I've got the CS 767 and have tried, but never completed a flight in it, figured I would abandon airliners.Then got the PMDG NGX and have rarely flown anything else since .. .. ..G

Bought the Captain Sim 767 (1.4) about a year ago, because it was on sale for 10 euros. Even though I didn't pay a fortune for it I was really ###### because it took them almost one more year to release service pack 1.5 which finally made the cockpit sounds working for me. Still problems with TCAS in FSX multiplayer, but otherwise its now usable. CS said that this will be the last service pack for that bird, so don't count on further bugfixes.Given the many bugs I saw in v1.4, I just wonder what a v1.0 release looks like? Definitely won't be buying from CS again!

The LDS is simply amazing in regards to system depth, but the visuals are...whew..look like they haven't been refreshed sinced initial release.

Have you tried "Andre-Folkers-VC-Mod-FSX" for the Level-D it does make all the difference.

...As others have stated zero support, buggy releases, rude developers.

Sorry, but that really is absolute twoddle!If you search back through my posts over the years, you'll see I was about as bigger critique of Captain Sim as one could get. Blatently so.As far as support goes, CS have improved their customer support ten fold. The only problems that persist as far as that goes, are purely language barriers.As for the product, I think you'll find that generally speaking the price speaks for itself. If you want top quality, such as PMDG, then one must pay a little more.

Sorry, but that really is absolute twoddle!If you search back through my posts over the years, you'll see I was about as bigger critique of Captain Sim as one could get. Blatently so.As far as support goes, CS have improved their customer support ten fold. The only problems that persist as far as that goes, are purely language barriers.As for the product, I think you'll find that generally speaking the price speaks for itself. If you want top quality, such as PMDG, then one must pay a little more.

I agree 100%, especially with the latest updates, the CS757/767's are a good value. Not PMDG quality, but then what is with exception of Level-D, and IFly? As far as systems supported, is more detailed then the LDS-767, although the latter I would say still integrates them better. Every button knob on the CS757 functions, you can't say that for the LDS-767. For example when you lock the cockpit door, it actually locks, try that on any other aircraft, including PMDG. The tiller (While still connected to the rudder axis due to FSX limitation) works. The one thing that I think could be improved better, is the cockpit lighting, but that's true with every addon except PMDG, Many reported problems have been traced to user error. For example, one of the most prevalent reports is blank displays or AP not functioning. That's because the CS757767's startup without the IRS aligned. Once aligned there is no problem. Watch this video before you make your decision. (Note audio segments are not standard made specifically for this video)

Edited February 7, 201214 yr by tf51d

I agree 100%, especially with the latest updates, the CS757/767's are a good value. As far as systems supported, is more detailed then the LDS-767, although the latter I would say still integrates them better. Every button knob on the CS757 functions, you can't say that for the LDS-767. For example when you lock the cockpit door, it actually locks, try that on any other aircraft, including PMDG. The tiller (While still connected to the rudder axis due to FSX limitation) works. The one thing that I think could be improved better, is the cockpit lighting, but that's true with every addon except PMDG, Watch this video before you make your decision. (Note audio segments are not standard made specifically for this video)

But most of the "simulated systems" are simulated incorrectly or are strictly aesthetic. That's what I was trying to say along with everyone else. Yes, it has clicky buttons all over and they are pretty, but most of them have no use. I'd rather have good frame rates and an accurate, well simulated FMC and overhead than a lockable cockpit door and some maintenance animations. Anyway, I think I'm running my point into the ground! I'll move along now.

But most of the "simulated systems" are simulated incorrectly or are strictly aesthetic. That's what I was trying to say along with everyone else. Yes, it has clicky buttons all over and they are pretty, but most of them have no use. I'd rather have good frame rates and an accurate, well simulated FMC and overhead than a lockable cockpit door and some maintenance animations. Anyway, I think I'm running my point into the ground! I'll move along now.

In what way? All flight critical functions work fine for me!! Give me some examples say compared to the LDS-767? Compare it to the QW757, that you have to CTRL-E to start!

In what way? All flight critical functions work fine for me!! Give me some examples say compared to the LDS-767? Compare it to the QW757, that you have to CTRL-E to start!

I'll consider reinstalling it to continue the discussion with you. It's been uninstalled and untouched since late 2010 according to the file properties!

