Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Great 3D panels for FS

Recommended Posts

Fellow 3D + trackIR users:I find the following planes have great VCs for flying (visuals+flight dynamics):* RealAir's SF260 (Wow!)* IK DC9 (really nice, except engine gauges not animated)* VMAX 742 (almost all gauges/lights animated, great aircraft. little tough on frame rates on a 1.2GHZ box)Are there other great planes out there?Pat

Share this post


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

There are so many great candidates, but besides the ones you mentioned my favorites are:Falcon 50 (AVSIM - Library)Captain Sims's 727 (www.captainsim.com)Challenger Ultralight (www.flightsimmodels.com)PSS Airbus (Phoenix-Simulations_Dreamfleets T-38 (Really cool)Beechcraft Bonanza 35 (www.coranado.comCessna 410 (www.flight1.com)Cessna Cardinal 177 (www.flight1.com)Piper Archer (www.flight1.com)If anyone knows of any particular model that far exceeds any of the models cited, please let me know because I think the models listed above are among "the best" that are on the free or commercial market.Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DreamFleet Archer II in my opinion has the most realistic panel in 3D sterograhics that currently exist. Not only that, it has in my estimation, the best flight dynamics of any plane that is currently on the market. The Cardinal 177 from the same people is also very nice, looking and flying. But there is something abut that Archer!!!!!The large planes I do not like in 3D. the small single engine GA craft are suburb, but on my 19" monitor the twin engine panels are just too large to fit well in 3D. I fly these planes in 2D only, and find I am much more comfortable with them. Of course I don't fly twins and larger much. Can't tear myself away from the single engine land type.Of course as has been stated in earlier posts, the SF-260, absolutely excellent. I assume the flight model is as good or better than the Archer, but having never flown that plane in real life, and I have the Archer, I cannot verify the actual flight model, other than to say, it feels right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice. Looks like a frame rate fiend in 3D VC.By the way, heavies in 3D VC is quite accceptable on a 21" tube at 100Hz refresh. VMAX742 really gives you that up high perspective and flies very well.I've been doing this flight simulation thing for nearly 20 years and I believe the VC with equipment like 3D and trackIR really changed this hobby. The immersion factor is almost complete. I can't understand why people are still clinging to 2D panels and ripping on VCs....Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a very nice panel. (The Dakota panel).Not to start a flame war, but as I use the Steve Small's FDEs,(which he gave as freeware), I cannot in all consciousness buy Carenados products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes Geof,Of course your Deb panel is a definite winner in sterographic 3D as well as the plane. Freeware to boot which makes it doubly sweet.Thank you and James very much I do enjoy and fly this aircraft.Great dilemma looming on the horizon however. There just is not enough time to fly all the magnificent aircraft, both freeware and payware.As a point of intrest, if the weather cooperates, this Sunday I will finally get my flight review DONE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks-Donald-James is coming out soon with a new version with many liveries and an easier install than presently available which is good.Good luck on the Bfr-I don't know where you are located but where I am (Detroit area) the weather has been rotten for about a month!http://members.telocity.com/~geof43/Geofdog2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Of course as has been stated in earlier posts, the SF-260, >absolutely excellent. I assume the flight model is as good >or better than the Archer, but having never flown that plane >in real life, and I have the Archer, I cannot verify the >actual flight model, other than to say, it feels right. I've flown them both in real life. The Archer flight model is excellent for an Archer, and the RealAir SF260 is a wonderful flight model, but it doesn't give me any G-force "nausea" :) I personally rate the SF260 as the best flight dynamics in sim land, due to it's sensational slip, and spin abilities. I guess I just like occasional aerobatics, of which this plane is very capable.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>It is a very nice panel. (The Dakota panel). >>Not to start a flame war, but as I use the Steve Small's >FDEs,(which he gave as freeware), I cannot in all >consciousness buy Carenados products. I think I'll start! It was the original graphics of the Carenado aircraft that caught my eye in the first place. Not the modified air.file or wheel hubs, of which they admitted too, and apologized for, well over a year ago.To me, it seems as if many simmers implicated they "hijacked" the whole aircraft, which was far from the case. And BTW--- I believe in, and did purchase every payware aircraft I have........... just in case anyone "still" says I addvocate "piracy", which I do not.L.Adamson ------ wondering where ALL third parties would be if Microsoft said "NO"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Geof,Will be looking for the newer version, although I don't really care about multiple liveries. Having said that, I sometimes do break my own rule and get an extra livery if it is really spectacular. :D Weather in Oklahoma City has been rough too, but is starting to breakout and looks good for Sunday. (Double Crossed Fingers xx) I fly out of KPWA Wiley Post.You have about 2 more months of this to look forward to, in your area. I feel for you. Here, (OKC) a couple or three days of bad, and usually it will breakup and be OK for a bit. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't forget the Lago Twin Otter. Best VC I ever saw.PSS Dash 8 is also excellent.IMO the Flight1 DC-9 VC is a bit of a disappointment after those one (if only because the overhead isn't active, it's a bitmap only).

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