SR22 review

[Guest SideSlipper]

Nice review on this little, sleak and sexy plane.The one thing I am missing is the implementation of the automatic governor of the real plane.The real thing will hold 2700 rpm with takeoff power and will maintain 2500 rpm with cruise power. There is no separate rpm lever (with the blue knob).Other than that it is a superb simulation.

[n4gix 4,947]

The SR22 doesn't have a prop pitch control (blue knob). Instead, Cirrus uses a single lever to set Power, and a computer calculates the correct prop pitch.FS doesn't support the type of automatic pitch that Cirrus uses, so leave your throttle quads pitch lever fully forward at all times.The review is in serious error with regards to the sound pack used. These sounds were custom recorded from the real aircraft and mixed by Aaron Swindle.Also, the exterior camera is auto-placed by the sim based on the reported wing radius, which unfortunately the FSX compiler bases on the extents of the largest object in the model......which in the case of the Cirrus is the extended parachute.That's precisely why there is a custom "View" control on the Preflight Utility popup that will all the simmer to left/right click to reposition the exterior camera quickly, then use the mousewheel to fine-tune.In FS9, resetting the wing radius was a quick fix using either AFCAD or a simple hexeditor to change the value. In FSX the wing radius is encoded in hex, and may appear anywhere in the compiled .mdl file. Any attempt to modify the value will result in a corrupted model.

[N400QW 205]

Many thanks to the reviewer on this aircraft.Two small corrections if we may...1. The sounds are mixed from the real world turbo engine and do not contain default sounds.2. The Preflight Utility offers a Zoom feature to adjust views nearer or farther suit. This was required because the CAPS system makes a large invisible radius around the model.You are refering to FADEC prop control which the sim does not support but which we attemted to emulate in our model.:-)

[Guest Pro-Sim]

Glad you guys corrected the stuff about the sounds - I was horrified to see the reviewer referring to the ES SR22 using 'default sounds' because I knew this was incorrect.It has - like all Eaglesoft add-ons - wonderful custom sounds. (I'm not associated with ES).The SR22 Turbo deserves special praise in my opinion (not given in the review) for how excellent the performance is in FSX, compared to many far less detailed models.The SR22 Turbo, along with the Eaglesoft Twin Commanche sit alone in how they somehow have wonderful levels of detail, but also give excellent performance in FSX.Well done guys.

[N400QW 205]

Many thanks Pro Sim!It's easy to overlook features from a reviewer standpoint if time lines are involved but overall we felt a fair and balanced approach was used...:-)Again, thanks for your aupport. It is much appreciated.

[Guest captmjk]

Hi All,Sorry for my late reply, I have not been on the forums much lately. I feel that as the author of the review it is my duty to adress the concerns of the previous posters:Prop Governor: I am/was aware of the prop governor and FADEC controls in the real SR-22 as I familiarized myself with it thru real world reviews and a visit to a local airport prior to flight testing. I found out early in the testing that this feature was not modeled, due to FSX limitations, so I did not comment. I did leave my prop control lever in the full foreward position for the duration of the test. Exterior Views: I missed the view tool in the preflight menu. I had similar problems with other (freeware) aircraft in the past so I figured that it was just a small glitch in the programing. I will try and use the utility on my next SR-22 flight (Probably tonight). I definately understand this glitch given that CAPS is modeled (Supurb job by the way)Sounds: Given that the engine is from the same family, I assumed that the sounds may have been layered with default, as they sounded quite a bit like the default 172 (my favorite GA aircraft prior to the SR-22 being added to my hangar). I could tell that there were definately differences in the set, but I assumed that they had been layered to save time. Sorry for the mixup.I cannot believe that I neglected to mention how well the SR-22 performed frame-rate wise, but as with all my aircraft reviews, I cut the scenery to minimums to preserve frame rates. Time lines were involved, and definately a bit of a factor in this review, mainly because school was starting back up when I wrote it. If I had a bit more time, I probably would have solved these issues, but as it stood when I wrote it they were legitimate "squawks". Even with the percieved issues it is still an exceptional package, and I stand by my recomendation. Mark