1. Fsx 777

I know they can often be isolated incidents, and I've certainly had a few of those from all kinds of companies.Dead on Al. In the past my #1 criteria for spending my money was support. I never bought anything 'right out of the gate', I always waited at least a few weeks to see what problems developed. EVERY developer has release issues and the good ones address them as fast as possible and keep their customers informed of their progress. Communications is THE key.Recently though, I have found myself changing from relying on developer support to user support, and it actually has been working out better.

Thats the main reason I stopped buying from producers who have 'locked' forums for their 'customers' only. I want to see what issues are there and what users are saying, since they are the ones using the product.

That alone has driven my purchases in the last year or so.The FS community is a resource thats second to none, and after watching the CS 737 'release', I think they have found a way to tap into it. To my knowledge no other developer has used a system as CS just did, and to say I'm impressed with the results is an understatement.Do I still expect 'support' from devs-yes. But now only for 'showstoppers', i.e.

Bad activations, etc. Everything else is just irritants that usually get addressed in a timely manner, and dont affect my enjoyment of FSX at all.

I could care less is a plane climbs 500fpm faster than the 'book' says, 90% or higher of FS users have never flown a real trainer let alone a 'tin tube', so I always take that into consideration when reading posts. There isn't a 'real' plane out there that flys the way it was tested, as all 'real' pilots know.The bottom line is, I buy what pleases me, and ignore those that dont.

In fact I have so darn many Boeings now I am thinking of leasing some out to get more hanger space:-). Does tech support sometimes drop the ball here and there? Yes, sometimes.However. There are companies known for good support and others who are not.

I can find a lot of complaints about CS but it is hard to find to many from PMDG or Hi Fi. So I think using the search engines and basing your opinion on what you see there is very valid and fairly objective. I followed the bad days of CS through others responses on various forums for a few years, noted that they seemed to get better so I took the plunge on the 767.

I had a feeling I should not have and soon figured out why. If I have a choice on spending $70 bucks on a PMDG airplane where everything works, there are few bad bugs and I can wave the automated email response refusing to give me service or a CS aircraft that is subpar and not on track with how they addvertise it I will choose the PMDG.I will ask a question. If PMDG made all the aircraft CS has made to PMDG quality would you guys even bother with CS? I bought the CS 767 because the LDS was outdated and I was lured into the 3d overhead panel. I was lured by their text into thinking I was getting the modelling of the LDS system wise and I could actually have a 3d overhead panel AND PMDG has not made one. Imagine a PMDG 707, or even a B52, how would that be. I know I get sick of flying the NGX and the 747 after putting hundreds of hours on them and have a hard time waiting on the DC6 and 777 so I to am inclined to buy 'subpar' aircraft to fly something new sometimes.

And I understand that CS is more of an eye candy affair. I have to say just do a search on all these companies and see how many negative vs. Positive comments you get. I had to get my feat wet with them and am sorry I did and apparently so are many others so this is not really isolated then.:Peace. I just do not understand how people can do business with these folks.

They even locked me out of the support request system after the 3rd attempt, unbelievable. All you have to do is look through there unofficial forum. Or do a few googles about them. Not isolated at all.And you can get a feel for their massive customer base with all that activity.

No turns out they ###### all their customers, I still see my post from last year only halfway down page 2. No one is there to help those poor customers with their broken planes and CS will cancel their ticket right away. That's a lonely feeling after spending $60 bucks or what have you. I just do not understand how people can do business with these folks.

They even locked me out of the support request system after the 3rd attempt, unbelievable. All you have to do is look through there unofficial forum. Or do a few googles about them. Not isolated at all.And you can get a feel for their massive customer base with all that activity.

No turns out they ###### all their customers, I still see my post from last year only halfway down page 2. No one is there to help those poor customers with their broken planes and CS will cancel their ticket right away. That's a lonely feeling after spending $60 bucks or what have you.Seriously?

