Looking forward to the Flight 1 C152

[Guest JonP01]

Having read the press blurb and seen who's involved I'm really looking forward to this release. One thing I really like is that photo-realistic views are available not only on the panel, but also on all the peripheral views (for fossils like me who still prefer to use 2D bitmaps over a VC). Nice looking aircaft, great panel and no doubt a quality FM as well.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

GForce puts out a great C150.... Doesn't have the 2-d views, but it's 3-d views are virtually photorealistic. It's an aircraft I enjoy flying for short hops, although I'm still partial to my own FS2002 Microlight :)

[Guest JonP01]

Thanks John,I might try the other C150 as well as trying your Ultralight. Only problem is there's a 2 knot wind at my virtual aerodrome today. I guess I'll have to hold on tight ;)

[Guest ucanfly]

>GForce puts out a great C150.... Doesn't have the 2-d views,>but it's 3-d views are virtually photorealistic. It's an>aircraft I enjoy flying for short hops, although I'm still>partial to my own FS2002 Microlight :) I agree that C150 is nice - and free by the way. I am a little surprised by Flight-1s latest choice just exactly beacuse there is a quality C-150 out there, and there are a lot of default small cessnas for free on everyone's hard drive. Curious to see what will make this one stand out.

[Guest Moghdad]

I'm looking forward to this one too. There is a decent freeware C-150 out there, but it will be nice to have a full-feature payware model.I have something like 100 real life hours in 150s and 152s. They are fun to fly, maneuverable, and easy to land but have a more quirky personality than the 172. It's also one of the few planes that I could dream of actually owning in the relatively near future as there are a fair number of them on the market in the $20,000-30,000 range, some in better shape than others.

[Guest JonP01]

From what I understand, they are a bit more hands-on than the bigger 172 or 182. Is that a fair assumption? I certainly don't want something that can fly itself - I'd fall asleep!

[Guest Moghdad]

The thing to remember about them is that they're underpowered. The 150 has a 100 HP engine and the 152 about 110HP, I think. It's actually a zippy little plane when you fly solo on a cool day. But when you fly it on a hot day with a passenger and full fuel the poor performance could give you a nasty shock. Pilots used to flying the 172 have gotten themselves in trouble by overestimating the performance of the 150/152. Is is also very easy to overload inadvertantly.The 150/152 is less benign in the stall than the 172. It really pitches down more abruptly and can drop a wing suddenly. And since it is lighter, it takes more skill to land in a crosswind than the 172.

[Guest JonP01]

Thanks for that. It will be interesting to see how Steve Small handles it. I remember downloading an X-Plane version which was a real handful.