Hey,Wanted to let everyone know that this plane is GREAT, and a huge surprise from a little known company! I don't have too much time on it, but she has a great great value! Get it here for now: Flight1 ForumsThe great things:BEAUTIFUL Model and Textures!Multiple panel optionsAMAZING sounds, it really feels like you are pouring the coals to those big Continentals!Seems to fly great (minus #3 below)Very good manualNice eye candyEasy to install thanks to Flight1, I'm happy they went with them!A few issues I'm having that I hope people can help me with, but I still feel this is an instant buy and well worth it! I highly recommend!1. Loading up the airplane, the props are spinning counter-clockwise, like a windmilling free turbine! They stop when the engine starts.2. When viewing from a tower view, or another non-airplane view, it looks like there is a big white rectangle, standing vertical, running through the middle of the airplane!3. When flying, especially on take off, it has a HUGE left yawing factor! I flew a C310C model for 35 hrs this summer, and it never exhibited anything like this! I know that this probably has IO-550TC's, but it shouldn't be like that, should it? It results in a nice 45˚ banking steep turn if you let it continue!4. No gauges show up in the G1000 model. Now, if you need Deluxe or Gold Version of FSX, that would be why! Also in this model, the buttons are opposite for the Pilot, Chocks, and covers.5. FPS seems strangely low, lower than the PMDG MD11, RealAir Duke, and A2A Cub (I list those, b/c I've flown them all a lot lately).6. I too am experiencing the odd Nav light behavior, showing in the beam of the landing lights.7. None of the listed clickspots in the VC work for me.Some stats:Win 7 64 bit Ult.FSX SP2 (No Deluxe, Gold, Acceleration)4GB Ram, 2.53 Dual Core, 512MB vid card (don't remember my stats).I've done the Camera.02 addition of the Clipping.I load from the default cessna, which has engine off, avionics on, and everything else off.Also, was this designed using the Gold Edition? Or Deluxe with Acceleration, because lately I've read that those of us using a non-acceleration SP2 setup have issues with aircraft designed solely for, or optimized with the previous.These are all the quick issues I've seen, and I'm sure they will be fixed soon, as the MilViz and Flight1 teams have excellent customer service! I will try to post pictures soon!Now go get her! Once these get sorted out, you will NOT be disappointed!

Not sure about most of your issues (I don't have them), but correcting the left yaw should be a simple matter of reducing the torque and p-factor realism settings until it feels right.Maybe the testers can tell us what realism settings they were using during beta.

Not sure about most of your issues (I don't have them), but correcting the left yaw should be a simple matter of reducing the torque and p-factor realism settings until it feels right.Maybe the testers can tell us what realism settings they were using during beta.

Tom,I agree about the settings in FSX, but the fact is that FSX does not ever correctly simulate that, I have them both at 0!!! I have General full, same as crash tolerance. But Pfactor and torque are all the way left. I'm almost positive that it has to do with the fact that I do not have Acceleration. If I remember right, you were able to make the doors in the C208 work right? I believe it's because the aircraft were designed and tested with Acceleration, which does not help us using SP2 only :(.Thanks for the reply. She is a great bird. I wish I could use her!

Pictures:However, here is a link to my album showing the anomalies.

Not sure about most of your issues (I don't have them), but correcting the left yaw should be a simple matter of reducing the torque and p-factor realism settings until it feels right.Maybe the testers can tell us what realism settings they were using during beta.

I personally used "hard" settings.The torque on takeoff (left yaw) is realistic for the actual aircraft. We did have a discussion during testing whether to keep this as it is or reduce the effect.Ultimately, with a lot of pressing by me (so you can blame me frankly) we left it realistic.You do have to stay on the rudder to counter the yaw on takeoff roll, especially initially. But, as speed builds up, the airflow over the rudder increases its effectiveness to counter this yaw. So, as your speed builds up, the amount of rudder you need reduces.The effect is more acute at sea level airports, where you can generate over 30 inches of manifold pressure (power). If you have a lot of runway available, one way to counter this until you get a feel for her is to add power in more slowly, so that you have speed and rudder effectiveness when you cob in full power.Cheers,Ken

I personally flew the aircraft with realism sliders at 100% during the beta.

3. When flying, especially on take off, it has a HUGE left yawing factor! I flew a C310C model for 35 hrs this summer, and it never exhibited anything like this! I know that this probably has IO-550TC's, but it shouldn't be like that, should it? It results in a nice 45˚ banking steep turn if you let it continue!

pd400,I wanted to home in on this one issue because it represents a flight performance issue.The yawing factor on takeoff does match my experience on the actual N5077J that is one of the aircraft offered in this package. But, in the air, the rudder counters left yaw tendencies very nicely. This aircraft was modeled for non-turbocharged IO-520-M's (per Cessna original specs for this 285hp engine).The 310C model used a significantly different engine (260hp) versus the 285hp models on the R model. But, much more significantly, the airframe between the C and the R is significantly different as the older C model had the short (pug) nose, a more upright vertical stabilizer, and did not have the additional ventral fins that the R model features. The C-model also used two blade props, which can offer a faster speed at cruise, but less takeoff and climb performance given the same horsepower.Frankly, I have never flown a C-model 310. So, I cannot provide educated feedback on how the C-310C performed. But strictly from the standpoint of how raw horsepower affects yaw on takeoff roll, and how additional prop blades would impact p-effect, I would suspect the 260hp a side C-model produced less torque and p-effect than did the more powerful, three-bladed R model.Cheers,Ken