Your only argument is a rude post from a rude customer calling the guys at Captain Sim 'morons' and the like. Not only that, but the post is from 2008 (as in nearly 5 years ago). Get a grip, Marc. You're coming across as highly ignorant of what you're talking about. Spew the hate rhetoric else where.You haven't even shared your 'problem'. Is there one? Baseless garbage.

If your tickets are as inflammatory and baselss as your post, I can see why you've been ignored. Let's be constructive. So did you even bother to read it, or mine just above it? Obviously you did not. What is so nonconstructive about voicing my anger over having support tickets cancelled before even being read?

If you like to do business with kooks like that be my guest. But don't call my problem baseless garbage.

If you even cared to read my link I provided, I actually meant to provide my post as well but could not for some reason, I would not need to explain it twice. Have some respect for other peoples opinions around here or get lost yourself.

I notice that there are only 2 attacking me here. Unless others want to agree with you here and are just keeping their mouths shut I will just affirm the fact that you are the minority.

If you can read and use google you will see what I mean. There is only a point to constructive criticism if the other party listens and changes their ways other than that it becomes word of warning to others.Cheers mate.

Well, I read all that linked post. In it you call CS morons, more than once, which is not a great way to get good customer service. But regardless, whilst I have sympathy for anyone who gets poor customer service, it seems that your problem was resolved with a refund by Paypal, who you apparently regard as sleazy in spite of them having done that, but since you disliked the product anyway, it appears to me that the problem was therefore resolved to your satisfaction. So I'm finding it hard to understand what your complaint actually is.Al.

Al, your talking about the wrong guy, look at my name its Denver and my post was This is getting Ridiculous. I did not call anyone childish names nor did not get a refund nor did I ask for one either.

I tried to link both but it only let me link that guys post. I was just trying to explain my issue w/o repeating it twice.I did not mean to ruin this Thread. If CS has turned a new leaf than that is great. If you guys are happy with them than great. I tried to give them a chance when they were in their 'leaf turning' phase and they blew it. Once bitten twice shy.

If I can keep some other poor sob like myself from making the same mistake than that is what I am going to do and I am not afraid to voice it either. PC has no place when it comes to restaurant comments, why here?

You can read my post over there just above it to figure out what my complaint(s) were. The main one being their support system and their rudeness. Hey, sounds like maybe I just got the guy after a heavy night at the club, I dunno.You know, if when my students email me questions, and sometimes they do.

If I just gave them some automated response like that I would be homeless and on the street and in a hurry. No matter how 'dumb' the question. When you are in business for yourself you just need to be polite and try and help them out even when you don't want to or feel like it. So how does the CS aircraft handle through a yoke and rudder pedals? Does it feel like a small passenger jet or an RC model? Does it hit the numbers performance-wise?

This was a mighty powerful little airliner.I've just been re-watching a DVD about Alaska Airlines retiring their 200 series. It seems the Pilot's love the aircraft because of it's solid hand flying abilities and stability.Also - does the CS 737-200 model the 'clicking' of the control yoke linkages? This sound is prominent throughout all 200 series vids I've seen!I want a 200 series but after previous experiences with CaptainSim it's a case of 'twice bitten thrice shy'! However it does appear that they are attempting to address customer concerns so maybe I'll bite again if someone can convince me it flies like the real thing (within the confines of FSX etc etc).ThanksAdam. Depends on how desperately you want a 200 right now to be honest. MILVIZ have one on the way, and so if you are happy to potter around in an NG or Classic, then it might be worth waiting. Does it hit the numbers performance-wise?

This was a mighty powerful little airliner.' Over' is the word.The overpower is the only big downside for me. The forum folks are on it and the dev is open to changes, but, currently, I wouldn't say that the FDE is what you may expect, Adam, in regard to the above statement.

The classic plane touch is amazing and the hand flying is pure fun, but that power and drag model needs extra work. Only a humble opinion of mine though. I wished I could read and understand those air files better.I fully agree to the quality of the sounds.

