I only have the $ for one. I've heard lots of good things about the Duke, but am wondering if it's worth the extra $. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated!

I only have the $ for one. I've heard lots of good things about the Duke, but am wondering if it's worth the extra $. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated!

I have both addons for FSX. They are both very well done. I tend to fly the Cheyenne over the Duke and it's just because it is a Turbine and a bit more complex, but thats my own personal desire.I would say your between two of the best light/med twin addons for FSX. Answer these questions...1. Do you enjoy turbines more than pistons?2. Do want a light/med twin that has Beta on the props? (Reversers basically)3. If you have the RXP GNS units, the Cheyenne will take the 430 in the VC and the Duke will take both the 530 and the 430.Good delema to be in.:)JB

I have both addons for FSX. They are both very well done. I tend to fly the Cheyenne over the Duke and it's just because it is a Turbine and a bit more complex, but thats my own personal desire.I would say your between two of the best light/med twin addons for FSX. Answer these questions...1. Do you enjoy turbines more than pistons?2. Do want a light/med twin that has Beta on the props? (Reversers basically)3. If you have the RXP GNS units, the Cheyenne will take the 430 in the VC and the Duke will take both the 530 and the 430.Good delema to be in.:)JB

Ohh.. and the Duke doesn't hold a candle to the Cheyennes climb rate, even fully loaded.I thought about it and if I was in your shoes I would get the Cheyenne. JMHO. I'm sure others may disagree, as it's more personal taste.JB

I only have the $ for one. I've heard lots of good things about the Duke, but am wondering if it's worth the extra $. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated!

The Cheyenne is the only aircraft I have purchased that I have parked permanently because of 'buggy' performance and crashes inside FS.I have no such problems in the Duke, and doubt I ever will.There are many folks who like the Cheyenne....but...I am not one of them, albeit it is a 'beaut' of an aircraft to look at.

The Cheyenne is the only aircraft I have purchased that I have parked permanently because of 'buggy' performance and crashes inside FS.I have no such problems in the Duke, and doubt I ever will.There are many folks who like the Cheyenne....but...I am not one of them, albeit it is a 'beaut' of an aircraft to look at.

Alot of people have had problems with the trimble GPS in the Cheyenne. This is what caused the prior issues. I personally have not had any problems at all. The last SP for the Cheyenne has fixed almost all the issues with the trimble and given people the options to replace the trimble with any other GNS (Which is what I have done using the RXP 430).The truth is though... RealAir is well known for making Rock solid products. bkeske is right, you probably won't ever see the Duke or any addon from RealAir Crash FSX.JB

Looks like RealAir is the leader so far.....Thanks for the opinions! I appreciate the feedback!

Is this a real question?Duke.

Looks like RealAir is the leader so far.....Thanks for the opinions! I appreciate the feedback!

Duke, IMHO. :( RealAir are in a class by themselves.

I only have the $ for one. I've heard lots of good things about the Duke, but am wondering if it's worth the extra $. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated!

Duke :(

Duke hands down. I just started flying it on VATSIM last night. It is a blast. Though I admit if I didn't have the GNS430 to put in it, I would fly it a lot less. SP1 made it perfection.My Cheyenne has been completely hangared since the release of the Duke.

I have used the Cheyenne in both FS9 and FSX since it first came out on DVD and as far as I am aware, I have never had a CTD due to the aircraft. It's so good, I have hardly used anything else since I got it. The VC and virtual cabin were simply in class of their own when it came out although it may (NB may) have been surpassed now by the likes of the PMDG MD-11 and maybe the Duke. It's certainly not shoddy even by the best current standards. I don't get into the deep recesses of the GPS so maybe that's why I haven't had problems but then again, I don't think the majority of users will get into things that deeply either. I suspect the issue of Trimble related CTD's is far less significant than you'd think from a quick glance at the Digital Aviation forum.Im fact, I suspect any problems which may occur with the Cheyenne Trimble unit at a much deeper level of sophistication than the FS GPS which is the standard fit in the Duke can reach (correct me if I'm wrong). So in that respect, if you do the same things in the Cheyenne as you do in the standard Duke, then you won't get CTD's anyway.In any event, a further service pack is due out in days to fix residual problems.The Duke does look fantastic. If I didn't already have the Cheyenne, I'd probably have bought it by now, given their excellent reputation. I suspect that being newer and being a pure FSX product compared to the Cheyenne which started life in FS9, the Duke is the one to go for. But you won't be disappointed with the Cheyenne, especially if you can find a cheap DVD version somewhere.

Just bought and flew the Duke. It's a joy to fly, and I think I may have just found my new fave GA toy. If I could just now afford it in real life!........ :( Thanks everyone for your imput!

I don't get into the deep recesses of the GPS so maybe that's why I haven't had problems but then again, I don't think the majority of users will get into things that deeply either. I suspect the issue of Trimble related CTD's is far less significant than you'd think from a quick glance at the Digital Aviation forum.

Well, if an aircraft is supplied with a piece of equipment, I expect it to work, and I do 'get into the deep recesses' of things like this. It is one of those things that I love about FS and third party designers products...I get to explore and learn about things I am not able to in real life.I do delve deep into all the GPS units I use.Actually, I like the Trimble in terms of the resources available by using it. I don't necessarily like simply swapping out a GPS unit for another all the time. There is something nice about using what would have been standard equipment in planes as this.

Im fact, I suspect any problems which may occur with the Cheyenne Trimble unit at a much deeper level of sophistication than the FS GPS which is the standard fit in the Duke can reach (correct me if I'm wrong). So in that respect, if you do the same things in the Cheyenne as you do in the standard Duke, then you won't get CTD's anyway.

Well, as long as you don't touch the Trimble, you should be fine :DActually, I finally replaced it with two other third party units, still got crashes, the final one after a 2.5 hour flight, and ready to contact approach. That was the final straw...into the eternal hanger it went.

I prefer the Duke due to the excellent VC and Model. The Cheyenne is no doubt awesome as well, but it is a different aircraft and a little older product. You really can't go wromg with either, though if I remember correctly, I did have a few issues with the Cheyenne.The Carenado Seneca is also due out soon. I can't wait for that one. :(

Seriously, the Cheyenne is a great product. Perfect VC, complex and not cartooney looking like the Duke. Besides, I hate the Duke in real life. :( If I wanted a plane to cruise at FL250+, I'd put TURBINE engines on it. Someone stated the Cheyenne is a "dated" product--it was rebuilt for FSX for crying out loud! Just how dated is it? Anyway, the Cheyenne, HANDS DOWN.