How is the DF/Flight1 C152??

[Arklight1 140]

Thinking about buying it and just wanted some opinions.I own just about every GA Payware product made but this 152 has recently grabbed my attention...What do you all think??Thx!

[briansommers 74]

i have it and its very good, its no speed demon by any means! so if you like to go slow and low, then get it, its very smooth and it flies well on a lower end computeri like it to just putz around in, when i dont feel like "working" for my vaciao!Brian S

[Guest Vilk]

just make sure you choose the one with rounded spinners...:-lol

[Arklight1 140]

>just make sure you choose the one with rounded spinners...>:-lolYou mean the aircraft or....:-lol

[ejoiner 21]

I wish they'd made one without wheel pants instead of roundedspinners... :-)

[Guest Vilk]

:-lolthat was a good one...

[Splash_One 0]

I fly a real world C-152 every weekend for flying lessons, and if your looking for realistic handling, atleast in my opinion, it's considerably off. I can climb no faster than 200 fpm or matain 70 kts on climb, while in real life, I acheive anywhere from 500-700FPM on average... cruising... I wish I could push her past 75-80 kts in FS... put I have to be in a descent to do it....I cruise at about 95 kts at 2300RPM in real life... takeoff run's are a bit longer... she wants to get off the ground at 75kts or so in FS... not so in real life.... and low speed handling characteristics are just decent...its the best out there, and its a very nice plane... but the airfile is not what I would call realistic... others wise its a beautiful plane, awesome panel, virtual cockpit, and a so-so external model... everything from the leading edge of the wing foward is kind of off... :)My $0.02 :)Jason :-wave

[Arklight1 140]

>I fly a real world C-152 every weekend for flying lessons,>and if your looking for realistic handling, atleast in my>opinion, it's considerably off. I can climb no faster than>200 fpm or matain 70 kts on climb, while in real life, I>acheive anywhere from 500-700FPM on average... cruising... I>wish I could push her past 75-80 kts in FS... put I have to be>in a descent to do it....I cruise at about 95 kts at 2300RPM>in real life... takeoff run's are a bit longer... she wants to>get off the ground at 75kts or so in FS... not so in real>life.... and low speed handling characteristics are just>decent...its the best out there, and its a very nice plane...>but the airfile is not what I would call realistic... others>wise its a beautiful plane, awesome panel, virtual cockpit,>and a so-so external model... everything from the leading edge>of the wing foward is kind of off... :)>>>>My $0.02 :)>>>Jason :-waveWell I purchased the C152 last night and I am having a few different experiences then you.It sure doesn't take me 75 kts. to takeoff it is lower which, as you stated, more closely models the 152 (I have quite a few hours in the 152 myself). The slow speed characteristics are also "similar" to what I remember them being, even though it has been a while. In addition, I climb at about 500-600 FPM just fine with the Flight1 C152...not sure why you only get 200 FPM, something doesn't sound right. Also, in level flight she stabilizes nicely at around 100 knots.Not sure what you mean about the external model. I HIGHLY doubt Roger Dial did a "haphazard" job externally.Are you sure you dl'd the latest 3.1 patch?Thx for the opinions guys! Much appreciated.:)

[LAdamson 240]

As far as I'm concerned, I consider the Cessna 152 to be a "slug" at my airport altitude of 4600' msl. But I purchased the 152 also, just for the heck of it I suppose. Since I lost my hard-drive, I haven't yet attempted a re-install, but hopefully I saved some of the info to a CD. But never the less, I don't remember this model requiring 75 kias for rotation, nor a mere 200 fpm climb. It may be a slug...................but not that bad.I do remember a patch quite quickly after it's release. And it seems that Dreamfleet did the panel & Steve Small programmed the flight dynamics. And memory say's it flew quite convincingly after a few problems solved with the patch.L.Adamson

[Arklight1 140]

>As far as I'm concerned, I consider the Cessna 152 to be a>"slug" at my airport altitude of 4600' msl. But I purchased>the 152 also, just for the heck of it I suppose. >>Since I lost my hard-drive, I haven't yet attempted a>re-install, but hopefully I saved some of the info to a CD.>But never the less, I don't remember this model requiring 75>kias for rotation, nor a mere 200 fpm climb. It may be a>slug...................but not that bad.>>I do remember a patch quite quickly after it's release. And it>seems that Dreamfleet did the panel & Steve Small programmed>the flight dynamics. And memory say's it flew quite>convincingly after a few problems solved with the patch.>>L.AdamsonAt Flight1 you can now retrieve your keyfile/order number/etc.. VERY easily by just supplying the name of the aircraft and the email address you used when you ordered it. No more going through technical/customer service channels, it's all automated. Type in your info and you should get an email instantly (or close to it!). Like I stated above you will need your order number to re-download but that too can be easily retrieved through the automated service. :)Hope this helps!P.S. I think the Flight1 C152 is up to Patch 3 now. When I installed it I believe it said version 3.1 (or along those lines).

[Splash_One 0]

>Are you sure you dl'd the latest 3.1 patch?Not sure... I think I have some version B... x.xxB ... I'll look into it later :)The thing about the external model is that the nose area just doesnt look like a 152 to me :) Personal opinion in that matter...

[Guest Vilk]

actually, i'm quite curious... what is it exactly that you find wrong about the external model? honestly, in all the screenshots i've seen the f1 152 looks kinda... how to say it... flatter? wider? than the 152's on http://www.cessna150-152club.com/ for example... as if shot through an ultrawide lens... the wings look kinda massive, too, still in comparison with photographs... is it just me? or that's what you meant... it may be me, anyway... my poor judgement is quite well known. :-)

[Guest Vilk]

oh well, you answered as i was typing this...yes, i agree about the nose...

[Splash_One 0]

I think what I'm seeing is that the nose is a bit longer and a tad skinny... its really no big deal to me... and was just my opinion... I'm more interested in the way it flys than the way it looks in FS :)See below... (also the side profile in my signature :) )http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/70409.jpg

[Arklight1 140]

Tough to say..http://63.201.10.102/cessna/reg/FMPro?-db=...=12605699&-FindThat pics looks pretty darn similar and so does this one:http://63.201.10.102/cessna/reg/FMPro?-db=...=12605431&-FindI guess it depends on the angle of the aircraft and such. I think there are also different variations of the 152. Like the 150 (ok, not really a 152), 152, and 152 II (I think there is one of those, right?). That website you posted has 4 versions...I never knew there were that many. LOLHere is the pic I think the one Flight1 created resembles the most:http://63.201.10.102/cessna/reg/FMPro?-db=...=12629183&-FindIt is hard to say really. Some of the 152s they have on that site look like they have long noses and other models don't.