Tilt Rotor - Bell Agusta 609

[BobP 56]

Does anyone know if the developers have a dedicated or 'casual' forum for feedback? I can't fly the aircraft from VC as the performance is terrible. Frame rates in the single digits with stuttering in outside views. Since there is no 2d panel, which is not explicitly mentioned by the publisher, I can't fly the plane. I really like the concept however, the poor performance is difficult to understand because the Garmin 1000 provided has very little functionality. There are bitmap overlaps on the MFD which look amateurish at best. The Flight 1 Mustang's performance is much better which doesn't make sense considering the simplifications of systems and avionics on the Bell 609. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.Bob..

[rcbarend 37]

Does anyone know if the developers have a dedicated or 'casual' forum for feedback? I can't fly the aircraft from VC as the performance is terrible. Frame rates in the single digits with stuttering in outside views. Since there is no 2d panel, which is not explicitly mentioned by the publisher, I can't fly the plane. I really like the concept however, the poor performance is difficult to understand because the Garmin 1000 provided has very little functionality. There are bitmap overlaps on the MFD which look amateurish at best. The Flight 1 Mustang's performance is much better which doesn't make sense considering the simplifications of systems and avionics on the Bell 609. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.Bob..

Hi Bob,Having contributed to this Tiltrotor product for a only a small (the "VTOL") part, and being, as such, not restricted in venting any personal opinions about the end-result, I do have some comments on some of your statements.....First of all, there are various threads about this Tiltrotor product on the SimOutHouse forums. Don't ask me, why Wilco doesn't have their own forum, or why a product like this seems more popular with posters on SOH then on AVSIM :-).Secondly, I think this Tiltrotor product requires a rather high-end PC for usage with FSX, mostly caused by the complex (read: framerate-intensive) gauges used in the VC. I have a rather low-end, 3-year old PC (by today's standards), and personally I have replaced/omitted a few of those gauges by some default (B737) gauges to get a decent framesrate in FSX (about doubles it).Only removing the GPS gauge ( by nature, a real resource hog) from the panel, is giving a substantial improvement in framerate on my PC.One example on this: adding a (default) FSX GPS gauge to the (framerate- and otherwise) outstanding RealAir Spitefire FSX model cripples my framerate.So I learned NOT to compare products (framerate-wise) without knowing the details of the functionality in the VC, and their inherent impact on framerate.I don't know about the Flight-1 Mustang, but I assume it has a very different set of gauges-functionality in it :-).. About not-having a 2D panel and it not-being mentioned by Wilco:I don't agree with you.Most state-of-the-art addon aircraft (other then aircraft that, by nature, focus on real flightsystem emulations like modern jets) for FSX don't have a real 2D-panel anymore.Simply because most FSX-users don't find 2D-cockpits state-of-the-art anymore (I AM of a different opinion !), so for many FSX designers/publishers/users the 2D cockpit is no longer more then a residue-for-old-times-sake, and hardly worth mentioning.Some people call that "progress" ( I don't ....LOL) The Tiltrotor does still have some (pop-up) 2D windows though.Best regards, Rob

[Guest Gunner_CAF]

As it was said, all gauges can be displayed as 2D pop-ups. It's easier to click on these because they stay in the same relative location on your screen. All the instrument panels have a view. I map these all these to my controller so they can easily be used. I fly mostly with the 3D cockpit in all aircraft because there is better visibility out the window. In IFR flight I prefer the 2D. If there is no 2D cockpit, I just turn on the 2D popups over the 3D panel, it works fine for me.On my pre-FSX single core PC, I get some single digit frame rates at airports, but it is playable and the frame rates are not bad once I get in the air.I am finding the tilt rotor a blast to fly. Gunner

[BobP 56]

Thank you gentleman for your replies I do appreciate you perspective. For me the airplane is a very poor value. My issues are the quality of visuals and performance of the plane. Plus, I'm really reluctant to 'gut' a $42 airplane in order to fly it from the VC (replacing MFD,PFD, GPS etc). The lack of 2D panel was a surprise to me and had I know I would not have purchased it. The poor performance in the VC is inexplicable as few of the G1000 features actually work. I understand that 'real world' data concerning engine/flight characteristics are guesses. However, quality of bitmaps and fidelity of instruments (Garmin 1000) are not guesses. This plane certainly fell well below my expectations and not recommended for anyone with a medium to low end computer. The attachments show the overlapping screens on the MFD, low quality gauges and flying from the "2d pop up panel." Few of the buttons on the MFD or PFD are functional. If the developers plan to continue work to improve this plane, then I'll keep it. Otherwise I will ask for a refund.Bob..

[Guest Gunner_CAF]

I understand your opinion, but here are some screen shots from my PC. If I zoom in enough, the VC will look bad, but it is quite readable and buttons are usable. The first is the VC view and the second is with the 2D panels on in the configuration I fly in. Gunner