Sign in to follow this  
Guest estevesm

Unrealistic GA FDE models, Dreamfleet and others...

Recommended Posts

I'm finding problems with some of the payware/freeware models I've down loaded for FS2k4 and maybe someone can help me understand. So many people have upheld the RealAir Cessna172 flight model over the default one. I don't understand this, yes the SF260 is awesome and in my opinion had one of the best flight models in FS2k2. But RealAir's 172 in FS2k4 does not have a better flight model than the default Cessna

Share this post


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

I think the realair 172 isn`t too bad, being 6`3" the viewpoint isn`t so bad for me! I`m a big fan of the Sf260 and the L70 Vinka (which I think is based on similar fde development) so I might be a bit biased.I too have issues about the dfleet 152, though my concern is primarily yaw in turns. In a constant bank turn, you seem to need to feed more and more rudder into the turn to keep it in balance. In the real machine, a fairly small amount of rudder applied and held from just after rolling into the turn does the trick. However, the panel, VC and sounds make up for this little gripe with the dfleet 152. As a package its awesome, and I`ve yet to cash in my voucher for the C310.I haven`t tried anything from Carenedo apart from their freeware Tomahawk for Fs2K. I wasn`t that impressed with that (nice to look at but the fde didn`t feel comfortable - I was training in a PA-38 at that point and wanted good stall behaviour!).Have you tried the C177 Cardinal from dfleet, I haven`t got that one but it well received by others on this forum. Also, FSD produce a Rockwell Commander 115, which I haven`t tried but it is very good by all accounts. I do like the L70 Vinka from Mikko et al. I`m not sure if the issues regarding copyright got resolved but if you can d/l it somewhere give it a go. Just by two pennies worth..CheersLungs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the roll rate of a 172 feel vs. the 182? The only stick time I had was back in the 80's on a 182... I found initially I had a problem overcontrolling, because the aircraft didn't respond as fast as I "sensed" it should when I was flying it. Once it did respond, roll rate seemed fairly high. Back to simming, I haven't tried RealAir's 172 file.... LOL, for light MSFS GA I prefer the Lancair :)-John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey John,Well both planes fly somewhat the same except the 182 might have a little more power due to the fact that it's a newer model (this also depends on particulars in individual aircraft). I haven't noticed the delay you've mentioned...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 182 and 172 fly very differently. Your sweeping generalisations are worrying me. As a student pilot you must have been taught that no two aircraft, even the same model form the same manufacturer, fly alike and that to dismiss the 182 as a 172 with a bigger engine is a sure invitation to an early funeral? The 182 requires far greater precision in flying, is more stable, but also more nose-heavy. Early trim is required, but precise trimming is rewarded with a more stable aircraft. The `skittish` feel of the 172 is almost completely absent in the 182's I have flown (3 different models in the last three years) but I don't have much time in 172's over the same period so my comparison is less relevant than others may offer.Your criticism of the eyepoint as part of the flight model is curious. Yes, it is factored into the aircraft.cfg but changing the eyepoint has no effect on the flight behaviour in FS, so its' an adjustment without cost, so simply set it to what you want to see.As for the flight model behaviour itself, you don't detail your system or your choice of controllers. Without precision flying tools all your synergies between real and virtual flying amount to precisely zip-all. I have a CH Products yoke and pedals ad even they don't persuade me that the virtual aircraft I am flying is anything like the real thing. What I can say with absolute certainty is that if your assessment of flight models from DreamFleet and RealAir is they are inferior to the default, then you have something very wrong somewhere in your system or with the real aircraft you are flying! Allcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>What I>can say with absolute certainty is that if your assessment of>flight models from DreamFleet and RealAir is they are inferior>to the default, then you have something very wrong somewhere>in your system or with the real aircraft you are flying! Couldn't agree more. Anyone who claims that DF's or RA's flight models are not any better than default ones - ought to have his flying skills reevaluated or PIC certificate revoked. But it is his PC, his simulation experience - we wish him luck.