So I decided to spend 5 Euros and try the CSS 737-500 again for a month, to see how it's shaping up.

The first thing to say is that it's not garbage.  In fact, the fact that it has so much potential is what makes it's current state such a shame.

The systems and functionality are coming along quite well.  But there are so many annoyances that - for me - make it unusable,

The big one is that not a single key assignment for the AP works with this plane.  Things like scrolling the heading bug or even turning on the autopilot all have to be done with fiddly, cumbersome mouse clicks.  That right there, is game over for me.   I don't need every AP function available as a key command - eg. in the new PMDG 737, I have no key for VNAV.    But I cannot tolerate an aircraft where not even the 2 essential basics work with native key assignments;  the heading bug and autopilot engage/disengage.

I took off from ENBR and tried keeping the plane climbing steadily with my left hand on my yoke.  However I am left-handed, so had to pass the yoke to my right hand while I clumsily got the mouse over to the LNAV and VNAV buttons.  With those engaged, I tried the standard autopilot ON key assignment - surely that has been binded?  .... nope.... so I got the mouse over to the CMD A button, pressed it and the autopilot OFF siren immediately started screaming..... and it screamed... and it screamed.   Hitting the AP Disconnect buttons on both the MCP and the yoke would not stop it.  After a sheer calamity in the sky of trying to keep the plane steady while frantically trying to stop the AP disconnect siren (never mind actually turning the AP ON!), I eventually discovered that the AP cannot be engaged unless the autobrake knob is turned from RTO to off.  That may be realistic but the absolute inability to stop the AP disconnect siren definitely is not!   Then came the vectors from SayIntentions - trying to turn the fiddly heading bug knob (which has tiny click spots - obviously!).  It was at this point that I bailed, hit 'End Flight' and uninstalled it.

It has so much potential.  The model and VC textures are really fine (not Fenix or PMDG quality).  The cockpit sounds are reasonably ok but the interior engine sounds are just an unconvincing, thin hiss.    There are no exterior engine sounds yet (at least there wasn't for me), so from the external view, your plane just glides silently into the air.

The EFB seems ok on the surface but there are so many idiosyncrasies.  For example for Simbrief, rather than just being able to enter your Simbrief ID or alias, you have to go through a scan process, the same as is normal for Navigraph charts.  But this is just to have Simbrief integration.  'Importing' your Simbrief OFP does only one thing - it sets the load in the aircraft.  You can't import the actual flight plan, or at least I couldn't, nor could I find any possible way of doing it.  The manual and tutorial docs also refer to Simbrief integration and in both, the flight plan is then entered manually.  So I'm pretty sure I'm right on this. 

Another annoyance that is dressed up as 'realism' is the fact that every screen has brightness set off when you load the plane.  You have to find and turn up (with fiddly mouse clicks) every single brightness knob;  PFD, ND, FMCs, Panel, MCP, radios.  Every one needs to to be turned on.  The manual proudly states it is so.   Is it really realistic that the previous crew would turn the brightness to off of every single screen before leaving the aircraft? It's another example with this aircraft of where they are trying to go with what they see as maximum 'realism' but do not pay a single degree of consideration to usability and how we interface with a simulation. 

It's like there is real talent behind the project, but no project planning skill to set priorities appropriaetly.  I'm not familiar with a single aircraft in MSFS 2020 or 2024 where the heading bug and AP ON/OFF functions have not been binded to the standard key assignments. 

Right at the start of the manual it is stated; "This addon offers no compatibility with hardware".  Well that's ok, but not even bothering to bind the core AP functions to MSFS's standard key assignments is not. 

It really could be a pretty impressive airliner for the sim, but I have little optimism that it will ever ascend beyond it's current clunky, fiddly, buggy iteration.

So, exhausted and in need of stability, I loaded the PMDG 737-800 and flew a flawless leg from ENBR to ENVA.  My goodness do you appreciate the quality of products like this, when you try something that is so far from being in a solid, usable state.   I was critical of PMDG in some of the threads over the last 2 weeks.  I take most of it back.   Paying $30 to have a beautiful PMDG737 in 2024 is honestly worth every penny to me.

