Hi all,I must say, that when FLIGHT came out, I was, like many of you I'm sure, prepared to fly it for ten minutes and then uninstall it but I must say that despite some frustrating limitations, I rather like it... I'm the procedural airliner type usually (I loved reading through the MD-11's system's manual and learning things like how and why the NRMPs work/are present), although have grown to love the A2A B-17 and Spitfire as well as the VRS F/A-18E too; now I doubt (but don't rule out the possibility) that FLIGHT will ever do anything like this (but being a highly modified FSX I know it is capable of it), however it does the whole GA experience which I have grown to love with a combo of ORBX and A2A fantastically well and the ability to do a walk round is very welcome; yes it's futile, but still fun.So there's my view, but here's what I'd like to discuss with you, the flight model. I really like it, there is a feeling of interaction between the aircraft and the air (especially noticeable with a bit of wind) and the enhanced sound effects really add to this- what I like about this (and I say this as someone whose knowledge of the simulator really only goes as far as the file structure) is that I believe it is integrated into the engine and so some sort of theme will emerge among all aircraft released, however, I don't like the way the PT-17 (this is the only plane I've clocked up any time in, I have none of the DLC and probably won't have for some time) itself handles, there seems to be no sense of residual aerodynamic effects from the surfaces, that is to say the aircraft seems to snap into an attitude and stick to it when the stick is neutralised, as if some obscure FBW CAS is present. I'll concede that my real world flight experience is limited, I'm 15 and have recently started my PPL (just over 5hrs) and have clocked a few hours with the Air Cadets in the Grobb Tutor, but my number of landings is now in double figures, but I feel that my opinion on the matter holds some validity.As you can tell, I like the handling, however, I don't like the throttle/engine response; the throttle response seems far too snappy for an old radial and the prop is far too quick witted, furthermore, the mixture seems to have no real effect on engine performance. Also, despite having no time in (or near :)) a Stearman, I know that the engine temp. modelling must be wrong, I know old aircraft weren't properly cooled, but there's no way that when you're in the pattern at 100mph and 1,100 feet with an MP of <20 and a prop RPM of <2100 that the engine temp would be rising so fast that you can clearly see the needle moving, not least with all the cylinders exposed as they are in this beautiful beast.To conclude, this sim so young that it's far too early to pass judgement, I remember vividly the hatred that followed FSX, which I have just seen someone refer to as "the last great sim" (I don't think it is), FLIGHT may be opened up to the developers we all know and love who will be able to sell their content independently and with the stunning new lighting model, very promising flight model and an engine which is capable of utilising the GPU there is huge potential; for now I'm sticking with FSX and DCS, but I wish Microsoft the best of luck with this endeavour, I know this opinion will be condemned by many, but it is there franchise and they do have the right to reorient it, but I think that despite the word's absence, there's still enough simulator left to please us (although I don't think MS will be the ones to nurture it into fruition)...So what do you think?Thanks for your feedback,Charliep.s. Sorry for another personal opinion post AVSIM, I hope the question integrated into it goes some way to justify this...

Regarding the mixture. Have you unselected the "Auto Mixture" feature? Have you enabled the prop and mixture axes in the config utility?

Regarding the mixture. Have you unselected the "Auto Mixture" feature? Have you enabled the prop and mixture axes in the config utility?

Oh yes, of course, it's just that mixture is set audibly in the Stearman I would think and I can't sense any change here (nor is there any in terms of RPM), as for the prop, I'd think that it would fluctuate a fair bit more than it does after an RPM change...Thanks for the reply,Charlie

Edited March 1, 201214 yr by MD11Captain

Both the Stearman and the Maule have an adjustable pitch constant speed prop, so the control will work on then.I can observe a drop from 900 rpm while on ground to 500 rpm at nearly full lean position, which clearly shows that the mixture control is functioning correctly. Below that point I'm starving the engine of fuel and it will begin to stop. As long as the prop is still spinning, enrichening the mixture will allow it to restart. It takes a few seconds for it to "clear its throat" which is only to be expected.

The Stearman in FLIGHT is modelled with the popular post war upgrade of a P&W R-985 engine and constant speed prop, seriously, try it... And as for the mixture, yes it will choke the engine, but it doesn't seem to be necessitated to prevent flooding when you're at altitude, the engine just seems to chug along merrily. As for the Maule, there's no way I'm buying what is in essence something I can fly in FSX.RegardsCharlie

Edited March 1, 201214 yr by MD11Captain

The Stearman doesn't have a P&W R985, but rather it is an aircraft that started life with a 220 hp engine and was later modified for the Lycoming 300 hp engine. It also served life as a crop duster for awhile before being restored to pristine condition. It is one beautiful aircraft.

constant speed prop, seriously, try it...

I was conflating the Flight Stearman with another one I have in FSX which does have a wooden, fixed pitch prop. I've corrected my post so as not to engender future confusion...Thanks for making me go in the other room to look... :Peace:

Also-finally ( after my complaining for years) the prop changes the noise ( though still not right to my ears) instead of manifold!However, with the rv6 notice no right rudder needed on takeoff, climb, nose up and doing a steep turn ball remains essentially in the center with no rudder input. Also all axis too agressive( could it have to do with the agressive joystick setting? - the stearman flies great though with no adjustment) and missing feeling of inertia and momentum totally-reminds me of Xplane aircraft I don't like-though not as extreme.

Geoff, check the config and make sure you have all of the "flying assists" toggled OFF.

I do...

The Stearman doesn't have a P&W R985, but rather it is an aircraft that started life with a 220 hp engine and was later modified for the Lycoming 300 hp engine. It also served life as a crop duster for awhile before being restored to pristine condition. It is one beautiful aircraft.

Oh, fair enough, I hadn't read the info. in FLIGHT, that was just such a common modification made to the aircraft (and was approved by Boeing) that I assumed, having a constant speed prop, our new Stearman had... Thanks for the info,Charlie