The optics and framerates will surprise you too, in the very positive ways. Close to no impact here, which is great for an airliner with that kind of artwork and class. Same for some details, which exceed the systems of previous CS releases in my eyes. The PDCS still needs some refinement though.So, for the folks looking closer at the FDE and e.g. The PDCS, 1.1 may be the better option while the plane itself already is a fine release, no doubt. The 737 fun surely is present in 1.0, the FDE detail may not be fully established.I also think that the customer testing process on the way from 0.6 (or 5) up was a benefit, leading to a good 1.0. I do not understand how to use the Heading - but I am very naive when it comes to real operations.

Here is what I posted over at CS forum regarding their headings:'Personally, I would just like to understand how the HDG works with this bird? From what I understand there will be a manual coming out to describe how to do this?I am a nubie when it comes to systems, so you could say I am not a hard-core simmer. All I know is I can use either my GoFlight MCP panel and my Saitek MCP panel for Altitude, Vert Speed, and Indicated Air Speed. They all work great for either piece of hardware but I cannot use my HDG indicator. If I turn it to a certain heading and in-gage, it reverts back to 000?So please excuse me sounding so naive but if it can be designed for all others settings to work, why not this?

Or someone show me how to operate properly. I am hoping there are other simmers who feel the same way.Oh, the only other thing I notice is when I use my yoke to manual adjust my heading (ie: turning, ha!), I get a big 'jolt' in the aircraft - the wings move violently. Is this normal for this aircraft? I would think passengers would have become very alarmed for such sudden turbulent type movement every time the aircraft made heading adjustments.Hope this feed back is helpful.;)Clutch(if anyone can explain it to me here that would be great).

Mind the poll running on the HDG feature.The difference among those two options lies in the way you can connect to the plane's autopilot. With the default FSX key bindings and controls, you could use most cockpit hardware and navigation addons like the CIVA INS. With the current implementation, the plane only reacts to mouse clicks in the VC though, so some addons and hardware can't access it and therefore fail to drive the autopilot.So it's matter or personal preference and needs. When the HDG is reverted back to default FSX bindings, the CWS 'bank' feature will get lost. Although I doubt that many of the folks actually use it (I only run it in the pitch channel, which will remain intact either way), there seems to be a need for realism in their eyes.My suggestion was to offer both ways of interaction.

So the user can pick his favourite one, depending on the hardware, the addons and mood. Shouldn't be too hard since the current autopilot already works and the default FSX hdg feature is available and doesn't have to be reinvented.I can't comment on the violently moving wings. I haven't seen that one happening so far. So it's matter or personal preference and needs.

When the HDG is reverted back to default FSX bindings, the CWS 'bank' feature will get lost. Although I doubt that many of the folksThe problem, as I understand it, is that the -100 and -200 really didn't have Delco INSs or anything like that fitted, even most -200ADVs were flown on pure VOR/DME tracks until FMCs started getting retro-fitted.

So for the most part, being able to put a FMC or INS into a 737 original, as they were built, is mostly non-realistic. And while it's nice to offer an option to people that want to slap vasfmc into the 737, the people at CS believe that it doesn't justify damaging the usability of the existing AP system, which is 'realistic'.Presumably they believe that offering an option is very difficult to for some reason, or their implementation just can't work as-is with an option. I guess they'd know better than us in terms of how it's currently implemented.

Given that they've made it clear that after 1.0 they wanted to focus on the 757 v2 and other things before coming back to the 737 in the update cycle, they also may not wish to spend another few weeks adding an option for a minority of users.Also, I imagine that it feels a bit of a slap in the face for everyone to demand complex realism in the systems, then turn around and say 'that's great, but VOR is hard, can we put vasFMC in it please?' They're pretty much in a 'damned if you do.' Situation, especially when the ones most vocal about needing a FMC are the same ones that rant about how it's 'not up to the NGX', I can imagine the sentiment becomes 'fine, go fly the NGX then.'

