The Must Fix List

[lthendrix 25]

I bought this as a comparison to flight ones t 182 t and I must say that right now I am favoring flight ones model more ..

g1000 is fully functional! but good for carenado to try

[Guest BeaverDriver]

@Rueben,

As for the FPL page issue, Carenado emailed me back and said due to limitations in FSX, it is not possible to queue more than one waypoint at a time.

 

I'm not sure what you mean here, or what Carenado are referring to. Is the question that you can't put in more than 1 WP at a time (in other words, you can enter the next WP you want to fly to, but not anything beyond that, or have I got this mixed up?

 

Thanks.

[HawkDsl 50]

SIngle and double pilot models should be available in all paint textures........

I dont have the plane, but this bit is easy... whatever plane has two pilots will have "model=2p" in the aircraft.cfg file (what they use in the Baron 58, T182 may have different names, but should be easy to figure out)). "model= " (or blank) is usually single pilot. You can copy a planes texture file, and past it into a temp file. rename it with 2p or 1p in the title, and edit the aircraft.cfg and add it like a new livery. then copy/paste livery in the T182 folder.

 

I hope I was clear... I can do a better job of it later if needed.

[Arklight1 140]

From Carenado? Where did you get that impression?

 

In all fairness, not many besides F1 have modelled a rather in-depth glass cockpit for a GA aircraft. The RealAir aircraft also use modified versions of the default FSX GPS, IIRC. The only difference being RealAir offers direct replacement functionality with RXP add-ons. For what it's worth, I think F1 is one of the only groups who have tackled "complex" avionics in GA aircraft (and perhaps Eaglesoft and DA) for FS9/FSX.

 

The "Carenado never does this..." posts are a little silly when you take into account most developers do the same or similar to what they do....Carenado just seems to catch the most (all) flak for it. lol

[smokeyupahead 6]

I really want this bird!

I've been holding off from buying the F1 one because I just love the Carenado textures better!

 

 

David DD

[austindk 5]

^ Its pretty much buy the Carenado for the modeling, FDE, textures, and visual aspects, or buy the Flight 1 for its wonderful G1000. Anyone put any thought to retrofitting the F1 G1000 in the carenado model, only for those who own both of course.

 

*EDIT: Also I have come to notice that the transponder is non-functional. I attempt to change it but for controllers who play online, my squawk code seems to remain VFR.

[tttocs 301]

The "Carenado never does this..." posts are a little silly when you take into account most developers do the same or similar to what they do....Carenado just seems to catch the most (all) flak for it. lol

 

I agree in the general case, but not in this specific one.

 

Carenado does seem to get called on things more than others, as in the case of GPS implementations. The likes of RealAir and Milviz also live with the default FSX GPS limitations, and many of us actually prefer to go the RXP route on these. So long as RXP integration is good (and Carenado's usually is) everything's actually pretty even here.

 

To me the curious thing with this plane is that Carenado went down the road of doing a G1000 plane, knowing that another vendor has already done the same aircraft with a very good G1000 implementation that worked outside of FSX limits, and there's no 3rd party G1000 alternative for those who want more - though Bert's RXP workaround at least gets some of the functionality.

 

To be fair, as pointed out in another thread, Carenado's plane is cheaper and the textures are typical Carenado quality.

 

Scott

[V1VrV2 44]

To me the curious thing with this plane is that Carenado went down the road of doing a G1000 plane, knowing that another vendor has already done the same aircraft with a very good G1000 implementation that worked outside of FSX limits, and there's no 3rd party G1000 alternative for those who want more - though Bert's RXP workaround at least gets some of the functionality.

 

I agree, Scott. I had the feeling that Carenado would basically "dress up" the default GPS functionality and we'd be left with something that was lacking in the simulation capabilities a lot (but not all) of us expect. Not to take away from anything Carenado has developed in regard to the T182T since I'm sure it was an immense amount of work, but I'm really disappointed to hear that it's lacking the things that make the G1000 fun to fly. Perhaps even worse news for me is what this likely means for the upcoming SR22 with Perspective. I had high hopes for that plane but I'm guessing it will fall short in the realm of avionics functionality. We've all been spoiled by RXP and its nearly analogous representation of the real Garmin units.

