In my limited experience, it was the constant (albeit gentle - unless it was quite windy) motion of the plane in the (not always clean) air that surprised me the most when flying for the first time after using FS for many years.

 

No, I didn't/don't have to make "constant corrections" to the control surfaces, but the plane (at least the one I fly in) does not usually just sit there once trimmed..

 

I was simply stating my own observations.

 

 

jake

 

I fully concur, jake. It's your rear, head and eyes that feel/see this random motion most of the time as your plane flies through the air. Therefore I always add turbulence (FSUIPC, AS2012) and ALSO set up and fine tune multiple randomized oscillation generators in EZDOK camera for each plane. The latter works best by far for me to simulate the same wobbly feeling that you get in a smaller propeller plane. Works even better in combination with the turbulence and wind from AS2012, both on the ground and in the air. It is a little tricky and will take you to dig and experiment with EZDOK, but the result is extremely satisfying. Helps me enjoy RA's Lancair Legacy, which I've flown exclusively since the purchase. In combination with the above the experience is just awesome. Thanks to all involved.

 

Cheers,

Dirk.

How can you put Realair and Carenado in the same sentence ?

 

My Carenado fleet has been fantastic.. after some bug fixes. By far my two favorite manufactures are RealAir and Carenado.

 

For me personally, I only like to fly what normal PPL pilots will be able to fly with a reasonable training expense. Single Pilot, with the exception of type rating like a King Air 350. For the most part, Carenado and RealAir are the only players in that field.

 

Would RealAir build a TBM 850 with a G1000 cockpit? Probably not, as they are the king of realistic 3d steam gauges. I want new RW planes too... and glass cockpits are standard now. So I own and fly both.

 

I like both steam and glass, so that's not an issue... but I sometimes find it ironic that I'm flying a 1983 Beech Duke on a 2,000 dollar simulator with the latest electronics.

BTW, you guys may love the new legacy, but wait til RealAir does the Evolution!

BTW, you guys may love the new legacy, but wait til RealAir does the Evolution!

 

Now that will be cool.

For me personally, I only like to fly what normal PPL pilots will be able to fly with a reasonable training expense. Single Pilot, with the exception of type rating like a King Air 350. For the most part, Carenado and RealAir are the only players in that field.

 

That's an interesting criterion for choosing virtual planes. Me, I like to fly planes I can't fly in RL as well.

 

But I have to disagree with you about RealAir and Carenado being the only players in the field of general single-engine GA aircraft. Bay Towers' fantastic RV-7 comes to mind, as does a couple of great airplanes from Ant (the Eaglet is my favorite), and KC's Seabee and even the Evektor Sportstar are both planes of the type you describe, and are great. A2A's Cub is superb! And Aerosoft have quite a few like the Beaver, and the Dimona, and the Katana. I'd probably throw Sibwing's Bird Dog in as well, although that's more of a warbird, I suppose. You get the idea....

Thanks Griphos for the heads up. I was unaware of Ant. I should add that I also prefer planes that can haul the family around. If the legacy was by anyone else, I probably wouldn't have bought it. Adding that all up, I have concluded that the perfect personal aircraft is the TBM 850. 300+ knots, Flight Levels, TTOW, range, G1000, style, etc. Truly, nothing is in it's class. Way to go French! It's a shame that the Malibu doesn't have similar performance... but it is 2 million less. The next closest thing is the Avanti II, but it would have field limits, and with two PT6's, is twice the price.

 

If I had stupid money... I can see a strip in the back yard, and a hanger with a TBM, G58, and an Evolution.

 

Until then, I'll be happy with the graphics ones.

fully concur, jake. It's your rear, head and eyes that feel/see this random motion most of the time as your plane flies through the air. Therefore I always add turbulence (FSUIPC, AS2012) and ALSO set up and fine tune multiple randomized oscillation generators in EZDOK camera for each plane. The latter works best by far for me to simulate the same wobbly feeling that you get in a smaller propeller plane. Works even better in combination with the turbulence and wind from AS2012, both on the ground and in the air. It is a little tricky and will take you to dig and experiment with EZDOK, but the result is extremely satisfying. Helps me enjoy RA's Lancair Legacy, which I've flown exclusively since the purchase. In combination with the above the experience is just awesome. Thanks to all involved.

 

This is something that my wife and I have often talked about, on our morning Sunday Brunch flights. It's almost a joke, because we compare it to flight simulation. We're approaching 200 mph across the ground in a supposeably figity Van's RV6 (which isn't known for Cessna 172 stability by any means)......and she say's "were hardly even moving". And that's how it is! If you didn't see the ground, you'd think you were sitting still. It's morning, the air is cooler, and the "motion" is rather nill. You can count on it! But after breakfast, especially in the summer, you can count on getting bounced around, to the point of being irratating. And of course, both of us have been in rough turbulence numerous times. Point is...........I'd never concur, that there is random motion "most of the time". It's just NOT true!

