Sign in to follow this  
Guest eko

Twin Otter thoughts

Recommended Posts

edit: I am toning down the thread because the plane is good, but not great. I don't know what came over me....too much of an Otter fan I guess...:)I am enjoying the "Twotter" very much. Panels are very crisp, but VC only has forward panel. The visibility is outstanding. Sound is kinda cheesy though. Need to practice landings...hard bird to slow down.Probably a $15 plane overall, but I'm happy with it and will fly it regularly.Thaellar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Crisp graphics. But it only has the forward panel. Can't see the wings outside and no view behind the seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info on the Twin Otter. Im sorry to hear they did not model the interior other than the front cockpit. I probably will still get it, but their FTP server appears to have just gone down and I have to work tomorrow so, Ill get it next week sometime. Post some screen shots, if you can. Thanks,Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought The "twotter", and feel that I have been ripped off. There is nothing accurate about this pakage. The visuel model is HORRIBLE! The sound is the worst i've hered in a commercial pakage, and the panel systems.........what panel systems? Overall, I dont see how they can charge money for such a poor product. I deleted it after one flight. the worst 20 bucks I ever spent. The VC is unimpressive, and why no wing views? In a real twin, you barely turn you're head and you get an eye full of engine, prop and wing. I dont recommend this product to anyone. If anything, LAGO should pay US the 20$ to fly they're crap.But hey, thats just my opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad ya got yours goin. My Twotter got gauge twobbles.Form at Lago got lot Twotter twobbles.Mabey they get them ironed out before New Year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I managed to purchase & download it. Flew it for a little while until it caused FS2002 to lock -up. (which never happened before) Aside from that, If it was freeware, Id say it was a nice attempt, but for $20 I would not recomend it. The VC guages are very clear. but even the floor on the cockpit in not textured (maybe a bug?). No virtual interior behind the cockpit like some of the other payware planes I have. The external view is just OK. the cockpit looks wrong. too wide and squaty looking from the outside. The props do not animate once at full throttle, so in outside views at full power it looks like the sim was paused. All in all, it needs a lot of work. I hope they come-up with updates or its the last Lago package for me. Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was flying great, but now problems are starting to show. For example, in the VC at dusk or night, the interior light blinks on and off. Does the real one do that? Even if looking into the plane with spot view, it blinks off and on every couple seconds. Someone else mentioned the trim control and it is indeed oversensitive at low and mid speeds.The first few flights were great (Alaska), but when I got near some airport scenery (KIAH with some Lago FSSE planes and gates), my frame rates dropped dramatically to about 7.It feels like its not finished yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max, perhaps a little research would go far in the future? I'm noticing a lot of people who purchase payware products impulsively get annoyed when its not what they expected. I guess the moral of the story would be its good to wait for reviews. That or it's that people in this forum seem to just hate payware, which makes them all that much more intolerant to the products.Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one problem is that Igor Suprunov (The panel designer, and likely the moddeler as well for this package) needs to learn how to debug! Does anyone remember that Saab 340 panel? The gauges are nothing like the real thing, the layout is inaccurate, the thing crashes all the time until you remove the defective throttle gauge, and the autopilot behaves VERY strangely. And to think that this was the 'demo' of a commercial package that got canned becuase Mr. Surpunov got this contract from LAGO... :-boom I was planning on buying this package, but with all the negative feedback, and odd reports of the package making FS unusable (i.e. it crashes every time you try and start a flight), I think I will definitely save my pennies for the Ariane (moral implications ASIDE) 737-300 United 'special set.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Max, perhaps a little research would go far in the future? >I am amazed myself. Why would anyone want to rush to buy a plane from someone who has specialized in scenery creation so far. And if someone charges $20 per single airport chances are big the same $20 will buy you even less in an aircraft.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"or it's that people in this forum seem to just hate payware, which makes them all that much more intolerant to the products"I don't mind payware. But the moment someone charges $$ for something, they lay themselves open for public criticism (or praise). I write this knowing that without payware, we'd be nowhere close to the add-ons for FS that we have today. I agree on the research too- I've made a policy to wait for reviews (which are never more than a week or two in coming). I recall reading here about those who got (apparently) burned on the MadDog product a few months ago.While we may wonder what it is that makes some of us rush to buy the next new product, those first comments here in the forums are usually right on the mark, and we can all learn from those.Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Lago's first (or one of their first) product was an aircraft. This was way back for FS98 and was the venerable MadDog (MD-80) which set the standards for panel design at the time.The Twotter was designed not by Lago themselves (they are just the publishers) but by someone from Russia who is providing loads of support in the Lago forums right now (from the number of his posts and work it seems he's been up all night).An update for most problems people mentioned should be ready later today. Most of those were caused by the inability to test on enough different machines (remember that Lago is a very small company) and some incomplete or incorrect data available to the development team (which has been provided and incorporated already).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I purchased the TWOtter and asided from some cosmetic issues. I think this is a terrific aircraft. Great for the short hops. I flew it in VFR and IFR conditions in large and small airports, and it works great so far. The cosmetic issues I am refering to is the lack of landing lighting in VC mode, no textures on the mixture and prop levers in VC mode, some funny slivers on the model faces on the side of the fuselage. Other than that I am enjoying the heck out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps a little research would go far in the future? I'm noticing a lot of people who purchase payware products impulsively get annoyed when its not what they expected. I guess the moral of the story would be its good to wait for reviewsLOL, you mean like the FSD Seneca which can be found for free with better flight dynamics that the sad FSD creation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read in a few threads by now I think the Otter sounds unfinished as well. :( I'm kind of surprised by this as I was hoping for the ultimate Otter experience from Lago - no less. Certainly glad I didn't jump up and buy it the instant it was released. Money well saved.Dash 8 - where are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only concur with most of the comments in this thread. The Twotter IS an unfinished product and IMHO overpiced in its current state. It has potential though to become a great aircraft if further developed. These are a few of my early observations:- when in full screen mode menu commands react very slowly (with a delay of 10 - 20 seconds)- throttle, mixture and prop controls cannot be moved with the mouse- at least the amphibian version can only be steered when taxiing with differential braking and not very precise at all- the engine sounds like a lawn mower. I'm not qualified though to judge if this is correct or not.- the panel in VC mode is cristal clear and as good as they come. The rest of the VC is of lesser quality though.- the lack of a complete interior is a missed opportunity, which could have added a lot of value to the package. I find this all the more surprising because the use of Active Camera Pro is recommended in the manual, it is even included in the package. But when using it, you have nowhere to go (except from the pilot's seat to the FO and back)- all settings (heading bug etc.) require invidual mouse clicks to move them one setting ahead. Holding down the mouse doesn't work... - where's the leaver for landing gear in the amphibian?- the textures on the exterior aren't very sharp- for an a/c which was meant to be flown from the VC, the popup windows sometimes get in the way too much. Not a major problem, but other a/c (like the 421 and the Marchetti) come to mind where you feel more thought has been given to the user interface.- awkward animation of the propellers in outside view: at high RPM they seem to stop.You might think i'm very disappointed with my purchase. I'm not, it still is a good product. But it needs more work. Do I feel ripped off? No. Do I feel I paid too much? Yes.Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

scott you are a lucky guy..you've loved to bits every item you've ever bought.you study every inch of the adverts and have never come unstuck once...i'm envious of you.maybe some people expect too much from aircraft designers..not me.but dont sit in the high chair judging others,because your the perfect flightsimmer?? steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interested to read your comments about the FSD Seneca(sad creation)??You have got to be ####### joking!Sad?Tell me where a freeware Seneca is available that even comes close to the FSD version.The payware version from PSS doesn't even come close either,in their defence it must be said that it was originally designed for FS2000.Steve Small did the airfile for the FSD version,and they don't come any better than that.Have you any real flying experience so that you can actually tell the difference,or what have you been smoking today?FSD is the only company where I would risk buying one of their products unseen(I have them all)simply because they are exellent,state of the art,properly tested and accurate products.If you want to know how NOT to do it,look at what's going down with Lagos Twotter at the moment.If Lago want to charge so much money for an aircraft(the FSD Seneca costs $1.50 less by the way)they should at least ensure that it's been properly beta tested before they throw it onto the market for $20.I've seen better FREEWARE Twotters than this mess,I'm glad I waited for the feedback before I went and wasted 20bucks on this balls-up,have fun Grahame EDHL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>FSD is the only company where I would risk >buying one of their products unseen(I have them all)simply >because they are exellent,state of the art,properly tested >and accurate products.I'd buy from Dreamfleet "anyday", product un-seen because of prior experience. Very state of the art----And with RealAir Simulations release of the Marchetti SF260, I wouldn't even hesitate about being the first on the block to get a new release. Lot's of innovation with regard to the air.file and VC cockpit went into this machine. FSD isn't the one and only................. and sometimes their products are even surpassed. I'm personally not as pleased with the Seneca V as some of their prior products. I prefer Dreamfleet's technique of photo/computer graphics for the cockpit panel and VC.