As you may have read on the AVSIM front page the CLS 747 (200/300) has been released.Can someone give there feedback on this product?The VC looks very nice, but how are the FPS in the VC?

It's a freakin' FS9 port, I won't bother purchasing it !

Ok... Are there any other 747-100/200/300 for FSX ?

If lack of bump-mapping and other FSX effects bothers you, then go ahead and buy CLS 747.ps: some says it's way too buggy.

B U G S galore.I am a disappointed customer but I am told to expect some quick fixes; we'll see. Very pricey but I really wanted some kind of 747-200 for FSX. Totally eye-candy in orientation. Probably my last CLS purchase.

>B U G S galore.>>I am a disappointed customer but I am told to expect some>quick fixes; we'll see. Very pricey but I really wanted some>kind of 747-200 for FSX. Totally eye-candy in orientation. >Probably my last CLS purchase.>Yes hope they issue the patch soon. Maybe then I will buy.What are the virtual cockpit FPS like compared to the default 747 and say LDS 767 and PMDG 747?Is it sluggish in the VC or nice and smooth?

Greetings guys,I have been over at the CLS website looking thru there Tech forums and am wondering what the "bugs galore" are....I see some have reported the GPS mode not working, fuel load not up to par, and some FPS issues in the VC mode....but other than that it looks as if it flys as described...i.e., a "LITE" aircraft.What are some of the other issues folks are having?Thanks,

The flight model is wonky, the autopilot won't couple with GPS, the advertised FMC is missing, the fuel gauges don't work, the VC FPS stinks, etc. etc. It is nigh-on impossible to simulate a commercial airliner flight with it in its current state.Sure, its a Lite title, but I don't think it should be so light that major pieces are missing. Go ahead and drop $55 bucks on it if none of this means anything to you. It might end up being a good title, but it was released in a very immature state.The developers seem responsive and will likely set things right, but the OP wanted to know how it IS (not how it might be) and I have shared my thoughts.Again, this is my last "eye-candy" purchase - "Lite" just didn't suit me like I thought it would. If I want "Lite" in the future, I'll just go freeware. The exterior model is nice and the forward view of the VC is nice, but that is the best I can muster for it in its present condition.

Thanks for your feedback!Seeing as they just released a few days ago I am willing to accept that it has a few minor issues. They have said they are releasing a patch (very soon) which fixes the INS and FMC (lite version) plus some other bugs.Mainly I was wondering how are the FPS in the VC? How does the VC FPS compare to the default 747, about the same? How about the VC FPS compared to the LDS 767 (which I have). I am hoping things are very smooth in the CLS 747 since it is a "lite" aircraft with regard to systems.

Don't get me wrong, I believe these guys will stand by the product and make things right, but it does have problems. The VC FPS are about the same or slightly worse than the default 747-400 and perhaps a touch better than the LDS. However, given that the VC is just "steam" gauges, I am surprised that the VC doesnt' get slightly better frames. I've discovered that I can hang with a Lite title like I thought, so that might be skewing my impressions. I think the CLS guys are dedicated the product and will see it through. I got the DC-10 and with the CIVA-INS add-on it was a tolerable level of "lite," this one isn't there yet.If you like the 747-200 a lot you'll probably be satisfied in the long run.

I wanted to follow up on this release and ask if the current patches 1.0 and 1.1 have made a difference in the initial negative comments.

>I wanted to follow up on this release and ask if the current>patches 1.0 and 1.1 have made a difference in the initial>negative comments. Yea the patches helped the issues although I did swap out the lite FMC for an ISG Smiths FMC and EFIS, along with RXP WX radar. Fly's pretty nice and its a heavy bird.