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allcot you are totally correct about the 182 performance difference. But as you pointed out, aircraft don't fly the same. As far as I could tell from my experiance the 182 was not that much different for the most part from the 172, now that is my experiance. Seeing that I've only flown the 182 once and have more time in the 172 makes our experiance a total reverse. Your no expert in the 172 therefore you can only offer what you've experianced much like what I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your criticism of the eyepoint as part of the flight model is curious. Yes, it is factored into the aircraft.cfg but changing the eyepoint has no effect on the flight behaviour in FS, so its' an adjustment without cost, so simply set it to what you want to see."As far as the visual model (let alone the default head placement), it's totally wrong. If you look from the outside in you'll see the whole cowling sits chest level to the pilots, that's totally wrong. The instrument panel/cowling in real life comes up to at least the average person's upper chest or lower neck. So this is not just an issue of moving the eye perspective...I asked this earlier Allcott so I'll just ask again and put this question to you, Visually from your experience have you been able to sit in a 152 and see the engine cover over the instrument panel or better yet have you seen anyone else do it??? Have you experienced this in any Cessna you've ever flown???Dillon--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Visually from your experience have you been able to sit in a>152 and see the engine cover over the instrument panel or>better yet have you seen anyone else do it??? Have you>experienced this in any Cessna you've ever flown???I was able to easily see the engine cowl over the panel of a 150 when I flew them, and with the adjustable seats in a 172S I can see the cowl as well, and I'm not exactly tall at 5'7".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you own the DreamFleet model? I don't think your understanding what you've experience in real life versus the visuals in the Dreamfleet model. Within reason your right but the DF 152 is a little exaggerated, furthermore you had the ability to adjust your seats in the 172. We're talking about the 152 who's seats don't adjust up and down (I didn't know the 172's seats could do that, I'll have to check that out).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the 172S can do it, theres a rotating handle on the bottom front of the seat . The older models only move forward/back like the 150's.While I don't own the DF model I can personally say that I find the eye height for the Default/Real Air 172 are both too low, always end up moving the view up and forward to get the perpective I use in the real 172.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I missed something, somewhere! The 152 you are describing is not a Dreamfleet product. This is a Flight1 product, and a fine one too, IMO, although I'm not a rw pilot. Just thought I should make this one little correction.Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I guess your taking this a little personal Lou Betti... Your personal attacks against my credibility does nothing to change my view about the 152. And it was just that my view, I don't care if George Bush designed the thing I'd still feel the same way. I'm really surprised to hear this kind of stuff coming from you of all people. I really like the work you guys have done, loved the Cessna177. Sorry to ruffle your feathers like this but after your comments I really don't care. I shouldn't have to be able to design an aircraft just because I commented on a product that I purchased with my own money. Would you go to Burger King and order a Whopper only to find out they forgot to put the meat on the bread and appreciate them telling you, "if you can do better make it yourself". Bare in mind they have given you great service up until this point. I never asked for my money back for the 152 so therefore I technically still support you guys and/or whoever designed the 152 project. Now for someone who has given you money for your work in turn can't make a comment about a product they own/is their property is very interesting... I could see if you gave me the product or I stole the software but when I'm or anyone for that matter have paid and supports your work they shouldn't have to deal with slander from the developer for an objective view which they wish to share with others??? If this add-on was Freeware I could see your point in a way. I made it very clear I like both RealAir and DreamFleets work as a whole, heck I own all your stuff. You question my ability to fly a real plane based on my comment about one simple product out of how many you've produced and I've purchase over the past few years?????? Check your records man and see how much I've bought from you guys."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Visually from your experience have you been able to sit in a>152 and see the engine cover over the instrument panel ...