A chubby little lady, but what a classic appearance. Lets get that real cockpit rollin'!.Checking the equipment at PANC. I think I have some JT8D sounds available on another plane, so at least this part gets a bit closer to the rw in the meantime.Oh, here's the night shot.And one when going around (which works nicely by the way).

Well, you've got a few options for replacement sounds, some payware among those choices. Sort of freebie-wise (assuming you have the aircraft), the FSX CS 727 does of course have P&W JT8D engines, although I'm not sure if you'd have to screw around to get the audio positioning correct in FSX, I suspect you would be okay though. The FSX Sky Simulations DC-9 is another possibility, it too having JT8D engines. Several Aerosim FS9 aircraft have JT8Ds, naturally, that includes both 727s and 737s they have made, but being FS9 sounds I'm assuming they would not have the audio sound cone malarkey that FSX stuff has sussed out quite so well although it's at least an option. Then you've got some payware choices, most notably from TSS, although I think most if not all of their JT8 packages are for FS9, but one at least is the exact correct model of engine for a 737-200 series (JT8D-7-9A), having been recorded from the real thing:

Al

Didn't someone do a great soundset for the Tinmouse version?

I'm going to be honest and agree. I purchased the BUFF exterior model from them and then the full model when it came out, receiving a discount for my prior purchase. However, I dislike the practice as it does seem to be a money grabbing exercise when coupled with the very poor support received once purchased coupled with the large amount of bugs. I'm usually a supporter of payware developers and in fact am more tolerant of them than of developers of other software I purchase, as I realize it isn't really a job that can sustain yourself and a family, but in this case I guess this will have to be my first real whine about an FS developer in 2 decades of virtual flying. The likes of IRIS, REX, FSCaptain and other smaller developers do an outstanding job of juggling support with supreme development skills and CS could learn a lot from their example.

The 737 looks good so far. I am still amazed it has taken this long to see a payware 737-100 and hopefully 200 series. I will wait until the full product is released however long that might be. 8-10 months from now? I bought the BUFF exterior model when it was released because of the quality of work I saw put into it. However, it served no better purpose to alias the instrument panel. Thus, I never flew the BUFF again until after purchasing the full release.

Looking forward to the full package. Don't care how long it takes as long as it is done right.

I agree with Alan here the development of the base pack should come way faster then the Boeing 777 since cs has what it needs from the 707 and 727. cool shots Coolp looking good.

I wish they would just finish a whole project for once and stop with the patch work money grab garbage...

I can't agree more with you Dillon!!

Ok, we need to stop wishing at this point and work with what is available. Question, has anyone attempted to merge Bob Scott's 200 panel and sounds. I guess there will be some "non-functionality" based on some of the xml programming that Bob as applied to the TinMouse

If it was any other aeroplane I'd probably have waited, but since I really like the 737, I coughed up for it, although frankly, there are actually already some Original 737 exterior models you can have in FSX, including the Aerosim one if you port it over, which does have a VC, so it was more about encouraging Captain Sim to get on with finishing it than for any great need for a Classic 737 exterior for FSX. Still, it is undeniably a pretty spiffy model and it might even make me park up the PMDG 737 for a millisecond: Al

Hello Alan,Glad to see you back in action. Ray

Didn't someone do a great soundset for the Tinmouse version?

Yeah the JT8 sound-set from Christoffer Petersen works fine with it

The best advice I give to myself is "buy what you see - not what you hope to see". So for me I don't put weight on what a developer plans to develop, what they hope to develop, what the want to develop. Until it is in my hands (an working as prescribed), it's all vaporware. The question for me is if they never offer anything beyond what they are selling at this very moment would I be content in my purchase? Otherwise, I would be sick with ulcers waiting for the next patch, upgrade, or "advance package". There's just too much going on in the world for small time developers (and I mean no disrespect when I say that), to always come through on their intent of the final project. Heck, I'm still waitin' on my Flightzone Portland for FSX... that's what I was promised when I purchased it, ha! In actuality, I purchased it because I liked what I saw in FS2004, and since they never came out with it for FSX I am still happy with my original purchase. So I am asking myself would I be content with this purchase at $15 USD if nothing else was ever done for it? I'm thinking yes cause I just luv the 732 and not a stickler for complete systems. I would like a 3D VC but I don't have that even with my glorious Tinmouse. But as others have mentioned I can input the correct sounds and port over the Simmer Sky 732 VC and maybe have luck with the Tinmouse 2D panels. Mmmmm.....

Those Captainsim boys sure do know how to build a good looking aeroplane.

Too bad that's all they know how to do. Their aircraft always feel incomplete and inadequate compared to other developers'. They just aren't very high fidelity. The flight models are usually awkward at best, and FPS are bad by comparison. Their planes STILL have very obvious bugs even after several versions. I guess if you like flying pretty slideshows, CS is for you.

Too bad that's all they know how to do. Their aircraft always feel incomplete and inadequate compared to other developers'. They just aren't very high fidelity. The flight models are usually awkward at best, and FPS are bad by comparison. Their planes STILL have very obvious bugs even after several versions. I guess if you like flying pretty slideshows, CS is for you.

I usually don't really have any issues with the performance of their aircraft. Having said that, any lower performance probably stems from all the doodads and whatnot they incorporate into their models. lol

CS released another exterior model. Whoop-dee-freakin'-do.

Haven't purchased a cs product since fs2002 727 but i'll get their full 777 if it runs decenlyt on a typ system.