Get ready for Christmas - Captain Sim's 999

[Valcor 9]

If this sale included the expansion packs, I would easily spend over 9.99 rather just picking up a single one at that price.

[Wendall 50]

I'm considering the CS757. I would utimately love to see LevelD bring out their 757 but that could be a while.

Guide to buying the CS 757:1. Download, not box: Captain Sim isn't giving Just Flight the 4.6 patch for their boxed products2. MAKE SURE you buy the 4.6. I'm sure the Installer now is 4.6 but just in case3. Have a pretty good computer, the thing drags frames down faster than Concorde flys (bad joke)4. You'll get through the frustation of using the CS 757, it grows on you :smile:put simply:tread carefully with buying the 757

[StamPilot 4]

Who has the base model of the 767 already? Looking at photos it appears to be a port over from FS9. Is that a correct assumption?

Clutch, there were no 767 in FS9, so it was a completely new FSX product. And it is really very good!

[Johnny767 40]

Is the CS 767-300 and entry-level (light) a/c in terms of functionality (FMC etc); or does it models advanced flight management features like Level D?How about the graphics, are they better than Level D? :(

[Benjamin J 751]

Is the CS 767-300 and entry-level (light) a/c in terms of functionality (FMC etc); or does it models advanced flight management features like Level D? How about the graphics, are they better than Level D? :(

It does model more advanced systems, indeed like the Level-D does. The graphics are for sure better than the Level-D, but the CS767 isn't as accurate in at least the VC as the Level-D is. For example, the ratio of the displays is kind of wrong after some quick comparing to actual photographs. I haven't flown the CS767 for a very long time now though, so I can't really comment on how she flies and if the systems work, but if she's as far along as the CS757, she ought to be a reliable airplane.

[niyoko 7]

Is the CS 767-300 and entry-level (light) a/c in terms of functionality (FMC etc); or does it models advanced flight management features like Level D?How about the graphics, are they better than Level D? :(

It does model more advanced systems, indeed like the Level-D does. The graphics are for sure better than the Level-D, but the CS767 isn't as accurate in at least the VC as the Level-D is. For example, the ratio of the displays is kind of wrong after some quick comparing to actual photographs. I haven't flown the CS767 for a very long time now though, so I can't really comment on how she flies and if the systems work, but if she's as far along as the CS757, she ought to be a reliable airplane.

Yeah the CS767 does a good job modeling a lot of the advanced systems, and like Thralni said, it does look much better than the aging Level-D 767. The framerate is impacted a lot more because of the increased VC detail as well. Though, I feel like there is not much difference in FPS between what I get in this than the NGX737. The biggest annoyance is the lack different cockpit layouts, that are tailored to each carrier. All I would like it some speed tape, but not the disproportionate displays might bug me. (^-^)I really enjoy flying the CS767 and using it's VC. It feels more immersive than the Level-D, but the Level-D 767 is just a solidly build aircraft that just works right every time, regardless of the lack of realistic detail in its VC. The Level-D is a great K.I.S.S..

[tf51d 284]

The 767 does have the option to suppress the Virtual cabin via their ACE utility, which does improve performance considerably. The other thing that is good about the cs767 is it models the differences between engine types in the EICAS. The LDS767 only models the GE variant. The 2 main things that I think keep it out of the LDS league, is cockpit lighting, although better, with the 1.5 upgrade, still not as good as the LDS. Also it still does not flare enough on autoland, causing a rather hard landing (400fpm) You can correct this with a little back pressure help, but then it's not really an autoland anymore is it. If they fixed those 2 items, I would say then it surpasses the LDS767 in systems, as well as interior graphic quality. I do think the LDS external graphics are better though. One thing you have to keep in mind with the CS767 and the 757, is CS's intention was to model the original 757, and 767 models of the 80's, hence the standard ADI and egg timer on the overhead. Where Level-D models the later models with the speed tape ADI.

[audiohavoc 24]

My main gripe with CS is that their EPR simulation and engine thrust settings are not correct. Also, I wish they had SDK's so they could get FS2Crew support.

[CoolP 283]

Also, I wish they had SDK's so they could get FS2Crew support.

Try MCE Multi Crew Experience instead. It fully supports the 757 and 767 and is a real treat. I've missed it all the time and bought it instantly after using the trial version. The trial is only time/startup limited, so you can check if the thing is to your liking. It now incorporates some nice voice sets.The EPR things may not change too soon as their engine model is a FSX default one and therefore off from rw values. I doubt that they will implement a more precise one, maybe due to market needs.

[hmslion 1]

The planes are a good value at this price point. All have shortcomings that CS has chosen not to address;1. Flight Directors in the Herc, the 727 and 707 do not work properly2. FMC in the 757 will not consistently load legs of stars into flight plans after selection from the apr/dep menu3. FMC in the 757 is simplified vs. Level D offering (and leaps and bounds behind the 737 NGX from PMDG)3. Engine data not correct as noted above

[DavideLeeSim 0]

The planes are a good value at this price point. All have shortcomings that CS has chosen not to address;1. Flight Directors in the Herc, the 727 and 707 do not work properly2. FMC in the 757 will not consistently load legs of stars into flight plans after selection from the apr/dep menu3. FMC in the 757 is simplified vs. Level D offering (and leaps and bounds behind the 737 NGX from PMDG)3. Engine data not correct as noted above

the FMC in the 767 is simplified too?

[rservice 4]

What!!. You are comparing a 757 with a 737NG. They are totally different aircraft from totally different eras.Utter rubbish!!,Ron

[CoolP 283]

I think he just compared the fanciness of the sim renditions, not the actual planes. Could be wrong though.

[tf51d 284]

The planes are a good value at this price point. All have shortcomings that CS has chosen not to address;1. Flight Directors in the Herc, the 727 and 707 do not work properly2. FMC in the 757 will not consistently load legs of stars into flight plans after selection from the apr/dep menu3. FMC in eth 57 is simplified vs. 7Level D offering (and leaps and bounds behind the 737 NGX from PMDG)3. Engine data not correct as noted above

Excuse me?? Your going to have to explain this one. Every entry that is modeled in the Level-D FMC is also modeled in the CS757/767, In fact I would say the CS FMC is more detailed, as it's NAV DATA page actually functions. Also bear in mind, there were different FMC Software levels in the course of the 757/767 lifetime, so just because there may be some differences between them, doesn't necessarily mean both are not prototypical. The CS FMC is also accessible in the VC, the LDS is 2D popup only. System wise I would also say the CS models are more detailed as every button and knob functions. The LDS model left some out. That said system fidelity, I still have to go with the Level-D 767. Mainly because the CS models still can't perform a proper autoland. The flare is too late resulting in a hard touchdown. Other than that with the new updates they fly very well, and you can't go wrong at 9.99 euros.

[ZKOKQ 986]

Sale now on. Just got the C130 All in One for 9.99. Normally 90 Euro.