>Clay,>saw your posting after I posted mine.>>Just wanted to say hello, thanks for all your input and>support. Your BUFF manual copy (thanks again!) is gonna have>busy days with our programmers soon ;)>>Best,>Alex >>http://www.captainsim.com/logo_n.gif>www.captainsim.comClay; Holy cow...you really sent a copy of a B-52 Dash-1 to the Ukranians???? A thorough reading of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 (22 USC 2753) might be worth your time. It doesn't necessarily have to be classified to be illegal to distribute military tech data outside the U.S. Given that we still fly the B-52 operationally, this rings warning bells.Bob

>Clay;>> Holy cow...you really sent a copy of a B-52 Dash-1 to the>Ukranians????>> A thorough reading of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976>(22 USC 2753) might be worth your time. It doesn't>necessarily have to be classified to be illegal to distribute>military tech data outside the U.S. Given that we still fly>the B-52 operationally, this rings warning bells.>>BobBob,Are you kidding? Clay just pointed us to the US based commercial site:http://www.eflightmanuals.com that's it. He did not SEND as a thing. Have you understood my posting as he actually sent us some manual? Oh no, that's just my poor English, just can't clearly express myself ;) http://www.captainsim.net/pix/avsim_forum.gifwww.captainsim.com

Hello Bob,Well, Trust me on this one, if you think the Ruskies, (no offense Alex ) don't have better things to do than pant like Pavlov's dogs over an 45 year old B52 manual that most EVERYONE has seen, looked at and copied more times than the bible, then you need to take a valium and relax a tad LOL.Believe me, I'm sure there are powers to be that have the new F-22 manual, and some of them before our pilots . . . it ain't no big deal.I am, and most of our government, I believe, is not too terribly worried about another super power -- its the guy who becomes an 'instant' super power with a suitcase bomb that I worry about.Besides, if the guys in the dark suits and cheap sunglasses stop by, I'll probably know one of them . . . I still keep in touch with most of my old 'spook' buddies, and we'll sit down, have a tall one and tell old war lies.I think Alex has already clarified the matter in his latest post. In today's day and age of modern cyber tech, you can buy a manual for almost ANYTHING on the frickin internet! Oh, wait a minute, you can't buy one on how to make MSFS 9 run flawlessly at 50 FPS with all add ons offered with sliders full right . . . Now THAT would be a breach in National Security!Best to all, Clay

Hey K,Now don't kill the messenger here, but in talking with someone who has the old PIC, and now just downloaded the new one, I have been told it is just a 2005 update of the old model.Again, I haven't bought the new one, however my friend who just relayed this info has flown the pants off the old PIC and tells me there isn't much new here on the Level D. However, I am sure all will rave about it and rant how new and modern it is and full of fantastic features . . . yada, yada, yada . . .go figure.Best to all, Clayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"

Hi Clay,I don't really see a point of your comment. The "old" PIC767 was one of the best add-on's ever made for FS and if there are "only" some cosmetical changes in LDS 767 for FS9, I think I'm going to have nirvana though. I honestly doubt even Captain Sim could beat it, so that's why my question. I just can't understand why CS focuses on the part of the market that is already filled and why they invest an effort and money into something with an uncertain future (I mean, if they want to sell out, it HAS TO be better than LDS 767). That's all.Bye

>Hey K, I>have been told it is just a 2005 update of the old model.>>Clayton T. Dopke (Clay)>Major, USAF (retired)>"Drac"Yeah, it is. But that's just like saying: "He, yesterday someone hand-delivered Cameron Diaz's twin sister to my bedroom, and I sent her back because she wasn't Cameron Diaz." Lol.ricardo

Update of the old PIC.... yeah right!!Have you seen the specs page ? This aircraft is a faithful replica of a 767, a true simulator. It simulates full left & right EFIS, and the system simulation is entirely overhauled.Guys, I've flown the 757 simulator a lot and have been testing LDS for about a year. I also flew the old PIC for many years. Take it from me: this isn't an "update". It's an entirely different beast. And frankly, I personally (my unofficial opinion that is) wouldn't expect CS to even scratch what we have accomplished here.You can get the most advanced jetliner simulator ever made for FS right now, or wait for the other 767 that doesn't even have panel shots to show to the customers yet! But everyone can of course decide for themselves :).Tero