>Have you experienced this in any Cessna you've ever flown???Yes I have. Many times.Ok, what's the next question ? *:-*Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I begin to see it now. You are out to deliberately pick a fight, and expect members of this forum to back you up.At all times all simmers should remember that you are flying a desk, not a real aircraft. Your `perceptions` are yours to have, but when you expect to drag other simmers into your grievances real or imagined you are going to lose sympathy, real fast. As you can't be `bothered` to provide system specs or details of the hardware you use with FS - which is undoubtedly the root of your problem and not the flight modelling, which almost all multi-hour pilots of the said aircraft find to be a massive improvement, guess you'll have to take the advice, and fix it yourself.You can modify the flight models with aired.exe. You can modify the flight models with changes to the aircraft.cfg. You can overhaul your software or your hardware. It's entirely up to you. That's the beauty of the sim. Quite how much help you will get from this forum with your attitude, I'm not sure. Allcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These too often repeated discussions about lousy flight dynamics are put in proper perspective when one considers that many flightsimmers are using a $20-$80 joystick (and usually poorly calibrated and maintained) to emulate flying an airplane that is worth anywhere from tens of thousands to tens of millions of dollars.What's wrong with that picture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point I dont think we should make assumptions about the posters equipment. His integrity and intentions maybe, but his equipment might be cheap or expensive, but any equipment is only as good as the operator.Allcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to set the record straight.The Cessna 152 being mentioned here is a Flight 1 Software product.The Cessna 152 is NOT a DreamFleet product. DreamFleet only did the 2D panel and gauges, VC internal textures and the manual.The flight dynamics are by Steve Small of FSD fame. I dare say that Steve's reputation for excellent flight dynamics is well-known in the FS community. The aircraft model was built by the extremely talented Roger Dial (he also did the F1 C-421 model), who works for Flight 1.Sounds are by Aaron Swindle (whose ability at mastering sounds is only bettered by his golf game!) from Sky Song Soundworks. Project management was by Flight 1's Jim Rhoads.I could go on with the names of the gaffer, best boy, director, producer, and cinematographer, but I'll spare you that! ;-)Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...RUM_LOUF_A2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all Allcott and anyone else ready to jump on the bandwagon (Lou) I'm not looking for any sympathy or empathy from you or anyone else. Allcott I don't know if you own the 152 from Flight1 or not but that's not the point. From looking at the many views this post has received I know I'm not the only one who either feels the same, noticed the same thing, and/or on your side of the fence disagrees. Who cares... If I bought something with my own money I'll say what the heck I feel. The developer has my money, he's made his profit and I'm just discussing my findings. What you or anyone feels about me or my comments means absolutely nothing to me at the end of the day. If a developer in question is afraid of future sales based on my comments slander would not help their cause. Furthermore we all know RealAir, Dreamfleet, and Flight1 have nothing to worry about in this department from any of us. Love or hate the things I say, someone has to have the guts to say something if they don't feel they like certain features about a product in question. If I'm wrong help me understand the error in my views but personal attacks, dissecting every little sentence in my post, and/or miss quoting my intentions is not helping anything here it's just starting a fight. If everyone sits back and is afraid to say something for fear of what people like you, Lou or anyone has to say in return is no better than what happened on 9/11. You just let someone fly you and everyone else into hell... I for one am not scared of you or anyone here and I will point out what I find because someone out there may feel the same way I do. We come here to share ideas good or bad not fight about people's point of view about their own property. When I bought that Cessna152 that gave me more of a right to discuss what I invested my money and time into. Did I ask for my money back, no I did not (that should say allot to anyone). I'm sure my comments won't affect future sales for Flight1, Dreamfleet, and/or RealAir. I would gladly purchase all of those design teams work in the future. All this heat about my views on one product is stupid... If I feel the RealAir172 is not my cup of tea and backed it up with things I found, what's wrong with that??? I'm still a customer of the SF260.Allcott your bullying tactics won't work with me and you and everyone who agrees with you can go jump in an ocean somewhere... Give me my money back and/or go help the development team of either RealAir or DreamFleet, only then I could understand your frustration in the hard work you put in (even though the customer your ###### at still has their money burning a hole in your pocket). But if you don't even own the 152 or have a vested interest in either company, what the heck is your point other than to get on here and start crap. P.S. Lou I don't care who designed the plane. No one has to like eveything certain people do...Dillon--Dell 8300 2.6gig (800 FSB)1gig SDRAM Radeon9700 Pro 120gig HDCH Flightstick Pro w/ Peddles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 172's all adjust: forward, back, up and down. 172 M's, P's, R's, SP's are the one's I've flown but they've all adjusted.The 182 is definately nothing like the 172 with more horsepower. That thing takes work to make it flare and drive it around the sky. Yes, I know how to trim. But it feels like a MUCH heavier aircraft in the controls. The nosewheel steering is completely different then the 172 as well, makes it a bit hard to control on the ground when you first strap into it. In fact, I can't see what people like about it so much. I much prefer the 172SP's over the 182S's anyday.