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah,I would agree with you,I also have Dreamfleets 737 and also the Marchetti Sf260.I didn't mention them in my other post 'cos the subject was FSD and the Seneca.I hope the few little bugs that the Seneca has will be ironed out when the service release comes in a week or two.Happy flying(but not at the moment with the Twotter...)Grahame EDHL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of hypocrits you are! Ok, sure the twotter has some teething troubles. What new peice of software doesn't? But I cant help wondering how many of the crowd who are so eager to jump on the "lets knock Lago" bandwagon were just as eager to jump on the "get it released now" bandwagon. This plane was produced by a guy in russia and not lago themselves and the pressure he must have felt to release must have been tremendous. There was hardly a day went by without at least one preson bleating that they wanted it released like an impatient kid wanting Chrismas early. Perhaps if the developers were left alone to develop in their own time there would be less threads like this one.The moral of all this is when you hear of a new product being announced, Be patient. It will be ready when its ready. Oh! and who ever heard of Lago not fixing anythig that was wrong with thier software? Rest assured all these teething troubles will get fixed.Just get of their back and let them get on with the job.Cheers,Stewart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My my,What were the BETA testers thinking of placing their seal of approval on this package? I suppose they could have placed a list of fixes and they got ignored, who knows!!- The visual model is not too bad, but the livery looks wishy washy.....compare this to the same Gmax liveries that come with the freeware Dash 7, well the Dash 7 wins hands down!- The panel, looks very nice in 2D but, so so basic it is untrue. Like many have stated no ability to mouse move any levers, so single engine shut downs for quick turn arounds are not possible. When you have the yoke displayed, it does not move, nor do the half placed levers on the overhead when in cockpit view, so IMHO a waste of processor power even having them displayed. We have NAV radios but no where is there any kind of DME. Mmm trim, I find it always a hazard to guess the ammount of trim you are applying, well I certainly can find no indication of trim (with exception from the light telling meit is centered!)- Other views. VC never been a big fan of those, but does look ropey. Side and flank views......well no effort has been placed on these at all. Any of you have flown the freeware otters will note the nice engine in ya face when looking left :-)- Sounds...mmmm no comment, but they have been replaced.- Air file. I did have some reservations earlier today not doubting those who stated it is a King Air untill I and a simming buddy opened ours up respectively to note......yes they are identical to the default!!! In essence this morning I have paid $20 for a half decent visual model and a half decent panel. The air file I have replaced with the reliable Steve Smalls and sounds by Barry FSSkywork. This has made the package half decent, almost good.But why oh why do developers time after time place items out into the market place with all of the hype that goes with it. I am very dissapointed with the efforts of the Lago team (yes I know they only published it). There has been weeks of the best aircraft around, every pilots dream etc etc banging around, and they unwrap a King Air dressed up as a twin Otter. Very very poor effort, and dissapointing.I am not sure what is happening to developers but Aerosofts much hyped Eurowings package which I was hoping would be so much is good for being a door stop at best, I hear from others the Wilco Airports 2002 is good for fueling fires over the cold winter period.With such a large market out there now within the flight simming community one would have thought developers would get it right, or are we now being subjected to mass produced tripe, knowing they will sell a few hundred and that the market is so big no one will know!Come on guys lets get back to the days and quality of PIC and DF!!!!regards guysLiamP.S. I have writen a very strong letter to Lago demanding my money back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am a former twotter pilot and read some comments- here are a few for your info: Standard procedure at an airport (ie commuter airline ops) was to take-off and land with flaps set at 20 degrees, props were always set at 75 to 80%. (Higher rpm was not used in these ops because it was REALLY noisy- and unnecessary). Cruise props were set at 75%. In fact, the a/c DOES slow up quite rapidly. Hold 160 kias until inside the outer marker, pull power back, begin slowing, set 20 degrees flaps, easy landing a/c. STOL ops: power off, flaps full, props full forward, in which case 500 foot runway is more than you need. The engines do not sound like power mowers and you can easily see the engines from the cockpit window. Lose an engine: bring prop lever on good engine up to 90 to 100% (obviously feather prop on dead engine). You can idle an engine and then feather that prop as the prop gear box and engine are seperate units (free turbine).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this