Yes, that realism topic again. It's hard to define at times while flying more or less detailed planes on a TFT monitor, grabbing some plastic yoke or joystick.I think the first part to be happy about is the fact that CS is actually asking the folks on how they would like to see this special feature. Not a commonly used type of action in the business. Big thumbs up on that. Regardless of the outcome though, you may end up with an unhappy party of a certain size, as long as it's either this OR that path.Right you are, we don't know how much work is needed to establish a switchable behaviour, but, as seen on the 707, it's possible to alter the AP drive logics on the fly for e.g. Right you are again, maybe no extra work needed if it turns out to be a wish of very few folks.I, personally, am happy with the current AP feature and interaction and I would be even more happy with the extra option. So it's complaining on an already high level for me, though I see the point in the requests, which, maybe due to their numbers, actually lead to the poll.I think what adds to it is the fact that especially the hdg interaction once got advertised as 'fixed' or being dependant of default FSX commands or something.

I wasn't part of any pre-1.0 tests, so I can't tell for sure.I am sure that changes on 1.0 aren't fun for any dev, but I think the software industry has already learned that 1.0 means the start of (customer inter-)actions, not the end. Same here, the FDE was changed a lot from 0.9 to 1.0, see the outcome. And the details like the PDCS may need a second look too. Apart from those 'major' aspects, I think that 1.0 already is a fine and successful release.So I'd say the requests on that one feature shouldn't come in too harsh, but just as a wish, nothing more.

I don't think that any possible decision on the hdg topic will spoil the fun with that addon. 2009:- 767 Captain for FSX version 1.2 (August, )- 757 Captain for FS9 version 2.2 (September, )- 767 Captain for FSX version 1.3 (October, )- 757 Captain for FSX version 4.4 (November )- 767 Captain for FSX version 1.4 (December, )- 727 Captain for FSX version 2.3 (December, )2010:- 727 Captain version 2.4 (February, )- 707 Captain version 1.1 (September, )- 707 Captain version 1.2 (October, )2011:- 757 Captain version 4.5 (October )- 757 Captain version 4.6 (November )- 767 Captain version 1.5 (November )- 757 Captain version 4.6 (November )This is a business. In a business you need care your customers. All software have bugs.software is developed by humans and humans fail.But.the key is how and when they make the corrective actions (patches).Companies with good customer support (PMDG, IFly, Orbx.) release patches to solve bugs, same as CS, what's the difference? When.CS still fix bugs 2 years before the release of his CS757/767 and the CS727 still waiting for the 2.5 patch.and as you can see, the CS727 waiting for a patch since 2010!!!! But since 2010 they release more products.

From the customer perspective.this is a joke. They haven't time for patch his products but miracle!!! They have time to develop new products.They lost many potential customers and lost old customers. His market each day decrease.And his business model is only supported by his ###### and a few new customers.Here, we have a heavy non-conformity.I can't fly an aircraft with bugs during 2 years.It's ridiculus.It's a business, if the company can't give a good customer support, my money is spent in good developers.Where i only choose my favourite and know, the quality is guaranteed. Quality is too the customer support, is very important and the good companies (professionals developers) spend much money to care his customers and care his products.I Wish they change is business model and we can fly soon the best Boeing 727 for FSX.

FSX/P3D Boeing 737-Max 8 Norwegian Air Shuttle Package with enhanced VC. Norwegian is a low cost carrier based in Norway and currently (April 2017) have 108 Boeing 737 Max8 on order. Deliveries are expected to start in mid 2017.FSX 737-Max8 native model by TDS with advanced 737-800 VC added. The wonderful Boeing 737-Max8 from TDS will be enjoyed by many more people who do not know how to install a VC into a FSX native model. Added the fantastic internal model/VC from Alejandro Rojas Lucena/FSND. This VC model includes Working wipers (right mouse click on switch) with rain effect. Switches for LCD Screens, EICAS, PFD, MFT.

Autobrake switch. Opening pilots window. Cabin Lights switch. Realistic FMC.

Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS), More Realistic night VC textures. There are custom Boeing sounds included for that extra realism. Use - Instrument panel - Util for ground vehicles, doors stairs, fuel truck, buses. New Utility allows Bus, fuel, doors and more. (Go to Views - Instrument panel - Utility) Model is not modified in any way. VC added and aircraft.cfg edited to allow correct VC views. Also fixed nose gear height so it no longer sinks into the ground.

