Sign in to follow this  
Guest UweR

Anyone tried Carenado's Dakota?

Recommended Posts

Just wondering of anyone has tried the new Piper Dakota that Carenado has just come out with, and if so, what you think of it?

Share this post


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

Hi,I purchased Dakota few hours after relase and i'm verry happy with it. This is first Carenado's plane relased in gmax and with custom sounds.As usual the external model and VC are extremly detailed , very good looking and frame rate friednly ( at least on my specs 1800+xp , gf4ti 4200 and 512 mb - locked fps @ 25 and i'm getting 25 with Dakota and some scenery in VC )Air file also seems to be good - i've made several tests with max gross weight ( 3000 lbs ) and the plane flies very close to "numbers" Sounds are good , maybe not the best, but suit to Dakota.There some nice sun reflections - nice touch specialy when you're making turn towards seeting sun and reflections are traveling on engine hood from one side to another ( in VC ) :-cool sorry for not perfect englishregardsEricson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First I've heard about it. I'm there! Seriously, Carenado's Bonanzas are my very favorite FS2K2 aircraft. Their Archer II is also great. Well, I'm off to buy the Dakota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

akk im being tempted.. Credtcard must stay in wallet.. as im still waiting on the 727 i paid for but didnt get yet. Until i get it i dont trust buying planes anymore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, don't let CaptainSim turn you against all other designers... We're all feeling a little burnt by the CS727 release which hopefully will get patched very shortly. If they don't change the way they do business, they may be out the game anyway (which would be sad because they do make good aircraft). Caranado's support is all but none existent but you will get your plane (without an activation key) exactly at the time you click the button and buy it.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> How 'bout a shot of the panels, 2D >and VC? > ok - here you have some VC shots : 1. VC with some gauges changed ( Carenado Archer II radio stack , one axis autopilot , VSI and altimeter from DF pa-28-181 , added switch panel in VC etc. )2. wing and interior view3. cool dynamic reflections on engine hood :-)regardsEricson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Caranado's support is all but none existent but you will get your plane (without an activation key) >exactly at the time you click the button and buy it.....Yep.. I like that way of business.Enter cc numbers. Download plane.No waiting months for your purchase to be made.No waiting weeks for an email with a activation key.No waiting days for an email with a registration key.I did have a problem with the B35b cc-kby model not showing up. After a quick aircraft.cfg fix all is fine.Plus they are cheaper than many others. You can buy two for the price of one from other companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry,How long after you placed your order did it take to get the e-mail with the download instructions?I ordered several hours ago and haven't received anything yet.Thanks,Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom,I haven't ordered from Carenado for a few months. But as I remember it, there was no waiting for an e-mail with download instructions. I just went ahead and downloaded directly and immediately after my card transaction was completed.John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Caranado's support is all but none existent but you will get your plane (without an activation key) >>exactly at the time you click the button and buy it.....>>Yep.. I like that way of business. >Enter cc numbers. Download plane. >No waiting months for your purchase to be made. >No waiting weeks for an email with a activation key. >No waiting days for an email with a registration key. >>I did have a problem with the B35b cc-kby model not showing >up. After a quick aircraft.cfg fix all is fine. >>Plus they are cheaper than many others. You can buy two for >the price of one from other companies. heh i noticed that. They are around the 15$USD mark.. Thats a very fair price.. much better then paying 40$ a plane, almost as much as the whole game costs itself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone had any luck intercepting a glideslope in the Dakota? The "Approach" mode on autopilot responds to the localizer but not glideslope, and I don't see any glideslope indicator on the Nav1 display.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possible, like my plane, that it is not stc'd for glideslope.On my plane electric trim was not approved which was needed for glideslope with the autopilot. So I get loc on the autopilot but glideslope is manual. I don't own the Dakota but perhaps this is the situation there.http://members.telocity.com/~geof43/Geofdog2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Works well for me, do you see the NAV flag, or no GS indication at all?Best Regards, Uwe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Has anyone had any luck intercepting a glideslope in the >Dakota? hehe - come on ... flying Dakota on ILS approach with APR mode on *:-* ? i think better idea is to use "hand and legs" :D - it gives much more fun...regardsEricson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the glideslope and approach mode seem to be working fine now. I like this plane very much.Is it my imagination or does it seem to have an unusual nose-low attitude in level flight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Is it my imagination or does it seem to have an unusual >nose-low attitude in level flight? i'm not Dakota pilot but i added this line to aircraft.cfg , becouse i had little problems with nose down cruise ( i was constatly pulling nose up ;-)flight_tuning 800