 

L.Adamson

...... It's morning, the air is cooler, and the "motion" is rather nill. You can count on it! But after breakfast, especially in the summer, you can count on getting bounced around, to the point of being irratating. And of course, both of us have been in rough turbulence numerous times. Point is...........I'd never concur, that there is random motion "most of the time". It's just NOT true!

 

L.Adamson

 

I concur Larry. In some circles the myth persists that small aircraft somehow create random movements of their own, or do unpredictable things when you move the stick. I've never known this whether it is a glider or powered aircraft. Any odd movement I've ever experienced has always been down to my piloting rather than the aircraft. Even the most basic GA aeroplance is actually quite well harmonised, and only a duff pilot causes duff movements! It can get a bit bouncy on hot days with low pressure however.

Interesting discussion.

 

I took a friend from work flying last weekend. She is pretty scared of flying in large commercial aircraft but is now so fed up with not being able to go on foreign holidays (without resorting to ships!) that she asked me to take her up in our PA28 to see whether it would help with her flying phobia.

 

I took her with me when I performed the "A check" on the aircraft and explained that we may feel the "bumps" a little more if we encountered any turbulence and that the noise level would be alot higher than in a commercial aircraft.She was a little nervous until we were airborne but once in the cruise at 2000 ft she said she was amazed how "smooth" the aircraft flew.

 

She explained that because the PA28 was so small she expected it "to get thrown around in the wind". I explained that despite its size the PA28 is a very stable aircraft whether in or out of turbulence.This is part of the reason I love the JustFlight Flying Club X PA28. It isn't much to look at inside but the flight dynamics are spot-on. The REalAir Lancair also appears very stable in the cruise but alot more responsive in roll when encountering turbulence.

 

And the good news is my friend has finally booked a weekend in Paris flying from Birmingham! I guess I didn't frighten her too much then :P

.....This is part of the reason I love the JustFlight Flying Club X PA28. It isn't much to look at inside but the flight dnamics are spot-on.

 

That's nice to hear. I did the FDE for the Warrior for Flying Club FS9 and I assume they ported it over with a couple of tweaks for Flying Club X. You've made my day!

That's nice to hear. I did the FDE for the Warrior for Flying Club FS9 and I assume they ported it over with a couple of tweaks for Flying Club X. You've made my day!

 

I should have known you were responsible. You are the FDE magician Rob! Flying that JF Warrior is so much fun. It is my add-on of choice when teaching PPL students the basics of flight.

 

Eagerly awaiting a 172 ;)

But after breakfast, especially in the summer, you can count on getting bounced around, to the point of being irratating. And of course, both of us have been in rough turbulence numerous times. Point is...........I'd never concur, that there is random motion "most of the time". It's just NOT true!

 

L.Adamson

 

In FSX you have to choose between no motion at all or some motion. You can smooth it out, fine tune, make subtle, regular, random however you like. I find this way closer to my real flying experience than fully smoothed out to nil with the current FSUIPC and ASE.

 

It's just hard to explain if you haven't really spent time on the 3 effect sections in EZDOK. It really makes a great difference for me. This is an example:

 

 

This one here is more bumpy due to interaction with AS2012:

 

 

Cheers,

My Lancair Legacy is tuned to fly much smoother, but will need to capture it yet. Anyhow, I love this plane, very good job, RealAir.

 

Cheers,

Dirk.

I only watched the first video... but there's no way things were that bumpy when I flew the Warrior... Maybe the 162 is bumpy but I always remember the high wing cessnas being "uber" stable. The aftermarket effects in that video are excessive. Even the short field takeoff I did at a strip a few years ago in a G1 SR22 was smooth, and the runway was old and cracking.

 

If you want to have a realistic feeling track IR is the best I've experienced so far... the natural head movements are essentially what I've felt when I flew irl. But to have additional "bouncy" effects seems overkill imho.

I only watched the first video... but there's no way things were that bumpy when I flew the Warrior...

 

The point is you can make it much smoother however you like. That was C162 and I experimented with it.

 

See Cirrus here, note the constant trembling. I know from my experience in the areas where I used to fly it was bumpy most of the time, including the ground airfield.

 

Cheers,

Dirk.

 

http://www.youtube.c...1&v=Y6f6KOAXSqo

 

In some circles the myth persists that small aircraft somehow create random movements of their own, or do unpredictable things when you move the stick. I've never known this whether it is a glider or powered aircraft.

 

I haven't heard about the myth, but the real video of Cirrus demonstrates better what I was trying to achieve with some random motions in EZDOK and I think what jake was referring to. Pls see the video of Cirrus SR20 above.

 

Cheers,

Dirk.