After 10 years Captain Sim is not able to do good system. Nice textures but empty. 
when I bought their product on FSX it was the same thing… I don’t understand why this company exists with their poor product. Some of old good company disappear in the same time…

3 minutes ago, kopek666 said:

After 10 years Captain Sim is not able to do good system. Nice textures but empty. 
when I bought their product on FSX it was the same thing… I don’t understand why this company exists with their poor product. Some of old good company disappear in the same time…

It's not Captain Sim  🙂

In this case, 'CSS' is "Commerical Simulations Software".   I believe they may be based somewhere in Scandinavia.  👍

3 minutes ago, JYW said:

It's not Captain Sim  🙂

In this case, 'CSS' is "Commerical Simulations Software".   I believe they may be based somewhere in Scandinavia.  👍

They’re based out of Dubai. There was a whole manhunt by some individuals because they discovered a number of developers were from Russia. 

they’re planning a massive update pretty soon as well as revised pricing which I discussed in another thread 

 

but to your original post, a lot of the problems stem from the aircraft not reading it writing to any simvars, presenting issues with interfacing with the aircraft like you’ve experienced. I’ve overcome it by using stuff like Spad but it’s not a good excuse.

im just hopeful the upcoming resolves a lot of my grips with the aircraft cause it definitely has good bones. 

17 minutes ago, JYW said:

It's not Captain Sim  🙂

In this case, 'CSS' is "Commerical Simulations Software".   I believe they may be based somewhere in Scandinavia.  👍

Sorry !  Thanks for this information 

It (almost) makes me feel sorry for the guys who bought into this Pig In A Poke at full price  

Say whatever about PMDG or FSW, but at least you know what you’re getting - and what you’re getting is GOOD  👍 

 

2 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

but to your original post, a lot of the problems stem from the aircraft not reading it writing to any simvars, presenting issues with interfacing with the aircraft like you’ve experienced. I’ve overcome it by using stuff like Spad but it’s not a good excuse.

They must address this!   It sets the addon apart from pretty much every other addon out there, in having no simvar interfacing.  When that means not even basic key assignment binding, it's just not acceptable.

I did look to see if someone like @guenseli had created an AAO script for the plane, that would provide at least some key binding capability. Unfortunately there was nothing out there.

Yes, I remembered you're recent post 👍  I decided to try it again in case that very update had materialised.   disappointed to see that it hadn't. Ah Dubai. The only reason I thought they were Scandinavian-based was because all of the tutorial flights and a couple of the (very few) liveries were Scandinavian.  

I honestly think that to be successful in any degree, they need to positively engage with (and listen to) the community.   They have no presence outside of their own discord 'bubble', and their communication there isn't always inspiring. When you look at their website, it does lead you to wonder who they are, what their experience level is and where they stem from. There's nothing to be ashamed of being based in Dubai but it does feel like they're masking who they really are, from the public.  Just my views.  To me, it doesn't matter in the slightest where anyone is from (including Russia).  I judge individuals, not their governments.

Edited December 29, 2025Dec 29 by JYW

3 hours ago, JYW said:

Right at the start of the manual it is stated; "This addon offers no compatibility with hardware"

Any addon that makes this statement is not compatible with my credit card.

3 hours ago, JYW said:

So I decided to spend 5 Euros and try the CSS 737-500 again for a month, to see how it's shaping up.

The first thing to say is that it's not garbage.  In fact, the fact that it has so much potential is what makes it's current state such a shame.

The systems and functionality are coming along quite well.  But there are so many annoyances that - for me - make it unusable,

The big one is that not a single key assignment for the AP works with this plane.  Things like scrolling the heading bug or even turning on the autopilot all have to be done with fiddly, cumbersome mouse clicks.  That right there, is game over for me.   I don't need every AP function available as a key command - eg. in the new PMDG 737, I have no key for VNAV.    But I cannot tolerate an aircraft where not even the 2 essential basics work with native key assignments;  the heading bug and autopilot engage/disengage.

I took off from ENBR and tried keeping the plane climbing steadily with my left hand on my yoke.  However I am left-handed, so had to pass the yoke to my right hand while I clumsily got the mouse over to the LNAV and VNAV buttons.  With those engaged, I tried the standard autopilot ON key assignment - surely that has been binded?  .... nope.... so I got the mouse over to the CMD A button, pressed it and the autopilot OFF siren immediately started screaming..... and it screamed... and it screamed.   Hitting the AP Disconnect buttons on both the MCP and the yoke would not stop it.  After a sheer calamity in the sky of trying to keep the plane steady while frantically trying to stop the AP disconnect siren (never mind actually turning the AP ON!), I eventually discovered that the AP cannot be engaged unless the autobrake knob is turned from RTO to off.  That may be realistic but the absolute inability to stop the AP disconnect siren definitely is not!   Then came the vectors from SayIntentions - trying to turn the fiddly heading bug knob (which has tiny click spots - obviously!).  It was at this point that I bailed, hit 'End Flight' and uninstalled it.

