And, WOW...just, WOW.What a great aircraft. The folks over at Aerosoft did an outstanding job and so far it is definately worth the money.The "worth" is in the details. For instance, when you turn your aircraft the little bookmark in the book located on the aircrafts dashboard actually moves and when you open the GPS there is a bitmap of a hand holding it (wish it actually opened on the actual GPS on the dashboard though). Hitting the "Fold Wings" key places the tie downs under the wings, etc..2D panel looks nice, is laid out in a simple fashion (just like the real Katana), is very functional, and it is clear. (But once you see the VC it is goodbye 2D Panel!)The VC is GREAT! I don't think I will EVER use the 2D cockpit with this aircraft, it is that good. Nuff said.Sounds are very nice as well. I don't exactly remember the sound of the one I used to fly but that one had a Rotax engine so the sound would be different anyways. The sounds included with this aircraft are not some "modified" 172 sounds...this aircraft actually sounds different (which is refreshing!).The exterior model is also very detailed. Specular Highlighting is present (as it is on all good payware nowdays) and it is handeled in a very nice way, meaning, you won't blind yourself at certain angles. The Specular Highlighting is present but not overdone, just as it should be. The exterior model has everything you would expect from a high quality payware aircraft. So far I have noticed no sharp edges, no flashing textures, no clear model areas, nothing that seems out of place.FM wise the aircraft flies exactly how I would guess it should. Like I stated above, I used to fly the Rotax version so I am sure there are some variances between the one I used to fly and the Katana represented in game but the Katana/s in this package "just feel right". I do not want to go in-depth here concerning the FM because I do not believe that an aircraft can be critiqued without at least a good solid 4 hours of flying doing tests and I am afraid any straightfoward comments at this point could be pre-mature, but as of right now I am VERY pleased.Performance I will not comment on since my system specs. do not represent those of the "average system". Needless to say there are no stutters/freezes (although the VC textures do take a second to load) on my system. If your system is similar to mine you should experience the same good times as I presently do.Flying this aircraft is just plain fun. The visiblity from the VC is great and you actually get a real show when flying it at dawn/dusk....toss in a few clouds (or not!) and you have screenshot Heaven.Hope this helps answer some of the questions presented by some of the guys/gals regarding the new Katana.If you have other questions feel free to ask. Right now I am heading to bed (5am here) but rest assured if you do ask a question I WILL respond as best I can tommorrow (err. today..whichever you would like to call it! lol):)

Hi Shane,Thanks for the review, I'm also liking this plane a great deal. But I am not feeling the same about a few things you mention, I will comment below:First, you should note that it is a Rotax engined plane that they modelled- so the sound and overall feel should be the same as the one you've flown. Is it very different? I am somewhat disappointed by the sound, I think it lacks depth and comes off with some "static" (not my system, I've got Audigy 2 and specs similar or faster than yours, no other plane gives static sound, and planes like the RealAir Marchetti sound like an orchestra!).Also, on top of the fuselage at certain angles you can see a bit of a "seam", where the textures don't quite meet correctly, running up the centerline to the tail. Otherwise the model is first rate but I wouldn't expect that in a payware aircraft, hopefully they will release a bit of a fix.Last I do not like the "people" in the cockpit. I know you can get rid of the copilot, but I do not like to look at the pilot either and there is no way to remove him or the "animated" arm/hand from the stick.But overall it is a super effort and a MUCH needed training aircraft in FS. I look forward to hearing others' reviews too.Best,Joel

Hello Joel :)Thx for responding to my post. In overall feel, this aircraft does remind me a lot like the Katana I used to fly in terms of feeling in the air. The Katana I used to fly was one of the first models released to the public and to tell you the truth I do not remember the exact designation (been quite a while ;) ). But yes, this Katana does remind me of the real one I did fly. Just keep in mind my flying experience with the real Katana happened quite a while ago.I am not sure why you are getting static in the sound since I am not experiencing it myself. However, I do understand what you mean. I get a lot of static in the sound for the Alphasim Hawk I bought just bought and that was $30!!! :( Did you try adjusting the sound volume settings in the options menu? Try turning the sound down a little (mine is at 50 or 75 IIRC), doing so will not effect the sounds of other aircraft but might help for this one.:)

okay what do you call an avarage system? Something with even higher specs? I have a something less average AMD XP2600, GF FX5600 256MB and a gig of RAM (PC2700) but I'm not happy with the FPS and loading time in VC, compared to for example the Realair SF-260. I like the details of the plane :)Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Flying.gif"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick back harder"

