I personally was going to buy the external model so I could get the entire product cheaper, but considering that their 707 brings my system to its knees at times, Im not sure. The video they released seemed to have a little lag, and that cant be good in a video created by the people who make it! (though that lag good just be my computer playing the video...)Also, I think this way of selling their product is ok. I think it makes sense for both parties because it allows the consumer to get a discount and it allows Captain Sim to keep money coming in during development. On the other hand, Im not such a big fan of selling the expansion packs. The freighter versions really should be a part of the overall package, and in the case of the Air Force One 707/tanker.... are you kidding me? Its a glorified livery.With MS Flight and XP10 coming out sometime in the future, I think wait and see might be good on this one.

the cost is spread out over the credit card in order to appease the wife.

Nice trick there, will remember it. Yes, I saw Mark's response to that 767 panel wish. Lets hope he can do it since this would enable some FMC to be on board instead of the very basic 747 functions the plane now has.I'm sure that some guys will be ok with the exterior + standard panel thing while others can't wait for the 777 systems to come, so this 767 compromise might fill the gap for them in the meantime (shouldn't take years though).Daniel, you could be right with the assumption that your current system may struggle on the full 777. Since you're talking about the 707 to already add some load, that (future) FMC 777 thing will add more, I assume. But the exterior in the current release should work.I was ok with the 707 cargo variant by the way since those cargo items like the loader and stuff were added. I think that the real 707 never really came as pure cargo plane, so all of them are convertibles which might explain the very close appearance to the passenger variant. The E-3 thing is very cool in my eyes while I agree on the KC-137 opinion of yours. They had a short discussion running over that variant in the forums, so there are changes, but only minor ones. I'm just waiting for one of the repainters to do a very shiny AF1 paint instead of the more matte one in the package, then I'm happy.

You think the PMDG 777 is going to be out before the full CS777 version ?All CS has to be is fairly good and first, they don't have to be as good or better.Most of the community does not wait for a product who's release is not imminent above all current like products.Maybe the hard core systems simulation crowd who refuse to buy anything less than the level PMDG puts out, butthey are the minority of the community. Most can live happily with a lot less than that level.Regards.Ernie.

Indeed. I for one will probably get their 777 once the full pack is out and its price drops. I've already seen multiple times how they drop prices considerably after some time. If PMDG has brought their 777 out by that time, or more is known about it, I will reconsider. If not, I will most likely just get the CS777.

I honestly don't get what all the moaning is about... So Captain Sim has decided to sell their 777 exterior model first, rather than the whole package. So what?PMDG does the exact same thing with their 747-8... but in reverse!! They charge people ($24.99) for the shell of a 747-8 that fits around their previously available 747-400 product. People don't complain about that.. so why is CS getting bashed for providing the shell FIRST (and for about $20 less than the PMDG 748 shell)... and then providing the guts + other variants later? Heck.. even Boeing did it with the real 787.. they gave the world a shell FIRST and (eventually) will give their customers a finished plane!In the end, the result is exactly the same! People get a complete aircraft!! It's like, if one person walks through the front door of a house... and another person walks through the back door, can either person say that the other is NOT in the house because they didn't get there the same way? NO! They both end up in the same place - they just came from two different directions!And to those who say "why pay for the CS 777 when the POSKY model is free?"... well.. just remember, the POSKY model will ALWAYS be just that - a model exterior with a blank VC. It won't integrate with the CS systems, flight model, or VC... at least not without a HUGE amount of work. So basically, if you have no interest in a 777 with systems modeling, then the POSKY model is, indeed, perfect! Save yourself $10!For those who opt to pass on the CS 777 simply because they are waiting for the PMDG 777... that's your choice! You can wait the full 2+ years it'll take before their 777 sees the light of day. No one is stopping you. But some people might prefer to invest in a product that will, more than likely, be ready sooner! It may not be as intensive as a PMDG version, but I'm willing to bet it'll be pretty good! But then, then that's the beauty and freedom of having a choice! People who are waiting for the PMDG 777 have no right to criticize the people who choose to invest in the CS 777 and likewise, the CS 777 buyers have no right to criticize the loyal PMDG customers for waiting.Come on, people... look at the bigger pictures in life! :(

I purchased the PMDG 747 after all the PMDG a really excited user ranting, I wasted $50.00. I don't think its near as good as CS 757/767.

