These guys are wizards. Absolute wizards. The flight model is staggering when compared to the default planes, and even some of the best payware I've tried.Just give it a try. You'll see what I mean. (Do a search on RealAir in the library and sort by date).RealAir: please, please do a payware piston twin! Maybe a reworking of the Baron!

Thank you kind sir.As for a twin, well FSD are the experts at twins and produce fine quality stuff. But we are currently having discussions with a flight school about designing for them a well-known twin for training.We'll let you know if it comes to anything.Best Regards,Rob Young - RealAir Simulations

Agree Rob,The Cheyenne LS 400 is Excellent! I highly recommend it..Barry

Any hints as to the "well know training twin".I am training in a Duchess right now-just wondering.....hoping... :-)Thanks for your 172!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

Well known flight school twin..sounds a lot like an Aztec to me...

I would like to add my 2 (US) cents here...The RAS C172 is an amazing plane, thank you sirs for an excellent addition to my fleet!

>Well known flight school twin..sounds a lot like an Aztec to>me...For well known, I'd say a Piper SeminoleL.Adamson

Geof -Where are you training? I know of only one Duchess trainer in the area. ;-)_____________________________Jeff S. KDTWPilot - Instrument Rated

HI Larry,I was beginning to wonder where you were!I think your guess is not a million miles away. We'll be sending you something to test very soon.Cheers,Rob

Fnt.. :-)I already did a photo cockpit for training....http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

Agree big time!!!This plane flies just wonderfully.. a real pleasure!Thanks Rob!

>HI Larry,>>I was beginning to wonder where you were!>>I think your guess is not a million miles away. We'll be>sending you something to test very soon.>>Cheers,>>RobOkay! :)I've been spending more time, getting the RV finished, & far too much time working at my HVAC business...L.Adamson

I have a serious issue with this aircraft...As I approach the runway... say.. I am like 10-20 feet off the ground..and I add a little power to soften the landing... It speeds ahead into the ground and crashes..In a landing configurationm Powering up should add altitude..not speed up.Thats a big Flaw... or am I doing something wrong.. In the real C172.. thats what I do to soften up a landing. A Flair and slight Powerup.

>I have a serious issue with this aircraft...>>As I approach the runway... say.. I am like 10-20 feet off the>ground..and I add a little power to soften the landing... It>speeds ahead into the ground and crashes..>>In a landing configurationm Powering up should add>altitude..not speed up.>>Thats a big Flaw... or am I doing something wrong.. In the>real C172.. thats what I do to soften up a landing. A Flair>and slight Powerup.Generally, a Cessna 172 can easily be landed with power off over the threashold because it wants to float. With planes such as the Piper Arrow with retracts & a heavier wing loading, I'll carry some power through the landing and add some to raise the nose in the flare if required.I guess I'll take this simulated one for some power up on landings & see what happens---------- if I just don't float down the whole runway! :)L.Adamson

I just did the test and have no adverse problems at all. Instead of completing the flare & letting the plane settle to the runway, I added power and easily, as well as in complete control, flew down the runway a few feet off the ground without an increase in airspeed. Pull power back & plane easily settles to the runway. "NO CRASHES"!!!!!Do keep in mind, that this is an exercise of precise & nearly undetectable uses of both throttle & elevator. Don't assume it's "just" throttle for altitude & elevator for speed, as this is a highly debated subject & both throttle & elevator are used for both reasons.L.Adamson