 

That said, there IS an alternative 3rd party, stand-alone G1000 from Mindstar that might work... has anyone tried that?

[tttocs 301]

That said, there IS an alternative 3rd party, stand-alone G1000 from Mindstar that might work... has anyone tried that?

 

Didn't realize that! Thanks, I'll have to take a look.

 

Scott

[Ruben1123 0]

Mindstar cannot be implemented.

 

As for the cirrus, I was looking forward to this too. What a shame. I wish they'd get with the times.

[V1VrV2 44]

Mindstar cannot be implemented.

Did you try it or is this just theory?

[HawkDsl 50]

Carenado does seem to get called on things more than others, as in the case of GPS implementations.

 

I believe that's because their graphics are second to none. NO-ONE is even close to the Carenado quality... So natural reasoning is that the rest should be on par with the body and interior shop.

 

 

I was watching one of the vids posted, and as the user panned around... i looked at the seat belts they put in the new plane... i mean... come on! Thery're just seat belts! Dammed if they don't look real as hell though... They got someone who LOVES graphics design working for them.

[Gregg_Seipp 571]

I bought this as a comparison to flight ones t 182 t and I must say that right now I am favoring flight ones model more ..

g1000 is fully functional! but good for carenado to try

 

One thing I'm curious about is what manifold pressure the F1 model uses for 1 notch of flaps, prop full forward, 90 KIAS on final. This version seems to need around 19ish? The Carenado C182 needs around 13 or so and the few references I've found online for RW aircraft is that the RW C182 needs about 12. Seems like the flaps on this model have a strong effect.

 

One thing that is *very* nice about the Carenado model is that adding flaps doesn't bloom the aircraft and you only need very small trim adjustments as you add each. Very much like the real world aircraft. I have 6 hours in the RW C182 but it's been so long ago that I don't remember the manifold pressure setting for final at all.

[Gregg_Seipp 571]

Here's my bug list. Some of these are already mentioned...just confirming that I have the same bug:

• The MFD doesn't come on when you turn on the master switch as per the checklist. I don't know (minor expletive) about glass cockpits so it could be me but it should follow the checklist.
  
• Low voltage indicator annunciator? Don't see it.
  
• Avionics bus switches are connected. This may be by design but doesn't follow their checklist.
  
• Standby battery does not turn on PFD
  
• Magnetic compass doesn't work
  

G1000 (taking me a while to go through this but here's what I've found so far):

• pressing DME turns on the DME info window but pressing it again doesn't turn it off (as per the manual).
  
• XPDR backspace doesn't work.
  
• Cursor control on the unit is difficult. I think it's, in part, because of lags while the unit is setting up to do something. Also, the cursor locations are difficult to find. Sometimes you have a hand cursor and you use your mouse wheel but it doesn't respond. It seems to want you to also find a place where you have a + or - in addition to the hand. The + and - places are small.
  

That's as far as I got so far. The cursor controls make testing the G1000 very difficult.

 

I wanted to say that Carenado has done a better job of documentation on this aircraft than I've seen in any of their others and that is both encouraging and appreciated. As for the items you can't do because it's not modelled, it might be a good idea to gray them out. For example, you can't check the stall warning since there doesn't seem to be a stall vane visually modeled.

[Ruben1123 0]

One thing I'm curious about is what manifold pressure the F1 model uses for 1 notch of flaps, prop full forward, 90 KIAS on final. This version seems to need around 19ish? The Carenado C182 needs around 13 or so and the few references I've found online for RW aircraft is that the RW C182 needs about 12. Seems like the flaps on this model have a strong effect.

 

One thing that is *very* nice about the Carenado model is that adding flaps doesn't bloom the aircraft and you only need very small trim adjustments as you add each. Very much like the real world aircraft. I have 6 hours in the RW C182 but it's been so long ago that I don't remember the manifold pressure setting for final at all.

 

Actually, I disagree. Adding flaps in the real plane balloons it a lot!! Especially on a touch and go when you retract the flaps form 5-up you have to pull up a lot!