Wonderful text, Alan. Absolutely agreed on it and nice to read such things from time to time.I have to admit that I had mixed emotions as the Captain Sim official showed up in this thread and politely asked about exact values to be changed . "They'll eat him alive" was my thinking and one of the first posts after his question was one of those "eating" ones.I think we all agree thattransports some emotions too and might lack of facts.I was confused because Epikk seemed to be one open minded fellow and he was showed in another thread that at least one thing from his list of complains was solved in the 1.1 update of the plane (the current one is 1.2). I even showed pictures to him and if my memory doesn't play tricks on me, he said something like "ah, there it is".I could do huge lists about lacks and flaws in some of the Captain Sim birds (in fact, I did some of those lists over there with some other guys) and I could be very disappointed on their beta testing process too, because some flaws shouldn't exist anymore in my eyes. But, I have to admit that they for example still update their "old" stuff while I can see some other companies drop off their products after one or two service packs (and they are not flawless then). I also have to admit that they react on wishes and comments and even complains towards their products in a timely and customer friendly manner, not the most common thing in customer support today as some of you might agree."Love it or leave it" would be the opposite of this and I had such experiences in the past at other devs (might be a pure personal experience though).There's no doubt that the system depth award goes to other devs while we should ask ourselves how much detail the average flight sim user wants to have (if there is something like an average user here). As I mentioned in some other threads around, the realism and system detail guys are very prominent in forums but I really doubt that they make the market numbers and therefor represent any majority of users.So, as Alan said, it might be a disappointing detail that e. g. all engines on the 707 can be started at at once but for 95% of users this isn't a problem and will never be. But those 95% applaud on the low fps impact of that detailed bird while some other "super extreme detailed and realistic" ones (which I own too) even keep your 4Ghz very busy.I'd like to mention one last thing concerning the customers approach on product flaws, not only on the CS ones.I really get the impression that a large number of fellow Captains complain about things in front of their monitor, a smaller group then puts these complains into words and posts them in e. g. support areas. A much smaller group is able to do this emo-free and with enough details for a dev to get a picture of some flaw.What I want to say is that I read about complains, often very emotional ones, all the time while the constructive part of at least describing things more detailed is missing. In the CS case, I can see some forum posts over at their site but the users that wrote tickets on some items (which is the only way at CS to get support and trigger an interaction from the devs) seems to be unused.What does one expect then? An overwhelming applause towards his "it isn't working" posts? I don't know ..A good beta testing phase should literally rule out any majoThe r flaws and if we just look at this sentence, the CS beta phase has to be improved (and, by the way, the Aerosoft Airbus one too). But the rest of constructive work on a todays detailed flight sim product comes from the users. Strange or disappointed fact, but every dev would agree that after the release some detailed and non emotional bug reports are needed to get in shape. These things, together with some wishes stated, form the future and maybe final product then.I think that this phase is another lack (besides the beta phase) on especially the CS titles and I think they can manage this if some people start writing what they want and what they expect. As this demanded intention isn't a Captain Sim special but a todays mandatory item, it can't be wrong to develop it.

Good to know I'm not open-minded like you do CoolP... I'll try to keep it in mind [if my mind allows of course]. Thank you. One thing for sure I'm out any CS707 thread from now on so ya'll be happy. Out.

I don't think it is a case of anyone regarding pointing out limitations as not being open minded, it is just that there may be some method behind the madness.Al

It seems like the 707 has a few new gadgets (like the doppler navigation thing) that set it apart from the rest of its line up, but at the end of the day they still do shallow systems programming and for $70 I'm just not going to bite. I bought the 757 and it doesn't even taxi correctly (correct me if this has been fixed in a subsequent patch), so I'm not going to spend $70 on something marginally better than their previous offerings. Some people in here are congratulating CS for responding to the comments in this thread; while that's great, it'd be nice to them actually step up to the plate and make a product worthy of this price point. A lot of people are convinced that CS has changed their ways and is now a much better developer, but I'm still a skeptic.

I fly the LH Maddog two - three short legs every week in the Orbx PNW: I got fed up waiting for Dreamfleet to produce their FSX version of the 727, and so purchased the CoolSky MD80. It was so poor in systems depth - I bought the LH Maddog - which is the absolute dream of systems integration. Do it properly and you will have a successful flight. Miss something and you can be sure you just created your own failure somewhere down the road. (There are a couple of very small niggly things but it is so far above the competition it just doesn't matter). The fact that Captain Sim are now here and are taking notice of our opinions is great news - but for me it also needs to work ala the real thing, too - no "Ctrl - C" to start: the fuel system must work as the real one; the electrical system must feed the right dependencies, as with the hydraulics. Right now Captain Sim has the best and most realistic flight deck graphics. It just needs the systems integration. This is where LH scores big..C'mon Captain Sim - you CAN do it!!Regards,

