Coolsky DC-9 Released!

[Nyxx 6,994]

Nothing wrong with the AP unless it's rubbish because it's very old nothing like a NGX, what you get works perfect and IMO is more fun to use than a modem AP

[slait 169]

It's not polar the points he makes are facts.

 

Not in my experience, which in my book makes it opinion.

[William J.S.S 173]

It works as it should, autopilot wise. This may be another case of what I see in their support forums. People are wanting INS, FMC, and all the tech in a bird they released to be a classic. Lol

 

And ya, looking at the pictures I posted not much of the plane, sorry for that. I didn't really know where to start as the sky and land looked good also, not enough room for it all. I will upload a few more so show how pretty she is.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[747-fan 19]

Looking forward to that William, great!

 

I guess a lot of us fence-sitters are just that because there are a lot of interesting addons on the horizon nowadays. Aerosoft's advanced Airbus, Majestic Q400 and the PMDG 777. I for one fear that this'll sort of "drown out", which could be why Espen has released now and not waited until he's ironed out some code to make it less resource hungry. I'm just speculating, it does seem release worthy from what I gather. I'd love to hear some official word on that whole FPS issue.

 

Still, we could always buy and just add a notice to our calendars 29 days from now?

[realpilotsimpilot 11]

Gents, I'm a fence sitter. I'm flipping through the manuals and it looks good. I'm a US pilot so I know navigation and I do like these older planes.

 

I'm curious if anyone out there is using SP2 and not Acceleration? I'm on SP2 and not Acceleration and sometimes I have problems with planes because of that (e.g., CaptainSim 727). Anyone who is using SP2 can comment about the performance I would love to hear your experience. My system is a first generation i7 running at 4.0 I handle most add-ons pretty easily, with a few hiccups here and there.

[jbrett2634 24]

I returned it because of FPS issues and because I couldn't read the overhead even with the 4096 option. Flight1 said it would be around 5 days to process. I thought it would be more of a hassle than it was to return, but overall it is a very easy process.

 

I was really looking forward to the DC9 because of the steam gauges and old-school nav. If it wasn't for the FPS issues, I would still be flying it.

[xplanery 250]

Gents, I'm a fence sitter. I'm flipping through the manuals and it looks good. I'm a US pilot so I know navigation and I do like these older planes.

 

I'm curious if anyone out there is using SP2 and not Acceleration? I'm on SP2 and not Acceleration and sometimes I have problems with planes because of that (e.g., CaptainSim 727). Anyone who is using SP2 can comment about the performance I would love to hear your experience. My system is a first generation i7 running at 4.0 I handle most add-ons pretty easily, with a few hiccups here and there.

I do, well FPS is a bit lower than with other aircraft in VC, however still completely flyable and enjoyable. Had to change texture max load to 4096 to make overhead less blurry.

 

Overall I like it very much

[froogle 59]

Hmm.

 

I grabbed it this morning and like others I'm having some pretty nasty FPS issues. NGX gets me around 40 or 50 in most areas, and I'm getting just under 20 with the DC-9. I haven't really had a chance to dig into why just yet, but I shall later before I throw up a video first impressions on the frooglesim channel (YouTube).

 

But yeah, there are some FPS quirks

 

Pete Wright/Froogle

(The PC Pilot one)

 

PS - it didn't want to even think about running in Prepar3d, just FYI

 

Pete

[WestAir 2,533]

Purchased it, did a few flights, followed some tutorials, and played with some of the failures. My overall opinion:

• Frames are worse than the PMDG 737NGX for me. I get about the same frames as I did with the PMDG MD-11.
  
• The system modelling is insanely impressive. An engine fire can flood the cabin with smoke and stop you from seeing anything in the flight deck - if you open the window, though, the smoke clears a little. That's pretty cool.
  
• For those asking about refund options, Flight1 will not argue with you, or debate with you, if you request a refund. The money typically hits your account in one business week - this is from experience after I returned several previous F1 purchases over the past few years.
  
• For those who are a fan of FS2Crew, this simulation has a pretty nifty crew modelling technique that has audible checklists, comments from the copilot, ground crew voices, etc. It's not as fluid as FS2CREW, but it's pretty good.
  
• The one regret I have about the product is the simulation of ground physics. In the Flight1 ATR-72, or the PMDG-737, the aircraft can taxi on idle thrust. You need almost 60% thrust just to get moving in this bird - it's my biggest pet peeve with flight sims because it's the biggest immersion breaker for me. Some payware companies can get around the increased ground-roll friction in FS, like PMDG - but CoolSky didn't bother to try, and as a result you'll be taxiing at 60% thrust just to maintain 20knots.
  
• I would recommend this product to a simmer that wants realism and stability. There aren't any CTD's I've come across; the bird isn't unstable, and it's the best reincarnation of the DC-9 to hit the shelves. If you can overlook the higher-than-average FPS drain and the unrealistic ground-friction issues, this product is definitely worth $50. I like it more than the Leonardo Maddog.
  

[Ben Cap 89]

If you can overlook the higher-than-average FPS drain and the unrealistic ground-friction issues,

 

That would be pretty difficult for me... lol

[Nyxx 6,994]

 

 

That would be pretty difficult for me... lol

Lol

[WestAir 2,533]

That would be pretty difficult for me... lol

 

True, but in Coolsky's defense almost every aircraft for FS has ground roll friction problems. I can guarantee you a 767-300ER can taxi 1000 feet on idle thrust, but the Level-D 767 can't. I've only ever really seen the F1 ATR and the PMDG 737 overcome that problem.

 

As for FPS - I don't have an argument for that one.

[ZachLW 37]

Here is a few shots I took in the past few days

 

 

 

Hi Jesse,

 

Beautiful shots, but please refer to the screenshot rules found here: http://forum.avsim.n...shot_rules.html

 

I'm not calling you out. There were just a few other great shots from some members posted in here I deleted.

 

Thanks guys

[realpilotsimpilot 11]

Purchased it, did a few flights, followed some tutorials, and played with some of the failures. My overall opinion:

• Frames are worse than the PMDG 737NGX for me. I get about the same frames as I did with the PMDG MD-11.
  
• For those who are a fan of FS2Crew, this simulation has a pretty nifty crew modelling technique that has audible checklists, comments from the copilot, ground crew voices, etc. It's not as fluid as FS2CREW, but it's pretty good.
  

 

Ken, thanks. This is helpful. I think I'm going to give this a go when I have a second. Can you explain how the F/O works? It isn't clear from the manual you can download. Is it interactive, like buttons, or does he just do things triggered by events?

[bendead 1,094]

could you explain why the autopilot is rubbish?

With a 30-40 angle of capture and 50nm DME, it's often take 6 to 8 turn to be on a radial, "lots of overbanking". So right now, I just disconnect the aileron servos and intercept them manually.

 

But for me that the way this old autopilot should behave, and this make the DC9 fun to fly. ^_^

 

And what do you mean by "just VOR even when they're not working"?

I have a few stations, that just don't work in FSX.

 

If someone could try the LHI 114.30, on Lord Howe island.