CS B767-300 Is Available.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kiwikat said:
As real as it gets... like VNAV that makes your plane climb to 30,000 feet at 3000 FPM randomly during your descent. No other plane I have that has VNAV does that... (PMDG 747, MD-11, 737, LDS767, Super 80 Pro) :ernae:
Click to expand...

I never had any issues wit CS's Box. VNAV works perfectly for me every time. Of my my friends who was a 767/757 FO(now a 737-800 Captain) ran this Model and Box and was impressed. You have to punch the perfs in each stage correctly to get the Box to fly the right way in each stage of flight. Just like the real plane, errors cause the automation to do things that aren't in profile.

Well, the model is quite old now, and I've heard the 767 shares a lot of systems with the 757
Click to expand...

On the real birds, the checkout is good(cross over) for both types.
 
deathfromafar said:
I never had any issues wit CS's Box. VNAV works perfectly for me every time. Of my my friends who was a 767/757 FO(now a 737-800 Captain) ran this Model and Box and was impressed. You have to punch the perfs in each stage correctly to get the Box to fly the right way in each stage of flight. Just like the real plane, errors cause the automation to do things that aren't in profile.
Click to expand...

It seems to be random, that is the odd part. Some users experience the VNAV issues, others don't. All I know is that it never screws up like that in those planes I listed. I'll have to do some more flying with it to try to figure out what is causing the VNAV errors. It's just painful getting 20 FPS with that when I can be getting 35 with the MD-11, 767, and super 80 pro...
 
What I had to do to get optimum FPS was to tweak my card settings to see what worked best. I have managed to get target FPS most if not all the time with CS products.

Regarding the FMS issues, it is hard to say why bugs appear with some users and not others. Some of it may be user errors in entering data or missing needed data(skipping steps). Some of these FMS's have limiter parameters in them meaning that whether there is incorrect data entered or for any reason you're out of profile then it might do something unexpected or off the norm. It is surprising how accurate some of these things can be in FS replicating bugs that exist in the real aircraft. As my friends who fly these "Automatic Wonders" tell me, the technology is just good enough to get you into real trouble!
 
I have the CS 757 and I have gotten alot of enjoyment out of it , I don't think that the 767 is such a big deal. Just a new outer shell is all.
 
I have to agree Scratch, I love that model. I guess it is a matter of preference on what tube to get if you don't already have the 757. Personally I love the real 757's lines over the 767 but when I have flown on long trips, I prefer to wider body of the 767. It also seemed to buck turbulence a lot better being heavier.
 
well, its is not accurate in terms of the outside.... it is not as good as some freeware ive seen, its not even as good as the LDS 767 and they should just wait and re do it so it is realistic
 
Cag40Navy said:
well, its is not accurate in terms of the outside.... it is not as good as some freeware ive seen, its not even as good as the LDS 767 and they should just wait and re do it so it is realistic
Click to expand...

Is that based on the two screen shots on their website or have you actually gone and bought it?

I'm not buying this thing unless there is a stand alone AWACS (i.e. I'm not going to buy this thing ever!). As for cockpit realism, I don't really care. I hardly ever get to fly for more than 30~45 minutes to care about these things. There's got to be a balance between realism and fun. RealAir Spitfire is the only one I can think of with the perfect balance.
 
Cag40Navy said:
well, its is not accurate in terms of the outside.... it is not as good as some freeware ive seen, its not even as good as the LDS 767 and they should just wait and re do it so it is realistic
Click to expand...

LDS 767 compared to CS 767, CaptainSim has modeled more FMS/FMC functions and weather radar to name a few over the past few hours I have seen. Also concidering the LDS realisam options it can autoland any RW. Also the CaptainSim overhead seams more functional a more things working over LDS 767. Only thing I think now the LDS has is the modeled FO for Flaps, Gear, and MCL trans. There may be good freeware out there but not as good as this in my veiw.

But also theres also of tube haters here on SOH and for sure CS haters.
 
Any new release is welcomed....no matter how bad the flight model, model, sounds, panels,gauges, systems, price and support is:icon_lol:
 
euroastar350 said:
Any new release is welcomed....no matter how bad the flight model, model, sounds, panels,gauges, systems, price and support is:icon_lol:
Click to expand...

valid point to some.

I feel the issue is that with tubeliners, most serious users are very spoiled with the "pro" level of avionics that is tough to beat what others come out with

Personally, even though I don't do tubeliners, I have had nothing but a positive experience from CS and their C-130 packages. Hope this does well for them.
 
No issues from CS on my side...in fact, I have the 707 and 727 when they were $9.00US couple years ago. I also have the C130 and some of the expansions...so no problems so far:monkies:
 
I have no issues with CS C-130's or 757's. I just wait till a Pro pack is out and i want that AWACS.
 
Have never had any issues with CS as well, enjoying all their products and will be buying their 767.
 
This is my first post here, but I can't see paying that much for another stinking tubeliner. And as far as their C-130, I can't see spending over $80 dollars for any model for a game. I mean if it was real life or something, but for a game, come on!! :isadizzy:

I'm not into simming that much that you have to have the stinkin' manual in order to fly the damn thing. If you want it that damn real, why don't you get a real pilots license instead!! :gameoff:
 
Mt_Flyer said:
This is my first post here, but I can't see paying that much for another stinking tubeliner. And as far as their C-130, I can't see spending over $80 dollars for any model for a game. I mean if it was real life or something, but for a game, come on!! :isadizzy:

I'm not into simming that much that you have to have the stinkin' manual in order to fly the damn thing. If you want it that damn real, why don't you get a real pilots license instead!! :gameoff:
Click to expand...

It's called "Simulation" that's why. To have real systems modeled and to be able to sit at home and fly somewhat is realistic as possible to the real thing. Sorry I cant afford the $100,000 to get my commercial license so this is the next best deal.

Most people who hate tube liners are the one who get in and know nothing or to lazy to educate themselves so instead of learning they diss it, instead they fly VFR GA Cessnas etc and tell themselves there simulating the real thing. But as for you sound like you treat FSX like a game rather then a sim. Also sorry you to lazy to read a manuals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top