It has so much potential.  The model and VC textures are really fine (not Fenix or PMDG quality).  The cockpit sounds are reasonably ok but the interior engine sounds are just an unconvincing, thin hiss.    There are no exterior engine sounds yet (at least there wasn't for me), so from the external view, your plane just glides silently into the air.

The EFB seems ok on the surface but there are so many idiosyncrasies.  For example for Simbrief, rather than just being able to enter your Simbrief ID or alias, you have to go through a scan process, the same as is normal for Navigraph charts.  But this is just to have Simbrief integration.  'Importing' your Simbrief OFP does only one thing - it sets the load in the aircraft.  You can't import the actual flight plan, or at least I couldn't, nor could I find any possible way of doing it.  The manual and tutorial docs also refer to Simbrief integration and in both, the flight plan is then entered manually.  So I'm pretty sure I'm right on this. 

Another annoyance that is dressed up as 'realism' is the fact that every screen has brightness set off when you load the plane.  You have to find and turn up (with fiddly mouse clicks) every single brightness knob;  PFD, ND, FMCs, Panel, MCP, radios.  Every one needs to to be turned on.  The manual proudly states it is so.   Is it really realistic that the previous crew would turn the brightness to off of every single screen before leaving the aircraft? It's another example with this aircraft of where they are trying to go with what they see as maximum 'realism' but do not pay a single degree of consideration to usability and how we interface with a simulation. 

It's like there is real talent behind the project, but no project planning skill to set priorities appropriaetly.  I'm not familiar with a single aircraft in MSFS 2020 or 2024 where the heading bug and AP ON/OFF functions have not been binded to the standard key assignments. 

Right at the start of the manual it is stated; "This addon offers no compatibility with hardware".  Well that's ok, but not even bothering to bind the core AP functions to MSFS's standard key assignments is not. 

It really could be a pretty impressive airliner for the sim, but I have little optimism that it will ever ascend beyond it's current clunky, fiddly, buggy iteration.

So, exhausted and in need of stability, I loaded the PMDG 737-800 and flew a flawless leg from ENBR to ENVA.  My goodness do you appreciate the quality of products like this, when you try something that is so far from being in a solid, usable state.   I was critical of PMDG in some of the threads over the last 2 weeks.  I take most of it back.   Paying $30 to have a beautiful PMDG737 in 2024 is honestly worth every penny to me.

Yeah, I agree. I think to it will probably become something great in the future. That's what I hope anyway. 

1 hour ago, UrgentSiesta said:

It (almost) makes me feel sorry for the guys who bought into this Pig In A Poke at full price  

Say whatever about PMDG or FSW, but at least you know what you’re getting - and what you’re getting is GOOD  👍 

 

…🙂…Aptly put, but we should give the folks who got this -500 bit of a break, driven by their love for the -500.

Just as the MSFS iFly is now not a replacement for the NG, likewise the NG is no replacement for the Classic 737 series.

At one time, I had the 737 variants from the -100 all the way to the -900; the -100/-200 (CS, Milviz, JF), through -300/-400/-500 (Wilco/feelThere), to the NG (PMDG, iFly).

Clearly different in terms of fidelity, but served the purpose, if one is passionate about each Generation of the 737; until a better replacement is seen for each series.

Currently, in MSFS, the PMDG NG stands by itself as the best and most enjoyable. The only one that came close to it in MS simulator in the last 20 years was the iFly; nothing else…

Interesting background, here, about this new developer….wishing for this CSS 737 Classic series to improve by user feedback…

The 737 Classic is a clearly perceived gap at the moment in MSFS…at least for some of us…

1 hour ago, JYW said:

inspiring. When you look at their website, it does lead you to wonder who they are, what their experience level is and where they stem from.

Tbf their website’s FAQ does briefly answer some of this https://css.aero/faq

though yeah some more presence outside of discord may help.