>okay what do you call an avarage system? Something with even>higher specs? I have a something less average AMD XP2600, GF>FX5600 256MB and a gig of RAM (PC2700) but I'm not happy with>the FPS and loading time in VC, compared to for example the>Realair SF-260. I like the details of the plane :)>>Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries>http://www.emotipad.com/emoticons/Flying.gif>>"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick>back harder"In terms of processor speed there is not one faster (unless you OC higher, LOL), so it would be impossible to have an "Average system" with higher specs.Average nowdays for processors I would say is probably something along the lines of a 2.0-2.2GHZ P4, and AMDs equivelant.

I agree with most of what was said in the first post.The visual model is fantastic, the VC actually looks better than the 2D panel. There's an incredible attention to detail. Virtually everything moves (ignition keys, maps, books) and is clickable. Sound quality was fine, I heard no "static". I'm using an Audigy2.I will post some screenshots later.I have some things I'd like to mention:1. This plane features a joystick in real life. So, away goes the expensive CH Yoke and in comes the cheap Logitech stick, retreived from the closet.Until I discovered that the DA20 features a variable pitch prop, that is. The logitech stick only features one slider. I ended up hooking up both the CH Yoke and the joystick and using the sliders on the CH Yoke for prop pitch and throttle and the joystick for control. It's a bit awkward to have to reach over the yoke for the throttle and prop levers, and of course, everything is in the wrong place - joystick to the right, throttle/prop levers to the left.Few joysticks are of the same quality as the yokes available, because most simmer consider yokes the more "serious" controller. Any suggestions for a high quality, ambidextrous (most fly stick controlled planes with their left arm/hand) joystick similar to the one in the DA20, Cub and other stick airplanes (Airbus anyone)?2. There are some flashing polys and other "uglies", both in the VC and in the exterior model. One thing I noticed was that the key for the ignition cuts into the leg of the pilot when he presses on the rudder pedals. That's gotta hurt! :-eekOf course, the polygon count is incredibly high so it's impossible to get everything perfect.3. Just like the Carenado aircraft with reflective windows, it takes a second or so for the window textures to load up when switching to the VC view, during which you only see grey instead of the outside world.4. I agree about the people in the cockpit. I can see my own hand moving the joystick, I don't need to look at someone else's hand on the screen to see that. Also, I feel performance would be better without the models.5. Performance is good considering the details, but this aircraft is fairly heavy on the frames.6. Some of the following may be true to the real aircraft as well, so don't take this as critizising the flight model deveoper(s). Here's what I found re. the flight model:-I haven't flown anything using a joystick for a long time. Very tiring on the arm and hand and it's more dificult to fly straight and level. The aircraft does not feature an autopilot so long flights are out. This is a machine for those touch 'n go's at the local airport, not for flying hundreds of miles at 10,000 feet.-The plane flies a bit nose-low when straight and level. If you don't keep an eye on the vertical speed indicator and altimeter, you'll probably be climbing at 500 fpm by the time you do.-Landings take some getting used to. I have a tendancy to stall this aircraft too high above the runway and hit nose-first. With a few attempts I got a lot better at landing properly.-She looks almost like a motorglider and handles a bit like one. Lead the turns with some rudder.

Actually when I flew the Katana I remember the stick taking off quite a bit of workload. It was much more comfortable IMO then the yoke of the Cessna we flew.I really liked the stick. It felt more natural and just plain easier to fly with to me.:)

For what it's worth - I don't like the idea of modeling the pilot's appendages or a copilot. The only exception is the pax in the Eaglesoft Citation X, and I could live without her too, as I'm sure she affects framerates even when I'm not ogling her accoutrements (e.g. her high-speed Dell laptop).I won't be buying this Katana anyway, as good as the visuals look, as I am "into" higher-performance aircraft. But - if it were an aircraft that I was considering, the non-removable human animations would give me pause.cheers,Dave Blevins