Epikk, I just wondered why a clever guy would come up with some some bug list that includes things (among new ones) which are already fixed since two patches. I wondered even more because you've acknowledged the improvement on another thread.Seems like this thinking aloud got you personally, sorry for that then. No need to stay out of anything for you.As I mentioned before, flight sim forums are full of emotional stuff, too short bug descriptions and generic (and therefor useless) complains and I think that posting a somehow outdated bug list together with those quoted two sentences sadly is another example for this behavior. In this case, the emotional one.The whole flying stuff is very depended on personal preference but, if you don't mind, I'd like to stay on a fact basis if critics come up and for this, one should know what has been fixed already and what not.You won't see me jumping in if somebody thinks about his future investment or clearly states his very personal preference. I have such a preference too and until now, my enjoyment on this product wasn't touched severely by those things mentioned but my believe is that the whole package of product, product support and company policy of e. g. Captain Sim now gives you a good value, even if it allows you to accidentally start all four engines at once.There are some technically more perfect addons around, but their package lacks of other things sometimes, at least in my eyes.Good words on the Maddog, Paul J. I like this one too and it would be an example of another good and valuable package with a different bias on the market.By the way, I wouldn't take the presence of the "Ctrl-E" feature as an indicator for any realism or non realism. Otherwise some guys will be amazed that it works one some of the very detailed offers today. :(

Gents -thanks for the comments. Just one question to Level-D and PMDG supporters: How hardcore the lack of Wx Radar supposed to be? As we'd expect this topic is not about systems depth anymore :) I believe it's all about customers satisfaction.Trying to cut a long story short I'm asking myself:- Are CS products good and in some aspects unique? Yes. - Are they perfect? God no! - Is there some potential for improvements? Of course.- Does CS improve its existing products and icrease its development standards for new titles? Yes.We are a small company producing complex hobby products, we doing our best to make you happy, and we do need your help. As you may noticed, now we are open for constructive customers input more than ever.

- Are CS products good and in some aspects unique? Yes.

I suggest you leave that to the peoples eyes while the rest of that list is an appreciated statement. If you watch your forums, you'll see that you already have some guys working together on improving your products. The best you can do: support them and their input, I hope there's some constructive work around and I don't automatically refer to my posts over there because I don't have an objective view on them.You were asking about the weather radar. For me it's some useful and atmospheric feature, especially when integrated in the ND of the newer birds.I know that the other devs like PMDG state "we can't simulate it realistic in the sim, so we leave it out", which is ok as a policy but looks somehow strange if you sell 747-800 and the LCF together with the unchanged 747-400 basis (and therefor wrong cockpits, wrong performance and just optics and sounds). So everybody might judge by himself, how realistic some things are and others not.Your weather radar, as well as the RealtiyXP stuff, shows me "bad weather" (roughly spoken) to avoid and I don't have 400 or so real people in my back complaining about delays then. So I myself keep it as real as it gets for me and not as it's supposed to be, following some forum bias.I hope that this doesn't turn out to some "who is better" thread now as I like all products and developers mentioned here and I'm still enjoying using their products. For me, the Captain Sim bias lies on the older steam gauged liners while the modern ones have some unique features and feeling, but will currently fail in correct system detail when compared to the other devs ones.As a strange matter of fact, the fun in using these aircraft doesn't come from the "close to the real thing" factor but from the overall experience. That's why I prefer the CS 767 over the Level D one for example.Maybe you can explain how this lately experienced improvement of customer support took place at Captain Sim as I would be interested in the trigger event there.I wouldn't suggest to put some oil in the fire about the comparison between e. g. PMDG, Level D and Captain Sim. You won't get an usable outcome there but you will definitely trigger some emotional posts.

Well, some developers have stated that they won't do a weather radar if it can't be done properly, and that's their position, but that doesn't necessarily mean every fan of PMDG, or any of the other developers who are perceived as hard core, happen to agree with that decision. Personally I don't like that stance and would rather have something which had a stab at a radar as much as is possible instead of completely missing it out, since I think it is akin to saying, well it's not real water on the windscreen, so why bother making the wipers move? There aren't real passengers in the back either, but they still have a crack at making the planes to transport them.In short, immersion is enough of a reason to at least have a crack at it. Even if one only has a radar so that it can be included in checklists and it doesn't do a goddam thing other than light up the cockpit with a glow, I'd still rather have that than a panel which looks like it is busted. As it happens though, the CS weather radar is actually useful on occasion, especially at night. So I for one appreciate CS efforts in that regard.That is why I bought the standalone CS Weather Radar, so that I could add it to some of those PMDG and Level D affairs, which means that to answer your question, they are hardcore, but moreso when they have that Captain Sim Radar slotted into them, LOL. But the same is true of the Flight Keeper ACARs gauge too, I always stick that in my airliners in order to give them such a capability, in lieu of them not having either that or SELCAL, because the real things would almost certainly have one or the other, and possibly both. So the fact is, CS birds miss stuff out too.Al