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UWE, THIS RESPONSE IS NOT TO YOU, IT IS MADE "IN GENERAL". :-) Your post just reminded me of the following...I owned/flew the Dakota's predecessor, the Cherokee 235, "Charger", "Pathfinder", for some 15 years, and if you have any familiarity with the oleo struts on Pipers, you'll know right away that the attitude of the plane on the ground has NOTHING to do with the attitude in the air. They often sit tail low, sometimes VERY tail low on the ground.Heck, our 235 often used to sit so tail low on the ground that at times I used to "pop" the wing struts up by lifting up on each wing tip! Of course, that was while dodging the leaky petcock valve under the tip tanks. ;-)In fact, such will apply to any plane, such as a Piper cub, or Cessna 185. I mean, does a Piper Cub look the same in the air, during level cruise flight as it does on the ground? Of course, this is an extreme example of a conventional geared aircraft, but, I make my point.Do not expect an aircraft to "sit" in the air as it does on the ground. The two are essentially irrelevant, especially when it comes to Pipers (I'm not talking 747s here).As to my -235, I never had the chance to step outside during flight to see what she looked like, and otherwise would adjust the ADI to "level" when the VSI was at "0". I trimmed for level flight, adjusted the ADI, and that was it. I could have cared less how she looked from the outside. We often carried loads in the -235 that even a new Seneca V cannot (useful load on our -235 was about 1400 lbs, 65 lbs more than a standard equipped Seneca V). Out of the factory, with "base" equipment, the uselful load was 1500 lbs, with an empty weight of 1500 lbs. Yes, it could carry it's own empty weight in useful load.I really would not be overly concerned about a slight nose down or nose up attitude on a -236 (That's what the Dakota is, a PA-28-236) during flight. ;-)In the end, while the 182 was more popular, the -235/-236 could not be touched when it came to load carying capabilities, and they remain very popular and pricey aircraft on the used market, with -236s usually fetching well over $100,000 for 20 year old models.As to the comment about the AP, my -235 was not STC'd for a 2-axis AP, but later it was. The -236 is STC'd for some 2 axis units. While my AP had LOC hold, I never used it, as flying the LOC/GS was a piece of cake by hand. Same as it is with the -181 and -201 I fly today.Gosh, I miss my -235!I recall seeing a shot of the Carenado Dakota panel, and I believe I saw a Cessna 300 Navomatic AP installed, same as on our Cessna Cardinal (yes, this can be done in real life, if the unit is STC'd for the Dakota). That being the case, the 300 Navomatic has only a "Hi Sens" mode for use with the LOC, and it remains a one axis unit, with no GS or altitude capability.Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...RUM_LOUF_A2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like most addons, it does seem to have its quirks. On the upside, the visual model is very pretty. The plane looks just like the one on the cover of AOPA Flight Training last month (although I can't really verify that that is a Dakota). The virtual cockpit is excellent IMO. Very similar to the DFArcher cockpit and maybe just a tad clearer. I like the fact that the tach and MP can be in a separate panel, for those of us with multi monitors. Otherwise, these instruments get obstructed by the yoke in the VC.It seems to fly well enough - never having flown a low wing. Like the DFArcher, there isn't much time delay between liftoff of the nose gear and the mains, which differs a lot from my real world Cessna experience. Power on and power off stalls are decent but it doesn't model spins at all. It also has some pretty weird slow speed behavior. Like the DFArcher, it is almost too forgiving in slow speed and I find myself maneuvering it almost like a helicopter at times. I'm not convinced the turn coordinator really indicates a standard turn properly either. What seems like a coordinated turn visually pegs the turn coordinator.In general, it is a fun airplane to fly. Maybe too easy. And since the SFMarchetti, I'm less tolerant of compromises in the flight model than in the past. Hasn't anyone else figured out how that group captured spin behavior so well?? If I had to decide between the DF Archer and the Carenado Dakota, I'd say they are really, really close. DF has better sounds although the Carenado gyros are the best sounding I've heard in. I think the Carenado looks a bit better too, but it might just be personal preference.As for the customer service, it's hard to beat the purchase process for Carenado. I always pause a moment before I use a foreign bank to buy things online, but (knock on wood) I've never had a problem yet. That said, it's seems a little strange that we know so little about Carenado. I've never seen any posts here from anyone in the company (that I know of). I've never seen them attack a customer either, though ;-). I've rarely seen their products patched either, so I suspect what you buy is what you get. Fortunately, they are inexpensive and represent good value IMO.David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post David,The question I have in my mind is: if you already have the DF Archer, is there enough differentation in the Dakota to make spend more $$$$$ worthwhile. Tough question, I know, but when flying it, do you think "this is just like the Archer"?ThanksRichard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, Richard, if money were an issue I guess I wouldn't get it. On the other hand it is pretty inexpensive. Personally, I really enjoy the little differences between models - slightly different radios, instruments, dings and scratches. The Dakota is easier on frame rates IMO, if that matters to you. Beyond that, it is pretty darn close to the DF Archer.David

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