~Skyy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dillon,Flight 1 has a 30-day money back policy, no questions asked.Since you seem to be so extremely dissatisfied with the 152, perhaps you should take advantage of this offer, as your comments in public seem to be accomplishing very little.You may not care who designed the plane, Dillon, but to come out in public and blame DreamFleet for aspects of the product that we had NOTHING to do with is unacceptable and inappropriate, as is the language and tone you are using in your posts.Being a "customer" and having spent money, does not give you that right, especially in public. As to what DF did on the 152, I had no problem seeing the cowling in the 152 I photographed, and regardless, many FS users want the cowling to be seen.I would suggest taking advantage of the money back offer.No hard feelings, seriously. :-)Regards,http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...RUM_LOUF_A2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was your fuel and cargo load and how many people were on board??? We were pretty light the day I flew, tanks were less than half full but if I had a choice I'd take the 182... We only did an hour flight and I wasn't the main pilot meaning I didn't take off and land the bird. Wish I could get back into that thing again and really get a feel for it, we only have 172s and 152s at our airport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lou I never said I totally disliked the aircraft and no I will not ask for my money back because it's not that serious. I didn't know DreamFleet only did the panel, you sure don't make that painfully obvious seeing that the plane is listed right there on your main website. I don't feel my tone in the original post was bad especially since I ultimately mentioned how I enjoyed you guy's work over the years (listed in the post you deleted that contained all your slander over on Flightsim.com). My comments are not going to make or break your bank account or your reputation as leading designers. My tone only got bad towards you for the simple fact you attacked me without even personally knowing me. You can't sit there and tell me how much time I have in a real aircraft or assume I'm lying about things I say. I have the Flight1 152 on my PC, I can make a comment about that. I'm personally using this add-on and commenting on it, not the team behind it. If this was the only project you guys have ever done I could understand your point. I never attacked you personally, called you names of any sort, and/or insinuated your intentions. I think you took my comments above out of context (like others have done) and that was the reasoning behind your comments. Out of the 600+ views this thread has received I'm sure some others out there may feel the same way I do and these views are nothing personally against anyone... It almost seems you guys are taking the Microsoft approach to things, "Send Me Nothing But Good Press". If you don't have a problem with me praising your product then you shouldn't have a problem with me pointing things out, heck either way you still got my money. We got this same problem with the guys at Redmond and you wonder why we can't get anything done concerning issues with FS2k4. Why even have a forum if everything is censored and policed to a point individual views can't be heard with out fear of attack. Sometimes it seems some of you developers and Microsoft feel your above the actual people your targeting as your purchasing audience. We all know every one of you guys do great work so why get so ###### as to get out of character defending something someone liked enough to buy in the first place from you... It's amazing when people first start off in business they welcome all feedback but once they make it to some sort of success they in turn feel they are above hearing anything they don't want to hear and if forced to they come out of the corner cussing, kicking, and screaming...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the difference between RA 172 and FS9 172 close to none. There was a huge difference in FS2k2 but not in FS9.I do have a question about pax in that AC (RA): If I put only the pilot in the pax config, the aircraft has a strong tendency to turn left. Is this properly modelled? It flies ok if you have both pilot and another person on the right seat....BTW, the stock C208B and RA's 208B also are very close and I still didn't decide about which one to choose.Disclaimer: I'm not a real world pilot. Just wanted to share my opinions and ask a question.. :-)RgdsMarcelo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this