I don't buy the PMDG reason for no weather radar. So what if it can't be done 100% right, nothing can. And like the poster a few replies above pointed out the 748 isn't realistic either. But when it comes down to system depth, realistic flight dynamics, and the abilities of LNAV VNAV and the FMC, nothing beats Level-D and PMDG

It never occurred to me to start all the engines at once.Anyway, the 707 has plenty to offer and enough to keep me busy. I suspect most people are like me and would not appreciate the difference between a gauge that goes up in three seconds vs. fifteen. As has been noted, doppler navigation really sets it apart and they have done a good job incorporating CIVA INS in the VC, which, I might add, was in direct response to customer requests. I have been surprised to find things like the flaps not working if switches are not configured properly, but alternate flaps in fact working.Does it work exactly like a real 707? As far as I know, yes, having never flown one or studied the 707 in depth. So that allows me to enjoy it on the level it is offered. I enjoy flying a lot of different airplanes, and would not enjoy the kind of system depth some desire.As far as the 757 not taxing properly, it goes straight down the taxi way for me and makes the turns, which is good enough for me.

You know, I appreciate that Alex (CS) has asked how to improve their product. That's great.That said... Alex, it's disingenious to follow up with a post about a missing feature in other products. I don't think that's appropriate. Users are entitled to their opinions as consumers, but I think developers need to be more understanding of product differences and philosphies.Let's respect that each product is different - there are reasons WX Radar has not been implemented in Level-D products (and PMDG no doubt)- and refrain from the thread drift?

Agreed, he could have asked the guys how important in general e. g. the weather radar feature is for them, without naming PMDG and Level D "supporters" first. Would have sounded much better, but, I must admit, I still would have known that he might point towards the lack of other devs there. Modern politics in a way.As I've experienced this sort of advertisement around here before (from all kinds of companies) and can't find any bad thing about it, I would be ok if this was done like this. It was not, so your are right, Daryl.He could also have asked for the winglets option on the 767 which is available on the CS from the beginning on but, and this might be the advertising item for Level D in my eyes, without any changed fuel burn or FDE data of course. So every dev gets its people and you see Pros and Cons being distributed somehow equal. At the end, the personal preference wins again.Coming back to the thread title and therefor system detail, the weather radar is simulated on the 707, it shows you the weather and gives you an idea of the degree of "heaviness". So your personal preference might get pleased because this adds some atmospheric detail for you (because this rotating amber beam is nice to use and to look at) or it might be rejected because you think that this feature isn't realistic at all and you are happier with an inop screen in the cockpit.One has to chose what he likes more but sadly or luckily (it depends on the sight), the situation where you can chose one aircraft model from different devs isn't that common. The 767 might be a good example for all kind of system detail approaches, the 707 is one where you can either go or no go.If one likes the old steam gauge liners, he won't find many reasons to leave the 707 out, even with some currently existing flaws and maybe less detailed systems overall. That's my personal opinion.

CoolP, I think you missed some stuffs there... I'm NOT complaining AT ALL about CS707's quality... Like I said, I don't expect system depth with CS because they never did such add-ons. And I think and I can understand that not everybody can do it... If I want system depth I fly The Maddog [iMVHO the VERY best in hardcore department out there and my favorite still], Level-D, PMDG, FSLabs, A2A, ... The guy who started the thread wanted to know where the 707 stands system-wise... I answered that it was good as long as long as you stick to normal ops... And I really think that the simple fact that you're able start all engines at once speaks for itself system-wise... You can't do such in the Maddog, the Level-D 767 or the ConcordeX : not enough Bleed Pressure... Just logical. I wasn't saying something like : "CS707 is bad because you can do that... " or "You shouldn't buy CS707 because... "Alex from CS then asked "What exactly dissapoints you in the 707 systems programing depth please? We'll try to dig it deeper in the next update". I then listed some stuff that looked just obvious to me... Obvious differences between hardcore add-ons and CS707. It's important to note that I DO NOT consider the stuff I listed as bugs because it's a CS add-on [they would if I was considering the CS a hardcore add-on. It's NOT]... So if they they don't correct those so be it. If my post looked a little harsh or something like that then I do sincerely apologize to Alex and other CS707 lovers... But it seemed to me like Alex wanted to know why I think other teams do a better job with systems and I tried to answer. The point is I DO honestly think the CS707's systems are are not up there with the hardcore ones and it doesn't bother me AT ALL... And I'm just talking about systems.

Much clearer now, Epikk, thanks for that post.

Let's respect that each product is different

Thanks, that is exaclty my point. Different... As for those companies, it wasn't me who mentioned them first in direct comparison to our company and our products. I've just gave an example on that there are no gods/devils of hardcore :) Different...

there are reasons WX Radar has not been implemented in Level-D products (and PMDG no doubt)

Undoubtedly. Everyone's got reasons and excuses (including Captain Sim). As for our Wxr, it's the most accurate one on the marked. It shows exact MSFS weather (whatever it is). We've spend thousands of hours on it. Other companies spent these hours on other features. DIFFERENT...