Think i'll give this one a miss! VC looks awful to be honest, and the lack of FMC and systems makes this expensive for $55.

Much as I really like to support the developers, I also really think this price is more than just a 'little steep' - it goes beyond that. This is another reason I'm very grateful for sites like this where we can openly discuss such issues.Sadly, I'm another that will have to pass on this one. There may indeed be a shortage of C-17s for FSX, but considering what else can be had for that price, it's a no-goer.I would LIKE to hope that threads such as this one, go some way to keeping addon prices within reach for the average user, but I'm not really that sure of it.

I made the mistake and took the plunge despite its lack of FMC. I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to drop an ISG one in.First impressions were a very nice sound set and a not too shabby looking VC. I duly set my Ezdok Camera views up, loaded the FSX flightplan and noted the waypoints displayed in the four MDU's. So far so good. I then attempted to dial in my v2+15 (It's a big mother and I wanted to play it safe for my first flight), I say attempted because nothing moved. With the exception of the VS wheel, all other inputs on the AFDS just don't work.It's the same for the lights in the VC. The Beacon and Nav lights are tied, and the strobe is no-go.When you switch to 2D it's a different story. All AFDS inputs function and the light panel, which bears little resemblance to the VC, has working switches.In the ten years or so I've been purchasing via Flight 1, I've only ever claimed two refunds - one for the Virtavia Sea King, and now, for the Virtavia C-17.Virtavia, a company I shall stay well clear of in future.

Thank you for that DeanI've been humming and haa'ing whether to take the plunge after the recent lights update.Now I think after reading your experience with this,I'll give it a wide berth.

To be honest I'm surprised at the degree of surprise being shown by some people over the depth of detail in Virtavia's (née Alphasim) C-17.I've bought a fair few Alphasim/Virtavia aeroplanes and helicopters over the years (B-24, Blackhawk etc). I even reviewed their F-104 for Avsim many moons ago, so if ever I have bought stuff by them, it has been in the knowledge of their place in the realism pecking order, i.e. somewhere in the mid-to-low range of system functionality and detail, with nice models (not always great, but almost always pretty damn good) with pretty rapid FPS, but never up there at the pinnacle in terms of systems simulation, and I don't think that position in the realm of FS add-ons is exactly a secret.There are occasionally some real gems to be found in their catalogue - such as their Consolidated B-24 Liberator, which has got a lot of functionality - but I've pretty much known what to expect whenever I've pressed that 'buy now' button, and taken anything I've got beyond that in terms of functionality as a pleasant surprise. So I would have thought most people who frequent Avsim would also be aware that this is where their products are coming from, and have based their purchasing decisions on that generally well-known ethos.There are a few companies who make FS add-ons where my decision to buy their stuff is generally done under the proviso that I'm possibly going to be tweaking the flight models (cough, cough... Carenado) or adding panels or some such. Thus, knowing who makes it, I would probably have placed the C-17 in that category and then if I felt I really must have a C-17, go ahead and buy it, but do so with my expectations at the level I've come to expect in their products. This is certainly not in any way a dig at their target area in terms of how they simulate stuff, for if it was I'd not have bought anything from them.I don't always want PMDG-style minutia, so lighter simulations certainly have a place in my virtual hangar, but sometimes they earn that place following a bit of DIY maintenance when they arrive in that hangar. In other words, if you know what to expect, and keep those expectations to a reasonable level, then you will not be disappointed with what Virtavia offer. They make no secret of the fact that they invariably don't go for simulating every rivet, and I for one was glad when they rose from the ashes of Alphasim.The fact that their C-17 isn't cheap may be a bit tricky to swallow for some, but that is the price to pay for a model of something that is not otherwise available. I paid the best part of a hundred quid for Ariane's NG for FSX when it was the only game in town, and I ended up adding some panels to that too.The truth is, sometimes you have to get your virtual spanners out when you want an FS aeroplane that no other developer has touched (in fact I'm doing exactly that with the Dirk Stuck Basler BT-67, which is about as dire as a payware product can be upon installation, but still something that can be saved), so I would think there will be plenty of people doing that where the C-17 is concerned, which I imagine is a masterpiece compared to that BT-67 LOL. Thus I'd keep an eye on the Avsim file library if I were particularly keen on having a C-17, because I'm willing to bet that there'll be some tweaks for it kicking about before too long (God bless ISG) which will make that price easier to swallow.Al

Well to be honest Al, I never had any dealings with Alphasim in their past incarnation, so I made a judgement call on the basis that an add-on, that cost 55 bucks should at least be half decent. To have lights and primary flight inputs non-functioning in the VC, is indefensible.I made a bad call.

Well to be honest Al, I never had any dealings with Alphasim in their past incarnation, so I made a judgement call on the basis that an add-on, that cost 55 bucks should at least be half decent. To have lights and primary flight inputs non-functioning in the VC, is indefensible.I made a bad call.