This old 310 pilot loves the flight model (well, the rest of it, too) and sure doesn't want to see it changed. Especially on the engine out stuff, it requires proper technique or bad things happen and I think you've done a great job of modeling it. Most of my flying career was in turboprops and with them, you just lower the nose a little and run the checklist for an engine failure. Light twins like the 310 just aren't that way with their much more marginal performance on one engine.Thanks for all your great input on the plane, Ken. It flies like a 310 and not some generic flight sim model.cheers,steve

Steve.That's very kind of you to say, thank you!Your feedback is frankly music to our ears because the entire development team made a calculated decision to strive for as much realism as possible knowing that this could cause some negative feedback because this airplane won't fly like the stock FSX Baron.Bernt worked very hard to model the dutch roll and the single engine characteristics. The plane entering a flat spin when at full power below red-line speed was another area that Bernt sweated to get right -- not that I've ever gotten into a flat spin! LOL!!However, you do get the nose break below red line and if you don't catch it in time by pushing the nose down and reducing power on the good engine to idle, you'll go into a flat spin and likely die! For the record, I am differentiating those comments above from the observation about yaw on takeoff and flight for the C-310C. That feedback could very well be 100% spot on with a difference between the C and the R models. The 310 underwent many very significant transformations in its life. I have heard many pilots who flew the various models tell me that the landing characteristics of the R is totally different, with one result being you can retard power to idle crossing threshold and smoothly glide in for a greaser. They say if you try that with the earlier snub-nose models, the plane will bleed speed way too fast, and with the further aft c/g due to the snub-nose, will end up landing hard every time.Ken

I have heard many pilots who flew the various models tell me that the landing characteristics of the R is totally different, with one result being you can retard power to idle crossing threshold and smoothly glide in for a greaser. They say if you try that with the earlier snub-nose models, the plane will bleed speed way too fast, and with the further aft c/g due to the snub-nose, will end up landing hard every time.Ken

I can attest to that for sure. I flew a Q first and you just didn't want to pull the power all the way off until the wheels were really close to touchdown or it would quit flying. It landed much flatter. I loved the R model in the flare since, as you say, you can just bring it back to idle and actually hold it off a bit in the flare for more of a nose up touchdown. Must be the longer nose as there really aren't many differences other than that between the Q and R models.Anyway, love the plane. Remember how looking out the side windows and seeing those tip tanks made me feel like a "real" pilot way back when the logbook was pretty thin.cheers,steve

Let me add my observations and feeling for this Cessna 310. I waited for this plane patiently and was happy to see it this morning in the AVSIM Forum. All I can say is that I am thoroughtly impressed and have been flying her on and off all day today. I love the way she "lifts off" the runway...not jerky or twitchy, but very smoothly and realistically. Yes, there's torque steer, but after reading some of the threads of those who really flew this bird, I'm happy with plane's takeoff behavior. I found that by taking the advice of gradually increasing the throttle rather that full throttle at the beginning, works well and makes the 310 very controllable. The most important observation I have is that to me, this plane feels real! Looking out over the cowl, and then the wings is a real sight to behold. I enjoyed flying the 310 from Princess Juliana to St. Bart's this morning, and it was fast, and extremely controllable especially making that very difficult landing on St. Bart's. I noticed that when the lights are on, the VC becomes clickable. When the lights are off, the VC is no longer clickable. Overall, this is one purchase I don't have any second thoughts about. I'll look forward to many excursions in this beautiful airplane.Stan

I can attest to that for sure. I flew a Q first and you just didn't want to pull the power all the way off until the wheels were really close to touchdown or it would quit flying. It landed much flatter. I loved the R model in the flare since, as you say, you can just bring it back to idle and actually hold it off a bit in the flare for more of a nose up touchdown. Must be the longer nose as there really aren't many differences other than that between the Q and R models.Anyway, love the plane. Remember how looking out the side windows and seeing those tip tanks made me feel like a "real" pilot way back when the logbook was pretty thin.cheers,steve

I had the same experience and was told that they call it the flying rock for a reason!

I had the same experience and was told that they call it the flying rock for a reason!

And it looks really nice in the cockpit at night time (Free Radio model with RXP GNS and someold Mooney gauges thrown in..)Coupled LPV approach into KSFO, down to minimums before disconnecting AP.

I noticed that when the lights are on, the VC becomes clickable. When the lights are off, the VC is no longer clickable.

Well, that's certainly odd! No one ever had this issue during all the months of alpha and beta testing...What "flavor" of FSX are you running?

Well, that's certainly odd! No one ever had this issue during all the months of alpha and beta testing...What "flavor" of FSX are you running?

Windows 7 with FSX Acceleration. SORRY...I over-stated that. I found that with the lights on, the GPS can be clicked in the middle and it brings up the navigation panel. When the lights are off, I have to do shift/2 in order to bring it up. Everything else seems clickable with lights on or off. Sorry again, it is only one aspect of the VC panel.Stan