Two Splendid payware aircraft!

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

I'm also interested in Carenado's Mooney. I've never purchased a payware aircraft, but Carenado seems to have a solid reputation, and their prices are low, respective to other brands. I can't decide if I want that, or the 172 though. Seems that both would be redundant, but since I'm still so new at the sim, I want something basic, but high quality that I can continue to build my skills in.

I'd suggest getting their 152 and Mooney. Both lovely aircraft!The default 172 is actually pretty nice... find Alex Metzger's flight model and you have a nice airplane

[Guest KevanC]

I'd suggest getting their 152 and Mooney. Both lovely aircraft!The default 172 is actually pretty nice... find Alex Metzger's flight model and you have a nice airplane

Bert, On your advice, I decided to pick up the Mooney, since I wanted something with just a little more "oomph" than the 152. Wow, am I impressed! It flies like a dream, and it looks absolutely amazing, especially the VC. I plan to post some screen shots of my flight in the appropriate forum. Here's a couple of teases.

[maxter 0]

Anyone with the Carenado Mooney would be crazy not to install the freeware Mooney High Def VC add on available here...High Def Mooney VCCheers,

[Guest bertvankampen]

Anyone with the Carenado Mooney would be crazy not to install the freeware Mooney High Def VC add on available here...High Def Mooney VCCheers,

Thanks for the nice tip!regardsBerthttp://www.worldoffs.com

[Guest cuizinier]

I'm also interested in Carenado's Mooney. I've never purchased a payware aircraft, but Carenado seems to have a solid reputation, and their prices are low, respective to other brands. I can't decide if I want that, or the 172 though. Seems that both would be redundant, but since I'm still so new at the sim, I want something basic, but high quality that I can continue to build my skills in.

Hi carenado's planes are very nice but as a first buy I would recommend either the scout package or the SF-260 from realair. As mentioned previously their flight modelling is awesome (the best ?) and that is the most important part when learning. cheersjulien

[Guest KevanC]

Anyone with the Carenado Mooney would be crazy not to install the freeware Mooney High Def VC add on available here...High Def Mooney VCCheers,

One step ahead of you there, and I also got the high def red Mooney exterior repaint. Looks fantastic. Good on Orbx for offering those for free.

[Guest a42abid]

I got it as well and I love it!So much better than the default one and its such an amazing aircraft to fly. I'm looking forward to training on it! Sadly, I read that the FTX cockpit is a framerate killer so I'll have to live without that but I'll check out the new colours. I also took a tour of FTX Blue and although Tasmania wasn't that impressive for me, the area around Melbourne took my breath away...wow. Its amazing how good they've made fsx look.

[Guest KevanC]

I got it as well and I love it!So much better than the default one and its such an amazing aircraft to fly. I'm looking forward to training on it! Sadly, I read that the FTX cockpit is a framerate killer so I'll have to live without that but I'll check out the new colours. I also took a tour of FTX Blue and although Tasmania wasn't that impressive for me, the area around Melbourne took my breath away...wow. Its amazing how good they've made fsx look.

You might as well give the FTX cockpit a try, it looks outstanding in my opinion. It only replaces the VC on one of your liveries, and you can remove it if you don't like it. It gave me a frame hit, but not that bad as long as I don't fly it in areas with lots of traffic or autogen. For those areas, I'll go back to the default cockpit.

[Guest sdaigle]

I am under the impression that the Cheyennes alywas has the same propeller sound, whatever the RPM is. Would it be a bug or its normal?

[Guest kwilson]

Hi carenado's planes are very nice but as a first buy I would recommend either the scout package or the SF-260 from realair. As mentioned previously their flight modelling is awesome (the best ?) and that is the most important part when learning. cheersjulien

Maybe the SF-260 isn't the best plane for learning in :) . Don't get me wrong, it's a brilliant airplane and the flight modelling is awesome. Perhaps too awesome in the the case of the SF-260 as it isn't the easiest plane to learn on. It is very unforgiving for stalls and usually requires a power on landing. In other words you can very easily crash the plane if you don't know what you're doing. Still, it is a brilliant aircraft to fly and should be in everyone's hangar.If you check the realair website they also have a free download which updates the flight dynamics for the default C172 in FS9 and turned a dog of a plane into something quite enjoyable. Does anyone know if this update will work in FSX as well?

[Guest sssummer]

As my preferred GA sim is FSX I have been searching for good GA aircraft. Unfortunately apart from a few notables I found very few good GA aircraft for FSX so I finally took out the wallet and purchased two GA twins for FSX,

• Eaglesoft Twin Comanche
• Digital Aviation Cheyenne

These two were bought after much reading about the payware aircraft offerings here at AVSIM.I can tell you after spending a week studying them and their systems and flying them I can say I am extremely impressed! These are fantastic products and they enhance the enjoyment level of FSX significantly.I would highly recommended purchase of these two aircraft for anyone wanting to enhance their FSX experience!Shez

Hey Shez, glad to see you have FSX. A little off topic here, but if I may be so bold, are you gonna dabble in FSX airport building? Love your FS9 stuff for So Cal! :)Brian S.

[meshman 109]

Hey Shez, glad to see you have FSX. A little off topic here, but if I may be so bold, are you gonna dabble in FSX airport building? Love your FS9 stuff for So Cal! :)Brian S.

Dittos to what he said! Not too far from KONT and loved to time my travels to the UPS 747s that would come in.

[ShezA 176]

Hey Shez, glad to see you have FSX. A little off topic here, but if I may be so bold, are you gonna dabble in FSX airport building? Love your FS9 stuff for So Cal! :)Brian S.

Hi Brian,Still struggling with finishing off the KPHL scenery (www.sunskyjet dot com). New job, family, sports, flying, etc. taking up all the time. We are pretty close on it but going is slow. However, we are going to make it FSX compatible.When finished I may go over to FSX. Maybe upgrade all previous FS9 ones to FSX.Shez

[mjrhealth 820]

I am under the impression that the Cheyennes alywas has the same propeller sound, whatever the RPM is. Would it be a bug or its normal?

Dont know where you got that from , i have had it for months and except for a few minor gps issues have had no problems, sounds as expected.

[Chock 17,769]

Re: the Flight 1 Cessna 441I spent a lot of time messing around with the Flight 1 Cessna 441 (largely because it was me who wrote the Avsim review of it amongst other things, but also because I like it a lot). It's a good representation of the real thing in most respects, both in FSX and FS9. As far as working controls in FS goes, there's not a lot of difference between the FSX and FS9 versions, but there certainly are differences, the props feather in both versions but only animate the action in FSX, the FSX version sits on the ground better, the landing lights extension is animated, so, nothing earth-shattering, but nice things like that. The FSX version flies better than the FS9 version and feels more like the real deal, but whether this is because of the improved air mass simulation in FSX or the different cfg file is open to debate. I found that there were a lot of things which are features of the real aircraft which the FS version emulates well, but slightly better in the fSX version, including some aspects which are really very believable indeed.One of the best things about it in both the real and simulated versions, is that it is intended to be a transitional aircraft for pilots, i.e it's a useful step up to turboprops from piston engined aircraft, which is why it is a good choice for getting up to speed for operating airliners up at higher altitudes, so for practicing having to start descents a long way from the destination and that kind of thing. This also makes it a good choice for fairly long international hops around Europe. The avionics are not spot on in terms of accuracy when compared to the standard fit of the real deal, but since most real 441 had quite considerable variation in terms of avionics fitted, it is believable enough.If you like GA aircraft, it's a good one to have in your stable because it has a 1,200 mile range, high speed and a 35,000 foot ceiling certification (like the real thing, it will actually go higher than that), so in many respects it is as well appointed as more complex turboprops, but much more pilot-friendly for someone used to piston-engined aircraft. It's also one of the few GA aircraft I've found which will allow you to run the Multi Crew Experience co-pilot with, so it's a great CRM trainer.Al