If you click the panel in VC will a 2-d window pop up? (like with the default boeing 737)? That really is a great feature.

ditto. just landed the 767 at RJAA with full AI traffic and lots of ASX cloudy weather, FPS 25-30. ==Marten:Weber==P-D920 oc3.64MHz 2GB RAM WinXP ATI X1900+1024MB 2xSATA250 2xVIEWSONIC 19"Best AI available today: www.world-of-ai.com

Well I finally took the plunge and bought and installed the 767. Was very reluctant after reading some of the posts especially those with a medium entry computer. Try to make a long story not too long; I was pleasantly surprised how smooth this bird flies on my computer with acceptable frames. Not quite as good as on FS9 but a keeper for FSX IMO. I used KSEA as my test site and with most all sliders midway or more except water; some clouds, traffic at 50%, global max, very dense scenery, the frames I got sitting on the runway at KSEA@6PM are below.I realize there are so many variables at least this would give some of those with similar computer like mine some hope.Frames set at 21fps; (cycle through)2D: 12-15 VC: 13-15Outside View: 18-21TV: 20-21WVs: 20-21If I use unlimited, which appears best for me, the frames other than the panels do spike higher 2-4fps.Now with all that said here is one problem I have noticed

I never bought this add in for fs9 as with my rig these type of products just took too big of a hit.I was curious though and took the plunge on this one and am amazed at how well performance wise it does. Big jets have never been my cup of tea but I may be changing my antics with this one.Great product!

I've got to get me one of those P4 chips. Seems they have it all over the newer generation chips with this plane in FSX ;)Gary

Great to see it Daryl...Randy Smith

>Well that was disappointing, but not totally unexpected with>a complex aircraft like this! I was hoping, that some how they>would be able to make the FSX version more efficient>performance wise, being that even with FSX SP1, FSX>performance still falls behind FS9, but alas, the performance>is no better than the CS-757, which is roughly half I get from>default, and 3rd party Overland aircraft. Over New York City>which since SP1 I'm getting high teens to low 20's with my>current settings, With the CS-757 and the LDS767 it's in the>8-9 range. This doesn't bode well for the future of FSX, if>the PMDG is the same. So be prepared to significantly cut down>your settings if you want to fly this bird, especially in>dense scenery areas like NY.I don't understand it Tom?I get over 30 FPS with LDS-767 with high settings. I can tell you my FPS increased a lot over any default AC's.I wouldn't be surprised to see PMDG's Queen to offer high FPS in spite of being a complex aircraft like LDS-767.Both PMDG and LDS have a reputation for getting everything out of MS FS that their is to get, and then some!

I sure hope your right about the PMDG! As for the LDS 767, I think the problem is traffic rather than the dense scenery. Of which I have a rather large traffic file consisting of WOAI aircraft, in a combination of UT and WOAI flightplans. I think the problem is the TCAS in the 767, having keep track of them. When I cut traffic down to 30% things are much better!!

I wish LDS luck with this version of their 767 :)

I use the LDS 767 in FS9, so I thought I'd give it a go in FSX. Absolutely no way will this work on my system. I only fly VC, and the frames are between 4-8 with the sliders to the left. I get a solid 21 in FS9. I'm only out $15, I guess I'll try it again when I get a new computer some day. This is not a slam against LDS, it's just FSX and my computer aren't compatible with heavies. Anyone with a machine like mine should be cautious when buying.CurtIntel 2.61 Gig RAMnVidia 6600 256 Memory

An update for you guys on my second attempt to run this aircraft. It seems my first attempt got my FSX in such a tizz changing settings and switching in and out of FSX that it got stuck in a low FPS rut. Had I have left it alone for a minute or so, the FPS nearly doubled as I discovered today. Anyway, today I loaded up my preferred settings profile, which is global high defaults + AA + AF + ground scenery shadows + water at 2.x low + airline traffic at 95% (yes I know this bogs down FSX at busy airports with UT-X) and GA aircraft at 0%. I also ran my displays spanned at 3360x1050 in VC mode, which is a pretty hefty effort to ask of my whole system.At the gate at KIAD with a nearly full ramp at terminal D, I was getting low-mid teens FPS, which increased to high teens to low 20's when taxiing for takeoff, then 25+ FPS once in the air on the way to KLAX (currently half way). This was actually quite acceptable using Track IR.The aircraft itself performs beautifully, just like a highly polished version of the FS9 version. I really like being able to set the speed bugs from the VC now :) And with FSX, we get all the nice jetways, aircraft tugs, wing tip contrails, traffic on the freeways you pass over just after takeoff, etc - all goodness and closer to the real thing.So I'd like to retract my whinge about FSX performance made above. If I had just let it settle the other night, I would have had a better first flight experience. The play pen just got a whole lot better :)Garyhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/173410.jpg

>>I use the LDS 767 in FS9, so I thought I'd give it a go in FSX. Absolutely no way will this work on my system. I only fly VC, and the frames are between 4-8 with the sliders to the left. I get a solid 21 in FS9. I'm only out $15, I guess I'll try it again when I get a new computer some day. This is not a slam against LDS, it's just FSX and my computer aren't compatible with heavies. Anyone with a machine like mine should be cautious when buying.CurtIntel 2.61 Gig RAMnVidia 6600 256 Memory<

Curt, I wouldn't be to hard on your machine. I thought I had a fair machine but it does not perform to my standards driving LSD 767 FSX. There are some good recommendations to tweak but I'm not willing to down size to make it work. I plan to keep the program on file until I build another machine this winter and give it another shoot. In the mean time, I'll continue to fly the RealAir SF270 FSX with the sliders up and fly the LDS 767 in FS9. ervIntel Core 2 X6800(3.22), P5W Deluxe, Coolmax 650W, Corsair DII800 4G, two 74G/WD 10,000 drives, ASUS 1900XT/512 Card, CoolMaster TAC-T01, Creative Sound Card, USB Logitech 350 Headset with Mic, Win XP Home Edition SP1, FSX SP1, SF260, ActiveSkyX/Graphics.

Gary:I just purchased UT this evening and gave it my first try.How do you get all of the airport aircraft to show up as in your screenshot? I seem to be very limited even with 100% airline traffic selected.Thanks:RTH

Before I compiled and went to the gate at KIAD around lunchtime, I first used the update tool in UT-X to download a whole bunch of new repaints. There is heaps more traffic that what I had porting my UT 2004 over to FSX. I've had to turn traffic down to :)Gary