You can choose on the fly whether to use 2 RXP 430's or a mixture of 1 RXP and 1 Flight 1 430

 

Perfect - that's what I figured they'd do but thanks for confirming.

 

To use 2 RXP 430 you have to get the unlimited pack...

 

Understood. Much as I love my 430 and 530, the price of the Unlimited pack has been hard for me to justify to myself relative to the value as I understand it, so it'll be one RXP 430 and one manufacturer's 430. That's how it is in my Carenado A36 and it works OK.

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

This is an exceptional value,Flight 1 did a wonderful job on this aircraft.I Love it! For about the price I paid for yesterday's lunch I have a Beautiful Cardinal 177 in FSX!! Couldn't be Happier!! :)

Cheers!

All the nice comments forced me to buy this.. You should see how red my arm is from all the twisting it took. :Just Kidding:

 

For the price this is a great buy and if you're a on a low end system and worried about "Is this thing going to eat framerates?" The answer is no.. It's very light on resources.

 

The only thing that jumped out at me was how it flew.. Now mind you, I am no pilot, I am not experienced in real world flight dynamics and not complaining at all. I am just comparing the overall handling to other aircraft with flight models that I've seen commented on as "great" (RealAir, Berts work etc). It feels very one dimensional in its flight characteristics.. Right after the takeoff roll I let go of my yoke and the aircraft stay at the same exact pitch.. There seemed to be almost no need for a constant enforcement of deflection or trim. Push the yoke down. Let go.. The plane stayed at the pitch.. It's very close to being able to be completely trimmed out just by pitching the plane how you want with elevator and letting go at a wide window of speeds. After a bit it would very slowly respond. ie: If I pitched it up, let go, it would stay at that pitch then eventually very slowly begin to pitch back down.

 

Whether this is right or not I have no idea and still enjoyed flying it. Just comparing it to other GA I've flown it feels completely different in every aspect of flight.

+1

 

I have a fair bit of C177 time, and planes I have time in always get a second and third look when they become available, but the unique panel was one of several things that made the Cardinal a different plane to fly. I would've been OK (in fact more than OK) with modern avionics but... with the old panel dimensions and basic look and feel. Dang.

 

I'll probably still give this a shot. The price is right and Flight1's return policy makes at least giving things a try a no brainer.

 

In any case, thanks for the heads-up Ryan.

 

Scott

I agree. The Cardinal has a very distinctive panel configuration which this Flight 1 model ignores. It looks like they just pulled something together from the Cessna 172/182 parts bin. They really missed one of the most unique aspects of the 177.

I bought the Cardinal this afternoon and buyer beware - there are lots of bugs to be ironed out, although the plane flies very nicely. I don't plan on seeking a refund just yet since Flight1 are pretty good about getting patches out, but this feels like it was rushed out the door.

 

-turn coordinator is reversed (turning left shows a right turn on the gauge)... come on, how does this get through beta testing?

-default panel with FSX GPSes is wonky with two 430s, the top one never leaves the self test display

-green paint scheme has issues with the external visuals options, no pilot is shown by default, unless you check both pilot and passenger, in which case only the pilot is shown...

-panel flood lighting and gauge lighting basically doesn't work at all unless the dome light is also on

-bump mapping on the yokes is really bad, when the dome light is on it washes them out totally making them look like untextured polygons

-texture work is mediocre. It's not bad, but there's very little realism in the bump mapping or weathering, looks very plastic-y, but I knew that going in based on the screenshots.

 

On the bright side it has really nice flight modelling, and although I can understand the complaints about the panel not looking like a traditional Cardinal panel, it still looks very good and high quality, and 3d gauges are a plus. Good sound set also, although it doesn't make use of sound cones.

 

Hopefully Flight1 can iron some of these issues out, because if they were fixed this would be a new favorite for me!

-turn coordinator is reversed (turning left shows a right turn on the gauge)... come on, how does this get through beta testing?

There's no need to be insulting. No matter how effective the beta testing process, things sometimes get through. This is one malfunctioning instrument and it's a problem that's been documented. I can't promise you a fix, but I will tell you that it's already been noted.

-default panel with FSX GPSes is wonky with two 430s, the top one never leaves the self test display

I can't replicate this. The dual default GNS430 configuration works fine for me.

-green paint scheme has issues with the external visuals options, no pilot is shown by default, unless you check both pilot and passenger, in which case only the pilot is shown...

