jetway animations active.Sir.

[Guest Panda_Power]

Just out of curiosity, what was the subject title supposed to be? It intrigued me as I thought it sounded like new scenery for some exotic island!! I think you're gonna be getting lots of views...haha :(

[MindYerBeak 73]

Just out of curiosity, what was the subject title supposed to be? It intrigued me as I thought it sounded like new scenery for some exotic island!! I think you're gonna be getting lots of views...haha :(

Not sure lol .I wanted to enter a totally diff subject but somehow I typed that in there and before you know I hit enter and I couldn't change it no more.

[Blodwenblod 0]

Mindyerbeak: You say "My specs: i7 980x,gtx 480, 2X 300gb raptors"and only 8fps? Blimey. I've had the 757 for a good 18 months now, and on my very modest system (q6600 mildly overclocked, 1 x Samsung drive, 4GB DDR2) I get excellent frame rates with it. Even when I've got real time weather, 70% traffic, Radar Contact and photoreal scenery on.I think you need to some serious tweakage of your fsx.cfg file, and perhaps have another look at Bojote's tweaks elsewhere on these forums. I know you have the PMDG 747 and MD11, but IMHO the only plane which seriously taxes a recent machine such as yours would be the Flightsimlabs Concorde X, which is a beast of a machine that eats PC's for breakfast. But in a good way ;)So maybe give the CS 757 another chance - it's given me a lot of pleasure over the last 18 months, I only wish I'd only had to spend a tenner on it....cheersOwen

[Chock 17,769]

A lot depends on other stuff in relation to your computer. For example, what PSU does it have? What speed and type of RAM does it have? What is the motherboard? Is the HD defragged? All of this stuff has an impact on how FS runs and like all computer systems, any weak link in the chain will negate the fancy bits of hardware.CS stuff is hard on memory because their aircraft tend to have a lot of stuff modeled and textured, take a look in the textures folder for a CS aircraft and compare it to some other FS add-on and you can see why it can be tough on frame rates. Most CS stuff has the odd sloppy error on it that can usually be fixed in the config file or with some other tweak, which is what keeps the developer out of the premier league in terms of reputation, but stick with them, there are some good birds in there waiting to be found.Al

[rightseater 0]

Sorry for the subject "bogu" I wanted to edit it but it wouldn't let me :( . Mods could you please edit it for me.Thanks.

Yea, just tell me what you want it to say and I'll change it.

[sargeski 16]

MindYerBeak,The first thing you can do with the CS767, if you are flying passenger variants, is to open the ACE Utility and put a check in flight deck only. This removes all of the modeling in the passenger section and will greatly increase your FPS. Cargo variants will not exhibit this decreased performance.Regards,Bob

[MindYerBeak 73]

Mindyerbeak: You say "My specs: i7 980x,gtx 480, 2X 300gb raptors"and only 8fps? Blimey. I've had the 757 for a good 18 months now, and on my very modest system (q6600 mildly overclocked, 1 x Samsung drive, 4GB DDR2) I get excellent frame rates with it. Even when I've got real time weather, 70% traffic, Radar Contact and photoreal scenery on.I think you need to some serious tweakage of your fsx.cfg file, and perhaps have another look at Bojote's tweaks elsewhere on these forums. I know you have the PMDG 747 and MD11, but IMHO the only plane which seriously taxes a recent machine such as yours would be the Flightsimlabs Concorde X, which is a beast of a machine that eats PC's for breakfast. But in a good way ;)So maybe give the CS 757 another chance - it's given me a lot of pleasure over the last 18 months, I only wish I'd only had to spend a tenner on it....cheersOwen

Believe it or not I have the flightsimlabs concorde myself and it is not heavy on the frames ! I have no idea why the cs 757 is so bad here. I tried bojote's tweaks but the only thing that seems to be making a difference is the highmemfix one. .I'm using the utility available at flightsimlabs for the tweaks.I also like the shader mod 3.0. Unless you're referring to other tweaks ? Yes the sale was a good thing !

MindYerBeak,The first thing you can do with the CS767, if you are flying passenger variants, is to open the ACE Utility and put a check in flight deck only. This removes all of the modeling in the passenger section and will greatly increase your FPS. Cargo variants will not exhibit this decreased performance.Regards,Bob

Bob, thanks I will try that. The CS767 is not soo bad when it comes to fps hit.Not as bad as the 757..at least on my machine.

[MindYerBeak 73]

A lot depends on other stuff in relation to your computer. For example, what PSU does it have? What speed and type of RAM does it have? What is the motherboard? Is the HD defragged? All of this stuff has an impact on how FS runs and like all computer systems, any weak link in the chain will negate the fancy bits of hardware.CS stuff is hard on memory because their aircraft tend to have a lot of stuff modeled and textured, take a look in the textures folder for a CS aircraft and compare it to some other FS add-on and you can see why it can be tough on frame rates. Most CS stuff has the odd sloppy error on it that can usually be fixed in the config file or with some other tweak, which is what keeps the developer out of the premier league in terms of reputation, but stick with them, there are some good birds in there waiting to be found.Al

Psu = corsair 950w. ram : OCZ OCZ3P1600LV6GK.Mobo rampage extreme II.Hd is defragged (o&O).Do you know of any tweaks for the cs birds ?Thanks

Yea, just tell me what you want it to say and I'll change it.

Can't think of anything right now :). Something like capt sim 767 and 757

[duckbilled 310]

Can't comment about the 757 or 767 but the 727 and C130 are performing well on my system. I just have to do some tweaks to the 727 because that trim issue is insane - one click forward=+3000FPM, one click back=-3000FPM.As far as LFPG goes - it kills my system but I am running 100% traffic. It is probably the worst FPS airport in the world. Much worse than any of the large airports with add on scenery (EGLL, KATL, KJFK...).

[MindYerBeak 73]

Can't comment about the 757 or 767 but the 727 and C130 are performing well on my system. I just have to do some tweaks to the 727 because that trim issue is insane - one click forward=+3000FPM, one click back=-3000FPM.As far as LFPG goes - it kills my system but I am running 100% traffic. It is probably the worst FPS airport in the world. Much worse than any of the large airports with add on scenery (EGLL, KATL, KJFK...).

I'm running ut2 80% (%1 Ga) I think .Mind you default kjfk eats my fps:not so when I use fsdreamteam kjfk... no prob with Lfpg here...just the CS planes.II still did not fly the 727.but it does look nice !

[Blodwenblod 0]

what operating system are you running? got any system hog antivirus running? disabled content indexing etc? Seems weird that Concorde is going well but the Boeing isn't. Very strange indeed.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

I just have to do some tweaks to the 727 because that trim issue is insane - one click forward=+3000FPM, one click back=-3000FPM.

Jeff, in the 727 folders depending on how many variants you bought, open the aircraft.cfg and change the line in the [Flight Tuning] section from elevator_trim_effectiveness = 1.0 to 0.3 That will fix the trim problem, works well in other a/c also that have sensitive trim.[flight_tuning]from//elevator_trim_effectiveness = 1.0toelevator_trim_effectiveness = 0.3