I purchased the PMDG 747 after all the PMDG a really excited user ranting, I wasted $50.00. I don't think its near as good as CS 757/767.

I purchased the PMDG 747 after all the PMDG a really excited user ranting, I wasted $50.00. I don't think its near as good as CS 757/767.

Are you serious ?

I purchased the PMDG 747 after all the PMDG a really excited user ranting, I wasted $50.00. I don't think its near as good as CS 757/767.

Can this be the statement of today? Or this week/month/year?Seriously, I can put this in " your own point of view". But...I can't digest it.Anyway,back to the "real topic". IMHO the CS777 exterior looks very nice with lots of animations. However this is only the early stage of the package. There are lots of addons out there that look "off the hook :(" but the system is a pain in the neck -_-Yesterday, when I look into CS777 product page, I just went sillence for minutes and thinking if I have seven dragon balls here I would wish this one has Fs9 version lol :(

<br /><br /><br />What does that have to do with anything?They beg people to donateThey treat everyone horribly in their forums, and can't even release a proper product with basic features required of FSXThey thumb their nose at vc viewers, I have a right to speak my mind and give examples of my experiences, no? Because they release a product for free? What a poor attitude.

You don't like them. Fine! They don't need your business and we don't want you whining. Its a free product that that was developed at no cost to you.

I purchased the PMDG 747 after all the PMDG a really excited user ranting, I wasted $50.00. I don't think its near as good as CS 757/767.

you got the prize for the "The most bone-headed statement" so far.

Yea I'm serious, infact at first I thought it was an FS9 product.

................So Captain Sim has decided to sell their 777 exterior model first, rather than the whole package. So what?............

I actually purchased the CS B772 (shell) last night. Once installed, I found that I had no sound (the sound.cdf was an alias to the 737-800 stock sound), but by moving the entire FSX 737-800 sound folder into the CS772 folder it now works (as good as the default 737-800 sound is!). I'm not sure why the alias never worked, I was too tired after work to figure it out.I have never "flown" the FSX B744 (I have the PMDG one), so I'm not sure if this is an FSX bug or not, but I found that the VC (uses the FSX B744 panel) wouldn't allow AP on/off, or other relativelty simple AP functions to work. Whether they work in the 2D panel or not, I'm not sure. More of an FSX B744 issue I think.Adding to what others have said here- the wing flex and other animations are awesome, and the wing textures ( in wing view) are really nice- even to the oil streaks from the spoilers and wing flaps. The flaperons appear to be actuated just like the real thing as far as control movement is concerned (these are not simply hinged like those on other aircraft, but actually extend when the control surface is moved). However, unlike flaperons, they do not extend when flaps are deployed.I'm not one for external views (other than wings), but they look good. What I have yet to verify, since they include United and American Airlines models, is if the different engine types are either visually or functionally modelled (UA has P&W, AA has RR Trent engines- and they look very different from the outside).Of course, no systems or B772 VC, so flying it is like flying the FSX B744, although it certainly flies better except the AP issues I mentioned.For the price of a few beers, it's OK, since I shall also be having the few beers after work tonight as well- hey, it's Friday after all.Thanks, Bruce.

Thanks for the initial thoughts Bruce.

<br />Yea I'm serious, infact at first I thought it was an FS9 product.<br /><br /><img src="http://i1133.photobucket.com/albums/m585/burnerski/013Medium.jpg" /><br />

<br /><br /><br />Technically yes, the PMDG 747 was first an FS9 product. And yet it it still far more functional and complete than anything CS will ever make

Technically yes, the PMDG 747 was first an FS9 product. And yet it it still far more functional and complete than anything CS will ever make

You can see into the future?

Boy you got to love some of these Avsim threads sometimes! It's like a group of guys in the military who have been on deployment for too long, two people starting yacking at each other about something and then pretty soon everyone is yacking at everyone and there are 30 conversations going between 15 guys....

Spot on. But you've got to admit, they're far more fun than those tedious threads about another baffling .cfg tweak...Ian