I can't replicate this one, and I have no idea how this could be related to the choice of livery. The aux panel gauge saves one configuration for the C177B, regardless of livery.

-panel flood lighting and gauge lighting basically doesn't work at all unless the dome light is also on

It works for me just fine, with and without the dome light.

-bump mapping on the yokes is really bad, when the dome light is on it washes them out totally making them look like untextured polygons

I can tell you exactly how this one slipped past me in the beta testing process: The first thing I do when I enter the cockpit is make the yokes invisible. They get in the way while I'm flying. I don't fly with the dome light on, either, unless the instrument lights don't work...which they do for me, so there you have it. I apologize, and I'll recommend that this be fixed.

-texture work is mediocre. It's not bad, but there's very little realism in the bump mapping or weathering, looks very plastic-y, but I knew that going in based on the screenshots.

No comment.

 

I see you've posted here: http://www.simforums.com/forums/cessna-177b-cardinal-ii_forum48.html so I'll take the conversation there.

There's no need to be insulting. No matter how effective the beta testing process, things sometimes get through.

 

It didn't sound like molleh was being insulting, he as a valid point. Everyone accepts that things can slip through during testing, but the turn coordinator is a big deal. Verifying its correct operation is part of the taxi checklist every competent pilot performs before a flight, and it would certainly be a glaring issue during instrument flight. Sorry, but there's no excuse, someone dropped the ball on this one (pardon the pun).

 

I can tell you exactly how this one slipped past me in the beta testing process: The first thing I do when I enter the cockpit is make the yokes invisible. They get in the way while I'm flying. I don't fly with the dome light on, either, unless the instrument lights don't work...which they do for me, so there you have it. I apologize, and I'll recommend that this be fixed.

 

Isn't the point of "beta testing" to actually test things and make sure everything is working? If not it's just "beta playing around."

Sorry, but there's no excuse, someone dropped the ball on this one (pardon the pun).

 

Have to disagree. Mistakes are made. Even PMDG's 737 has had a couple of updates since it was first released and I know they do extensive beta testing with several aircraft experts. It happens. The fact that things will be fixed in an update is all that matters to me.

 

Jim

That's the thing......with Flight1, you KNOW these things will be fixed!

That's the thing......with Flight1, you KNOW these things will be fixed!

 

Exactly, and that is why I am confident in my purchase! And when all is said and done you STILL get the money back guarantee, which is just awesome any way you look at it.

Anyone having issues with click spots not functioning on the HSI (CRS and HDG) and the baro adjust knob (plus a few others)????

Have to disagree. Mistakes are made. Even PMDG's 737 has had a couple of updates since it was first released and I know they do extensive beta testing with several aircraft experts. It happens.

 

Disagree with what? As I said: "Everyone accepts that things can slip through during testing..." It sounds like we agree on that point.

 

What I don't agree with is molleh being called "insulting" for questioning the thoroughness of a beta testing process that misses one of the primary flight instruments malfunctioning in a big way. That's not a minor "slip through," that's a colossal oversight, and his comment was entirely fair and valid.

 

The fact that things will be fixed in an update is all that matters to me.

 

I can't promise you a fix, but I will tell you that it's already been noted.

 

Good luck.

Wing,

 

From my position as a beta tester, I could never and would never promise a fix unless I had permission from one of the developers to do so. All I can do is inform them of the problems I become aware of. When it comes to fixes, I don't think luck enters into it, particularly with Flight1.

 

Reaching further back, I withdraw my "insulting" remark. Molly has shown herself to be genuinely interested in solutions and not merely antagonistic. In many forums, including this one, there is often a general tone of negativity, and it is easy to leap to the conclusion that a poster who asks such a question is only trying to stir up trouble. Leap to that conclusion is what I did, quite incorrectly, and I regret doing so.

 

Molly, you have my sincerest apology.

I'm saving my money for what will no doubt be the ultimate high-wing Cessna addon. The RealAir Simulations 172.

I'm saving my money for what will no doubt be the ultimate high-wing Cessna addon. The RealAir Simulations 172.

 

I have no doubt the RA 172 will be great......but its not a 177.

 

There are some rather large differences between the two....not least the constant speed prop and higher cruise speed.

 

Besides, I think F1 have the FDE right on the money with this release. It just feels right.