Fair enough, but there are plenty of reviews for Alphasim/Virtavia products kicking around, and for 55 Bucks it's worth spending a few minutes checking some out before you spend the cash. Price alone is no indication of quality.Al

It's not often I get the wool over my eyes, but I had a soft spot for the C-17 in FS9. We had a number of flights in our RTW Buzz where we where delivering toys for the kids at XMas. The C-17 was ideal for those desert strips in Kabul. We could put them down on strips the size of a fag paper and when empty they would rotate at a little over 100kts. Awesome fun.I had a really nice freeware panel with RXP gauges as well.

It's not often I get the wool over my eyes, but I had a soft spot for the C-17 in FS9.

This seems like you are implying Virtavia mislead or fooled you somehow.Did they really ? The feature list for the C-17 is pretty slim, no mention of an FMC or most of the additional features we normally see in a over $50 product (clickable VC buttons and animation, systems simulation etc).I think you knew you had a money back guarantee, the risk was low, and didn't feel the need to do much research before buying. So you just took the plunge. If that was so, fair enough, but the can you really then still imply they somehow pulled one on you ?Its not a bad product, the exterior model , handling and VC are pretty good IMO, but no-one disagrees $55is too steep for this product's features.But as Al noted, there aren't any better C-17 renditions than this one, and there may not befor some time. I like the product myself, my desire to fly C-17 missions has overtaken my desire notto overpay for an addon. I'm keeping my C-17 purchase.If you are a C-17 fan, IMO its a product you can enjoy. But... you need to make peace withthe price first.If you're not really a C-17 fan, then yeah pass on it, you'll never get over the price.Regards.Ernie.

Sorry Ernie, but when a Company advertises in bold white lettering -'High quality 3D cockpit with many mousable functions and systems replication (FS9 VC has reduced detail, but full systems and gauge functionality)'I at least expect to be able to turn left, right and change speed from the VC.If I had been able, I would have been more than happy just to drop in some of your gauges and fly as is.

Sorry Ernie, but when a Company advertises in bold white lettering -...'High quality 3D cockpit with many mousable functions and systems replication

The posted Screenshots show pretty clearly what the 3D cockpit looks like.So even though they said high quality the screenshots tells us what that really means.>>'Many' mousable functions. What In your opinion is the minimum number to quality as 'many' ? 10, 20, 30, 100 ??I count over 30 clickable areas, is that enough to count as 'many' ? It would seem so.If they had said almost or every VC button clickable, then yeah that would be specific enough toexpect it to be exactly as described. I think we can allow them a tad bit of marketing, its not like every other developer doesn't do it.I think we know not to take those type of product feature descriptions too literally they are in part marketing.

(FS9 VC has reduced detail, but full systems and gauge functionality)'[/i]

Considering its it parens prefixed with 'FS9'.It seems to mean in that context the FS9 VC version has the same exact gauge functionality as the FSX version, but less VC detail.It'd be a misread to interpret that to mean literally full systems functionality. I really don't see the intentional mislead here.

I at least expect to be able to turn left, right and change speed from the VC.

Agreed, they need to fix that in the FS9 version (I don't know if that's an issue in the FSX version).It does appear the fact they are clickable that was their intention to have them scrollable with the right mouse, but apparently no-one in testing picked up on it.Though if they don't fix it an basic XML gauge can be placed over the window to make it functional.I think those who keep the product will have to be prepared to do some customizations with this C-17 anyways. Again no argument that its priced too high for its features.Regards.Ernie.

Agreed, they need to fix that in the FS9 version (I don't know if that's an issue in the FSX version).

It does appear the fact they are clickable that was their intention to have them scrollable with the right mouse, but apparently no-one in testing picked up on it.Though if they don't fix it an basic XML gauge can be placed over the window to make it functional.I think those who keep the product will have to be prepared to do some customizations with this C-17 anyways. Again no argument that its priced too high for its features.Regards.Ernie.

It failed to be mentioned in the manual but all of the AP controls work using the mousewheel. And they work very well.But that said, an update came out yesterday to make them also work using left and right mouse button clicks for those who fly using a mouse with no mousewheel. Who says Alphasim/Virtavia isn't Accessibility minded?The update also makes changes to the pilot's HUD and following input from Aussie C-17 pilots, adjusts fuel flow. (Backup your existing aircraft.cfg file if you have made any changes there (added textures, etc.).http://www.virtavia.com/?p=427

Fortunately and unfortunately iFLY has reclassified what it costs to buy a high fidelity aircraft. System-wise the iFly 737 is on par with current PMDG and LDS offerings in terms of complexity + every NG aircraft included plus free repaints - all this at $55 US. It makes it hard to justify a dumbed down aircraft for the same price.

You can't compare prices like that so many different factors come into play. A niche market like a military cargo jet will have to be priced higher because it won't sell half as much as a 737ng

You can't compare prices like that so many different factors come into play. A niche market like a military cargo jet will have to be priced higher because it won't sell half as much as a 737ng

A "niche" mil product like the VRS F/A18E sells for less and it surpasses all other developers in terms of offering excellent FDE, system modeling, VC quality, FPS performance, and true innovation (collimated HUD, NAVFLIR). I'd say the F/A18 is underpriced...