Doesn't it default to personal preference again? While the one guy likes the more accurate systems of the Level D, the other one enjoys the optical immersion of the CS some more. The easy operation of the QW and the more detailed one of the CS. Not a big deal and great thing to have options to choose from, right?If you buy smart, you'll get every basepack (which is a full pane of course) for just 10 Euros on the regular sales. And the support side improved a lot since that new 'official supporter' role was added. So you may find Mark and Lou helping where they can, while the CS folks actually do take note of problems and issue service packs.I personally see CS shine in the classic plane section though, but their 757 and 767 packages may be worth a look, especially on the sales.

I have flown both of the CS 757 and 767 (and 707/727/C-130) and I find them to be pretty solid and would recommend them :( not everything (for me) has to have complete systems modeling, and at least CS757/767 have an FMC...I am able to complete flights in them regularly... I have just as many oom errors and system crashes in my PMDG planes, as well as other high memory usage planes....FSX is buggy with its memory management, I've just come to accept it.

Sales aside, which I'd have to guess is when most people buy Captainsim products, the regular price for the CS757 is currently slashed from 60 to 30 Euros. At today's exchange rate, that is from down to 40 US Dollars. That's just the -200! If you want the -300 and -F you'll have to splash out 10 euros more for each. So for 50 euros you get a 757-200, -300 and -F with all the above mentioned issues (which in my case have proven true, not trying to discredit those who haven't had those issues with CS products).Now, note that Qualitywings provides a great simulation of a 757 that includes all variants and multiple engine types, as well as the C-32A military version and the -F version all for 45 US Dollars, 5 bucks more if you want it boxed. They provide support for both versions. Then add that it comes with a realistic or lite switch so different types of sim pilots can enjoy it and 125 liveries and counting and we're talking a serious bargain chaps. It's not PMDG or Level-D, they don't claim to be, but I certainly rank them between CS and PMDG in terms of quality and realism. The CS 767 is also 40 Euros and for the -F and -200 costs another 10 Euros each. I won't count the KC version. The Level-D sells for 55 bucks, although it says it also sells for 40 Euros, so something is up with their conversion tool. But 40 Euros is the same price as the CS -300. They don't offer a -200 or -F, that I know of, so we're looking at a more dated, but higher fidelity system. For only 24 Euros, I find the CLS is seemingly a bargain in that you get the -200, the -300 and a fully-featured VC with a lite FMC. So while CS seems a bargain, to me the headache of potential bugs that make the aircraft unflyable (or in my case, not even installable!!!) and limited support, means I'd rather shop elsewhere.

...Any who, the 757 is appealing to those who don't mind blatant inaccuracies and rocket ship performance. The models look nice, though!

To be fair, the B757 is nicknamed the "Rocket Plane", it has quite extraordinary performance.

The biggest problem with the CS 757 is the FMC bug that causes it to not calculate top of descent some times. Other than that its an OK plane.

To be fair, the B757 is nicknamed the "Rocket Plane", it has quite extraordinary performance.

The biggest problem with the CS 757 is the FMC bug that causes it to not calculate top of descent some times. Other than that its an OK plane.

It certainly is powerful. My father-in-law is rated on the 757/767, and he thinks the 757 feels like a truck, while the 767 feels like a Cadillac. Supposedly the 767 is much lighter on the controls partly because the control surfaces are so much larger.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by audiohavoc

I own both products. Yes LDS is rock solid in systems but not in graphics. I also own CS 767 and it is pretty solid system wise...I got it a few weeks ago and it is a great product...The visuals and graphics are outstanding!--The problem I have noticed with a few posters is that they seem to stick "blindly" to only one or two developers and they forget completly that as we speak (or write) there are other developers who are as good or better in many aspects such as the VRS, Melviz, I-Fly, FSLabs, Wilco, and Aerosoft Airbus X (to name a few). Seeing beyond our noses is a good thing; lifting our foreahead to look ahead is a good thing; we will learn more and more, and become more informative...Moreover, it's good competition as it favors the customers!

I really ought to try and merge the LDS767 and CS767 sometime. Because as people said, if we have the graphics of either the CS or CLS and the fidelity of the LDS, that'd be the best of both worlds. getting the panel in should be a no brainer. What worries me is whether the autopilot and such will work - that's usually where panels break.Question is of course, whether a merge with the CS would be best, or with the CLS. to be honest, I don't really like the CS767 VC. There are some key things there that are rather inaccurate, like the display's shape. BEcause of that I'm thinking of doing the merge with the CLS.