I wonder if the eFlightManuals guys have strayed into the radar of law enforcement yet...I see they're now openly soliciting a C-17 flight manual on their site. That alone might be enough to get somebody interested in them.It's all in good fun until the knock comes at the door. Lots of MP3 swappers and kiddie porn posters have discovered that just because lots of other folks are doing it, and they've been getting away with it for years, doesn't mean that knock on the door will never come.I just think it would be pretty dumb to give a former eastern-bloc foreign national tech data to a weapon system still being used by the strategic forces of our nation, which was issued to me in the course of my military duties, regardless of how little of a risk I think it might be, and then to chat about it on a public forum. Alex, your english seemed perfectly OK to me when I saw you in Reading. You wrote: "Your BUFF manual copy (thanks again) is gonna have busy days with our programmers soon..." I think the meaning is quite clear, and it hasn't anything to do with a web site.Anyway, back to the thread topic...all we need now is for Ariane to announce a new 767 project to put the icing on the cake. Hey...how about a collaborative venture between Ariane and CaptainSim...that would make some sense now. They could put Peter Tishma's public relations skills together with CS's reputation for customer support. PT can tell us the product is coming any day now, and CS can tell us their support forum will be up and running any day now... Hey...you heard it here first!! Bob

Bob"I just think it would be pretty dumb to give a former eastern-bloc foreign national tech data to a weapon system still being used by the strategic forces of our nation, which was issued to me in the course of my military duties, regardless of how little of a risk I think it might be, and then to chat about it on a public forum."I could not agree more.Not good Clay!!!If the data is accessable let CS go and find it on their own.It should`nt come from a retired USAF officer.Come to think of it that data did`nt even belong to you did it?Troy

Hello Bob, and Troy, You know guys, just so you understand, this information has been available since hector was a pup and he died years ago from old age.If you cut me, I bleed red, white and blue. I have given this country more of my time, body, friends and health than most. On my wall in my den is a framed bit my wife did, (against my protests as I'm no chest trinket junkie), which holds the Sllver Star, the DFC, the Air Force Medal of Merit, Purple Heart, more unit citations than I care to remember, and several heavy sounding decorations from the former country of South Vietnam . . . oh, and a few which I don't have the medal for, nor can even tell you WHAT they were for, and not because I can't remember what I did to get them.So, in a nutshell, please reach down, grab your ears and pull your heads out of your butts . . . this is much to do about nothing and is a perfect example of a flight simulation reproduction using factual information to reproduce an aircraft which many of us would like to fly at one time or another.And as for the 'weapon' systems, those are in a separate manual depending upon the model, mission and era for which the aircraft is being used. Nothing in the manual mentioned is a. State of the art, b. current for weapons or still classified Top Secret. Even the crab landing gear, which was considered top secret for years has been declassified.Talk about something you know of, or don't talk at all. Perhaps you should give up FS for awhile and take on something more taxing like pac man.And please, don't lecture me on security, God and Country and my loyality to this nation . . . because that dog just won't hunt.Enough, Clayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"

>And frankly, I personally (my unofficial>opinion that is) wouldn't expect CS to even scratch what we>have accomplished here.How do you know?>You can get the most advanced jetliner simulator ever made for>FS right now, Thanks, but many people already got the PIC767 ;) They could wait for something NEW.>or wait for the other 767 that doesn't even have>panel shots to show to the customers yet! Right, to build brand NEW panels from a scratch takes time.

Hello,I don't know. I just assume, and I have a right to that :).LDS767 is not a patched PIC767. People have already waited to get the 767 back into FS2004 virtual skies long enough.Best of luck to your project though, I'll be following it with great interest. Tero

.

>and CS can tell us their support forum>will be up and running any day now... Exactly, our new site (including new support system) is on the final testing stage (screenshot below). We expect it available to our customers any day now.http://www.captainsim.net/pix/site.gifhttp://www.captainsim.net/pix/avsim_forum.gifwww.captainsim.com

Why at least they don't make 767-400? I can't comprehend why someone would try to duplicate someone else's previous work and possibly fight for a greatly diminished market. Very strange.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2