Has anyone tried the new Tupolev 154M by IGFly? IF so what do you think? From the info on the website, it looks like a nice add-on.

Hmmmm....at $33 it wants to be something special.Alas, $33 with no VC, its "promised" as a free addon, way outta my pocket.Shame, I like Russian metalDan.

My initial impression is mixed. The model looks good, the cockpit looks good, the flight model feels good (great heavy feel, well trimmable) and the custom Autopilot is certainly a highlight so far. Very smooth, also the pitch modes are very stable. Also after provocation I couldn't manage to put it in any hickup state (often seen in "western" payware).Engine startup sequence and sound work as advertized and so far besides a minor graphic glitch I haven't found any bugs (something to get used to after the SSW bug festival :D).Some nice ideas, e.g. switching between cockpit views and wing views in flight.Big minus point for me and certainly not expected for the price is the lack of navigation systems. The heart of the Tu-154 navigation, the NVU navigation is almost not present (reduced to loading an FS flight plan and switching it on). Operating this system and the connected TKS-P2 with it gyrocompasses and gyromagnetic stuff is a big fun part in a Russian Airliner and is missing. But it is hard to operate and from this point of view the IGFLY is better accessible than it's freeware counterpart, the Project Tupolev Tu-154B2.Imagine you have a 747-200 with INS, but reduced to loading an FS flight plan into it and just switching it on - that would be a comparable situation. The big fun to operate the INS manually would be gone.Additionally there is a switch for the Bendix KLN-90 GPS in the panel, but it's not implemented. You simply have to use the Microsoft default GPS.Although not exactly the same model, the Tu-154B2 by Project Tupolev has much more to offer regarding systems and a more dense sound atmosphere with far more voice callouts. But again - more Russian "as real as it gets" also means hard to operate, so the IGFLY version is definitely easier to use (engl. manual + tutorial flight + engl. tootips available).If there wouldn't be the freeware alternative, which has certainly set the measure extremely high (so many details and finesse, it IMO even eats ALL western payware for breakfast), I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the IGFLY product. So if it's really worth the $$, everyone shall decide for himself. To sum up what is not more than a first impression : The pure flight part of the "M" is VERY good, the systems part leaves something to scratch the head. Tu-154 fans like me - use both ;)Mike

Its really to bad I dont understand Rusky the panel is hard to comprehend.An English panel would be nice.Other than that it looks really good.

>> Its really to bad I dont understand Rusky the panel is hard to comprehendNot necessary to learn Russian. There are english tooltips on every switch and instrument, together with english manual and example flight tutorial it's really easy.Mike

Just judging by the screenshots it doesn't look as impressive as the freeware one really, and if theres no VC (which the freeware one has in spades), I can't see spending 30 plus $ on it...

I've tried the freeware version but can't seem to get over the gauge errors. Oh well.

The freeware version (154B2, with VC) available here at avsim is by far not as accurate as the IGFLY Tu-154M. The freeware Tu-154B2 I was talking about was the one by Project Tupolev : tu154.avsim.ru (seems temporarily unavailable because of problems at avsim.ru).The more I use the IGFLY model, the more I like it, probably because the feeling and sensation of big jet flight is very well done.They will release around 80 liveries and a VC. And they plan other stuff like weather radar and TCAS. Who knows, maybe we'll also see "real" NVU in the future.Mike

Thanks Mike. Just purchased and downloading now.

I've got to say, so far this thing is incredible. The panel detail is extremely well done as is the model. I think money well spent.

It sounds good because I am not sure how long it is going to take SSW to create theirs :)Are the Flight Dynamics good?

It's Russian aircraft Nirvana lately. I'm am about ready to retire all of my western airframes to the desert!

>> I'm am about ready to retire all of my western airframes to the desert!Yes, me too :DNice little cityhopper you are displaying. Can you tell more about the Yak-40 ?

George,Do you have anymore to report after having it for a few more days? Regards,Trevor

Trevor,Been flying it pretty much every time I get a chance. My opinion just keeps getting higher on this add-on! Just downloaded and installed the latest patch (second one) that corrected some additional minor bugs. None of the bugs have been showstoppers. These guys seem to work 24/7 on this aircraft. It is really, really good. Graphics, panels, flight model, everything. The plane does not have a virtual cockpit yet but that is coming, and the way these guys are supporting this product I feel very confident that it's not an empty promise. The cockpit is all labeled in Russian but all of the tooltips are English, and EVERYTHING has a tool tip. The manual and tutorial are well done even though the English may not be "perfect". It very easy to understand. I really can't say enough good things about the package. In my opinion it ranks up there with the PMDG, RFPB2 etc. as far as quality and support.