Hi everybody,I have a war in my head, and i just can't pick which plane to choose for complex air plane training. The Real air SF260 Marchetti, or the Carenado 182 Skylane RG. The marchetti; I mean the gauges must be great in 3d, but I think the marchetti has too much power(not sure if this is particulary a bad thing for beginners) .The 182 has a wonderful atmosphere, excellent flight model, but the stutterey 2d gauges can be annoying. ITS SO HARD TO CHOOSE!!!!Please if you have any experience with any of the planes, please give your impressions.CheersAlex

I have both, and regularly fly both, but if I had to pick only one, it'd be the Marchetti (btw it's pronounced Mar_K_etti, with a hard 'k' - FS gets it wrong). It's faster (175kts cruise vs 140), but the VC and gauges are As Smooth As, and it's very pleasing on the ear. There's something about the Carenado sound files that just grates after a while, and once you've flown a few they all seem to be very samey.

I also own both. I prefer the Carenado C182RG because it has (indeed) a lot more atmosphere than the cold and sterile SF260, and due to that it gives me the feeling I am flying a real plane instead of a computer-model. I also like the 'old' hardware in the C182RG. Looks nice. I never have the idea the SF260 is modelled after a REAL SF260 somehow, while the C182RG just looks like 'the real thing'. I also like the sound of the C182RG a lot btw: I can't remember being surprised by the sound of an addon aircraft as much as this one. I can't wait to touch the throttle and hear the different sounds of the engine! Besides all this, I simply like high wings more than low wings: it enables me to enjoy the scenery down below! That's why I will never buy a high wing aircraft again.I have to say though the SF260 gauges are all 3D: they look good and are super smooth. Most of the Carenado model is flat and you cain often see the pixels... I have to say though it doesn't bother me as I feared it would. And as nice as the 3D-knobs etc. are, it looks too 'computerized 3D' to me... I like my planes used and beaten. :(In the end it's all a matter of taste. Both are good!

For "complex airplane training" get the Siai Marchetti. The flight dynamics is very, very good; probably a benchmark for all other FSX planes. Stalls, side slips, cross-wind maneuvers, etc all work as advertised.

Does the 182 have good slide slipping characteristics?

For "complex airplane training" get the Siai Marchetti. The flight dynamics is very, very good; probably a benchmark for all other FSX planes. Stalls, side slips, cross-wind maneuvers, etc all work as advertised.

While I do not disagree with the notion that the flight dynamics of the RealAir SF.260 are indeed great, there is in my opinion a large misconception that they are unique. RealAir really earned its reputation with flight dynamics, but that was also many years ago. Many developers have caught up, and in some cases surpassed the level of fidelity in their models with new techniques, etc. A great example is the A2A Cub. I digress though, because I have a dog in that fight. That said, of the two planes the SF.260 likely has better flight dynamics than the Carenado offering.Both have their advantages, mind you, and I own both. I will say however that the RG model is slightly dated compared to some of the newest Carenado offerings, especially in the modelling department. Most of the panel in the 182 is flush and textured in 2D, wheras the SF.260 model is 3D and more dynamic. Both have excellent FPS. The SF.260 does indeed have that "computerized" look, due to how RealAir models and textures. For the most part, Carenado takes the approach of photoreal.Both are great offerings. I think it rather comes down to what YOU specifically want out of the package, and what your expectations are.... or you could simply get both. ;)