Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

AWACS

Carenado's Seneca, how is it?

Recommended Posts

Hi all,Unfortunately, I'm a poor Aviation major right now in the middle of instrument training so I don't really want to spend $43.00 on the Real Air Duke which looks amazing by the way, so I was wondering if I could get your impressions on Carenado's Seneca? I've switched over to FSX now as I use it for instrument training, but since it is a "simulator" I want to simulate flying something that I haven't flown yet, (rather not spend my money on something I fly in real life like the 172 or the Warrior.Although I'm keenly eyeing the Seneca, if anyone wants to throw in their suggestions for a light twin that would be appreciated too, I just ask that we stick to FSX only aircraft and not FS9 ports. Framerates and price are important to me, my system is an E6600 2.4 (Duo) and an nVidia 8800GT, and I have 3 Gigs of RAM.Thanks!Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The Carenado Seneca is awesome. One of my favorite addons. Also check out the Eaglesoft Twin Comanche.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very easy on the FPS. Visibility is relatively poor, so not the best choice for VFR, unless you have Track IRNo 3d knobs so you can easily use RXP gauges like I do if you want your own panel mods.FDE, imho, is poor. The first release was really bad, then they issued subsequent patches, so what we ended up with is a more stable FDE, but not more true to flight. It flies very rigid, and takes a lot of yoke to roll, sorta feels like flying a 747.I'd say 6/10 stars.... based on owning it for 6+ monthsIn general Carenado does a beautiful job on the exterior model, and the VC's look good, but I've yet to own a CA model that flies properly.I'd highly suggest going with the RealAir Duke instead:http://realairsimulations.com/duke09_rxp.php?page=duke09_rxpIt will be worth your money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not as good as the PA34 but you have to consider the fact that the BE60 is much more complex than it as far as modeling goes.Check my specs in my sig:VC Duke fps = 20 rural areasVC PA34 = 30 " "Then again I have an older system and my AA and AF is set very high using nHancerp.s. What school are you attending? I went to UND and now work ATC.... I did the private pilot license there too but it's so dang expensive these days so I haven't logged hours in a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
p.s. What school are you attending? I went to UND and now work ATC.... I did the private pilot license there too but it's so dang expensive these days so I haven't logged hours in a few years.
I'm at Baker College in Muskegon, MI. So far the best flight school I've seen. ATC was a smart choice, I was going to go that route as well right after I left the Air Force, but I ultimately decided that flying was what I really wanted to do.How do your system specs compare to mine so I can get an idea of how the Duke might perform on my computer?Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably pretty similar...that's an older Core 2 cpuFor instance.... when simming, in general, I tend to avoid class B airports....even with default planes. Flying the Duke into MSP, JFK, LAX is pretty much a no-no for me unless I'm on vatsim then I just put up with 12 fps. Whereas in the PA34 I *might* be able to get 18 fps on final....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably pretty similar...that's an older Core 2 cpuFor instance.... when simming, in general, I tend to avoid class B airports....even with default planes. Flying the Duke into MSP, JFK, LAX is pretty much a no-no for me unless I'm on vatsim then I just put up with 12 fps. Whereas in the PA34 I *might* be able to get 18 fps on final....
Hmm... Wish they used Flight 1, so I can get the refund if it is really bad on my system. Alright, thanks Ryan, sounds like maybe I should look around a little more, or just go with a high performance single. I get pretty good frames at Muskegon, but that is pretty rural, if I hop over to Grand Rapids (GRR) I definitely see a drop.Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff,If you purchase "The Duke" I seriously doubt you'll be looking for a refund,at least I've never heard of anyone who has.IMHO it's the best VC for a GA aircraft in FSX.You get what you pay for.***Also*** RealAir Simulations is working on a Royal Turbine version,that may interest you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeff,If you purchase "The Duke" I seriously doubt you'll be looking for a refund,at least I've never heard of anyone who has.IMHO it's the best VC for a GA aircraft in FSX.You get what you pay for.***Also*** RealAir Simulations is working on a Royal Turbine version,that may interest you.
Thanks. I understand, but I was talking more about potential performance issues, not a question of quality, I have no doubt the Real Air Duke is awesome, I just want to make sure it flys smoothly in the sim (Frames per second).Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm... Wish they used Flight 1, so I can get the refund if it is really bad on my system. Alright, thanks Ryan, sounds like maybe I should look around a little more, or just go with a high performance single. I get pretty good frames at Muskegon, but that is pretty rural, if I hop over to Grand Rapids (GRR) I definitely see a drop.Jeff
They do actually.... http://www.flight1.com/products.asp?search...ch=Beech%20DukeI work/fly out of Duluth.... I have a friend working GRR tower as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm at Baker College in Muskegon, MI. So far the best flight school I've seen. ATC was a smart choice, I was going to go that route as well right after I left the Air Force, but I ultimately decided that flying was what I really wanted to do.How do your system specs compare to mine so I can get an idea of how the Duke might perform on my computer?Jeff
I go to Muskegon a couple times a year for a $200 hamburger in the terminal there-a very good place for eats.There are 3 light twins I think are must haves for fsx: Real Air Duke, Carenado Seneca, and the Just flight Duchess.I know some have complained about the fm of the Seneca but I actually find it to be fine.I have trouble deciding which of these 3 to spend the most of my time with as I try to find the closest to a Baron. The Duke is perfection, looks perfect, and has more complex systems, and flown in the lower levels has a fairly comparable performance. The Seneca (retrofited with the realityxp 430) just feels and looks right..the typical "warn look" ...I can't put my hand on it but as a total package I just feel "real" in it. The Duchess likewise also retrofitted with a rxp 430-and both it and the Duke look amazing using 3d glasses.I spend 99% of my time with one of these three. I don't know what twin they use at your school (I seem to recall seeing a Seneca there)-but I don't think you can go wrong with any of the three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I go to Muskegon a couple times a year for a $200 hamburger in the terminal there-a very good place for eats.There are 3 light twins I think are must haves for fsx: Real Air Duke, Carenado Seneca, and the Just flight Duchess.I know some have complained about the fm of the Seneca but I actually find it to be fine.I have trouble deciding which of these 3 to spend the most of my time with as I try to find the closest to a Baron. The Duke is perfection, looks perfect, and has more complex systems, and flown in the lower levels has a fairly comparable performance. The Seneca (retrofited with the realityxp 430) just feels and looks right..the typical "warn look" ...I can't put my hand on it but as a total package I just feel "real" in it. The Duchess likewise also retrofitted with a rxp 430-and both it and the Duke look amazing using 3d glasses.I spend 99% of my time with one of these three. I don't know what twin they use at your school (I seem to recall seeing a Seneca there)-but I don't think you can go wrong with any of the three.
I wasn't aware that I could get a great burger next door, I'll have to check that out on Monday, and we do indeed use a Seneca for our ME training, which was another reason I was eyeing the Seneca so closely. Thanks Geof.Thanks again all for replies, looks like it will be a coin toss between the Duke and Seneca, I'll have to look at the Duchess too real quick.And Ryan, tell your buddy over at GRR next time he sees a Baker Warrior over there flying a perfect approach and making a perfect landing, it was probably me.JeffEdit* Geof, let me know next time you'll be at Muskegon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites