Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Carenado

CT210M Centurion for FSX on final.

Recommended Posts

Guest acezboy561
Is it just my imagintaion or do the T210M VC shots show an RXP 530 with a 430 below it? Somehow they do not look like default MS ones, at least to me...
The 530 looks like the default MS GPS - though im not 100% sure about that, will be confirmed on release!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 530 looks like the default MS GPS - though im not 100% sure about that, will be confirmed on release!
Not really - the default GPS500 does not have a radio built in..

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really - the default GPS500 does not have a radio built in..
Yeah, that is a Garmin 530 and 430 in the picture on their site of the VC, and I would suspect it's from Reality XP given that folks for a long time have been asking Carenado to make it easier to add this GPS, I sure hope so, that would be a great setup for the T210 for those who own the Reality XP GPS.Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are side by side comparison shots of the 210 centre panel (left) and the duke centre panel with 530/430 combo. Looks wise they are identical other than:- On the extreme top right of the 530 unit where the unit name is (red circle) there seems to be an ever so slight difference - some sort of icon/logo/label (?) on the 210 version not seen on the duke one.- The texture of the units seems a bit lighter (more weathered?) in the 210 shots - but this could just be lightingMy understanding is that the panel developer (as opposed to RXP themselves) would be responsible for the VC textures and 3D knobs so this could well explain the minor visual differences?Otherwise they are identical to the RXP units looks wise - buttons, white button decals, 3d knobs etc.Oh, and attached a shot of the default GPS500 just to show just how different the units are. Having said that there's that icon/logo/label before the unit name on the default one which seems to be what is on the T210 530 unit too?Subsequently I have noticed that Carenado included their own GPS430 in the B58 which is identical in looks to the RXP unit but clearly functionality is not the same. Perhaps that is what is going on here with the 530 unit?


Konrad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope not I'm not buying anymore of there planes until they add rxp 3G masks to them. I'm am sick and tired of screwing around with Panel CFgs I've got the katana from aerospft and soon the f1 182 so I'll be busy with for a couple months. Bareback needs to do 3 things number 1 beta test longer and release a bugless (or close to) plane, add rxp integration like realair. And last but not least; work on there flight dynamics more. I know I sound picky but I can be with all the great products coming out soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bstolle
Hope not I'm not buying anymore of there planes until they add rxp 3G masks to them. I'm am sick and tired of screwing around with Panel CFgs I've got the katana from aerospft and soon the f1 182 so I'll be busy with for a couple months. Bareback needs to do 3 things number 1 beta test longer and release a bugless (or close to) plane, add rxp integration like realair. And last but not least; work on there flight dynamics more. I know I sound picky but I can be with all the great products coming out soon
Flight dynamics on the 114 were already better as will be those for the 210. The 337 will set a new standard for Carenado flight dynamics.At least the bugs on Carenado planes can be fixed. The gapping holes in the Aerosoft Katana can't be fixed according to its designer. I like the Katana very much but these items are real showstoppers IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bstolle
What holes?
If you place the viewpoint into a realistic position, which means to the left (the middle of the seat) and way forward (also approximately the middle), there's suddenly a real big gap between the fuselage and the canopy at the back because the fuselage shape and the canopy shape don't match at all.And a further gap becomes visible along the bottom of the canopy/fuselage joint. Not nice as a few accidents happened IRL due to the canopy not been latched properly.It's a showstopper if you can see the scenery going by where there shouldn't be any visible, LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flight dynamics on the 114 were already better as will be those for the 210. The 337 will set a new standard for Carenado flight dynamics.
So does that mean you didn't do the 210's dynamics? Maybe I'll just wait for the 337 then. Your work on the 310 was exceptional. To have that in a Carenado product will be truly awesome! The 337 has always been one of my favorites so it will be something extra to look forward to. :(

13900K | MSI RTX 4090 | 64 GB 3600 MHz | 4x SSD + 1x HDD | ASUS 42" 3840x2160 120Hz OLED
VirtualFly TQ6+ | Virpil WarBRD + Constellation Alpha | MFG Crosswind V2 | RealSimGear GNS530/430

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bstolle

Thanx for the kind feedback :)Altough I'm not designing the flight dynamics for the 210, I'm involved in testing the FDs and they are nice and a step foward.Nevertheless the 'leap' will occur with the 337 ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BeaverDriver
If you place the viewpoint into a realistic position, which means to the left (the middle of the seat) and way forward (also approximately the middle), there's suddenly a real big gap between the fuselage and the canopy at the back because the fuselage shape and the canopy shape don't match at all.And a further gap becomes visible along the bottom of the canopy/fuselage joint. Not nice as a few accidents happened IRL due to the canopy not been latched properly.It's a showstopper if you can see the scenery going by where there shouldn't be any visible, LOL
We work on Katana's and what we have determined is that those are actually "ventilation slots" Big%20Grin.gif. Oddly enough, when a pilot first discovers them, he/she seems to actually sweat MORE, not less. :( Can't imagine why... :rolleyes:Have to admit - both IRL and in FS, I'm not a big fan of the Katanas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanx for the kind feedback :)Altough I'm not designing the flight dynamics for the 210, I'm involved in testing the FDs and they are nice and a step foward.Nevertheless the 'leap' will occur with the 337 ;)
How big of a leap? A frog leap or a gigantic leap? :( By the way thanks for developing the B58 stall fix, what a great improvement!BB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanx for the kind feedback :)Altough I'm not designing the flight dynamics for the 210, I'm involved in testing the FDs and they are nice and a step foward.Nevertheless the 'leap' will occur with the 337 ;)
I noticed Carenado never did post your stall fix, is there a chance you could e-mail the cfg file to me?apteryx007@yahoo.comThanks and look forward to the C337 :( CheersMartin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bstolle
How big of a leap? A frog leap or a gigantic leap? :( By the way thanks for developing the B58 stall fix, what a great improvement!BB
You are welcome :)lesp distance depends if or how many real 337 pilots I can get to answer my customized questionnaire...
I noticed Carenado never did post your stall fix, is there a chance you could e-mail the cfg file to me?apteryx007@yahoo.comThanks and look forward to the C337 :( CheersMartin
It's available at sim-outhouse.com but I've just sent you the new air file. (no change to the cfg file)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...