Edited and assembled for the many who cannot do this themselves. Credits go to TDS wonderful native FSX Boeing Max8 model. Added the photoreal textures by Stian Svensen.

See VC docs to get the best out of the VC and FMC.Assembled and prepared for FSX/P3D by Chris Evans. FSX/P3D Airbus A350-941XWB LATAM package.LATAM is the merged airline from LAN and TAM of Chile and Brazil and currently (April 2017) have 7 Airbus A350-900 in operation with a further 6 on order.The Airbus A350 XWB is a family of long-range, twin-engine wide-body jet airliners from the European aircraft maker Airbus. The A350 is the first Airbus aircraft with both fuselage and wings made mainly from carbon fibre structure. The A350 is intended to replace the A340 and compete with Boeing's 787 and 777.Added the great textures by Emiliano Rujano.Assembled using the pack base by FSPainter with enhanced Thomas Ruth VC with updates by Phillip Wallaert, Louis Quintero and some further edits by Chris Evans. FSX/P3D Boeing 777-200ER British Airways 'Mountain of the Birds' Package.

Includes Virtual Cockpit and working FMC.British Airways currently (April 2017) operate 43 Boeing 777-200ER aircraft. Many are themed - this one 'Mountain of the Birds'. Includes revised VC and Honeywell FMC (via Views-Instrument panel). Project Opensky model features opening doors & cargo doors, detailed textures, accurate paint, dynamic shine & effects, dynamic flexing wings that respond to turbulence, fully independent suspension, trim animation, gear steering, accurate flight dynamics, spoiler animation, reflective cockpit windows, crash effects, animated tilting bogies, full night lighting, stairs, ground service vehicles when cargo doors open, (FSX - Go to Views - Instrument Panel -Posky Util.

In P3D go to Vehicle-Instrument panel - ), detailed virtual cockpit and more. Added custom B777 sounds. To use FMC - Go to Views - Intrument panel - FMC thanks to Garret Smith. See FMC docs. Fantastic native FSX model by Skyspirit/Project Opensky.

Jetway exits. I have included the great textures by Ben Jones. Zip preview for images. Prepared, tested and assembled for FSX by Chris Evans. P3D/FSX Boeing 767-300ER Westjet package with advanced VC.Canadian airline Westjet is Canada's 2nd largest airline and currently (April 2017) operates 4 Boeing 767-300 aircraft.Native FSX B767-300ER model by Skyspiritwith advanced 737-800 VC added.

Includes utility for ground services, cargo, stairs, etc (FSX find it under - Views/P3D Vehicle - Instrument panel -Posky Utility)The great native FSX Boeing 767-300ER from Skyspirit will be enjoyed by many more people who do not know how to install a VC, views, exits, Utilities etc into a FSX native model. The layout fof the 767 cockpit is not a million miles away from the advanced 737-800.The VC is the Alejandro Rojas Lucena/FSND fantastic revised Boeing 737-800 VC model. This VC model includes Working wipers (right mouse click on switch) with rain effect. Switches for LCD Screens, EICAS, PFD, MFT. Autobrake switch. Opening pilots window.

Jul 29, 2015  107 Facts YOU Should KNOW About VIDEO GAMES!!! S6. E3 107 Saints Row IV Facts YOU Should Know!! The Leaderboard - Duration: 17:41. The Leaderboard 271,107 views. Saints row 4 female formulas.

Fsx 777

Cabin Lights switch. Realistic FMC. Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS), More Realistic night VC textures. There are custom Boeing sounds included for that extra realism. Jetways also edited (Ctrl j).

Exits and views corrected for FSX/P3d.I have added the great textures by Serdar Badoglug and added 767 sounds for more realism. Fixed viewpoints.Model is not modified in any way.See VC docs to get the best out of the VC and FMC.Packaged for P3D/FSX by Chris Evans.