Hi,

 

I am training on a C172. Was wondering, if there was any really good Cessna 172's for X-plane?

 

I don't own the newest X-P but if a good one (FDE is the most important thing) exists, no problem in getting the sim.

 

Tero

IMHO: Carenado C172

Actually I don't find the default C172 that bad. At the org there is a X-Plane Flight School model that is pretty good in the flight model. Jason Chandler has a good C172, here, http://www.c74.net/xplane/_aa_special_editions.html

 

The aforementioned Carenado is good. I own the planes mentioned and like all of them. I do have several hundred hours in a C172N and a few hours in a C172R.

 

I find in almost all flight models there are some elements that one could find fault with most seem to me to be a bit optimistic in there climb rate, but even so, I believe one can get good practice with about any of them. For instance all of them if you bank, you must put back pressure in or the nose will dip down, so you do get the training for the proper coordination that one needs. Of course you don't have the feedback from your stick or yoke emulating the forces of air on the actual control surfaces so none of them are going to teach you the proper pressure you have to apply. I find even so that in X-Plane and using the CH Flightsim Yoke and CH pedals, to get a good approximation of the forces needed. I find it easier to trim for pitch in X-Plane a little easier than it does in FSX, although that may be just me. A lot of these things are pretty subjective in nature.

 

I would suggest downloading the demo and spending a few hours or weeks using the default C172, then if you decide to invest in it, get a payware model. As an aside the demo will take a payware model and run it as well as the full blown payed sim will, you are just limited to the Seattle area scenery and to 15 minutes of flying time. Spend some time with the demo t learn the systems and quirk of the sim.

 

Good luck,

Actually I don't find the default C172 that bad.

 

I feel the same. I've used the one for XP9 quite often. I prefer it's virtual cockpit over the 2D. With a yoke/stick & rudder pedals, it's quite realistic in getting from point A to B.

Hi Donald,

 

Thanks for the information.

 

I am on my final hrs of the training. One thing that I wanted to try at home would be x-wind landings.

 

I have decent hardware (PFC yoke, good pedals, Cessna trimwheel etc.), and have had good results with Realair C172. In FSX that is. It's really a decent simulation of the real thing, for the most part. The reason I am asking in the X-P side is because the RA new Skyhawk is not yet released. And I am not entirely satisfied with how the FSX models crosswind and the control inputs' effects on the airplane.

 

What I would like to know is that how well does the X-Plane 10 (or older) fare when it comes to cross controlled flight dynamics? Compared to FSX, also ?

 

Tero

Hi Donald,

 

Thanks for the information.

 

I am on my final hrs of the training. One thing that I wanted to try at home would be x-wind landings.

 

I have decent hardware (PFC yoke, good pedals, Cessna trimwheel etc.), and have had good results with Realair C172. In FSX that is. It's really a decent simulation of the real thing, for the most part. The reason I am asking in the X-P side is because the RA new Skyhawk is not yet released. And I am not entirely satisfied with how the FSX models crosswind and the control inputs' effects on the airplane.

 

What I would like to know is that how well does the X-Plane 10 (or older) fare when it comes to cross controlled flight dynamics? Compared to FSX, also ?

 

 

A few years back, I posted numerous pics of MSFS & crosswind landings. It may have even been the RealAir modeling. Never the less, they were quite authentic.............landing on one wheel & all of that. BTW---- cross controlling with RealAir planes is very good. It's something they specialize in. I suppose someone else can give you the XP side of things.

Hi Larry,

 

Yes, it works quite well in the RA C172. Better than in anything else. With 25kt+ direct crosswind you start to run out of rudder, exactly like in real life. Only thing is that in slow speeds, very close to runway there seems to be a some kind of very thin layer of much less wind than say 100-200ft above, where you need to take most of the bank out momentarily. This does not happen in real life. What's also nicely modelled is that the rudder will start to lose its effectiveness when you near the landing speed, ie. close to stall. And the nose will start to weathervane a little just as you sit her down on one leg. On ground, aileron into the wind produces more drag to downwind wing, and assists in keeping the nose from turning towards the wind. In all, it works well, but it's not perfect.

 

Tero

I suppose someone else can give you the XP side of things.

 

Well, all I can coment is on the AS-K21, and I do find it rather realistic, both under crosswinds and when performing fwd slips to lose height rapidly without gainning to much speed... Running out of aileron on a full rudder slip is also realistically modelled on the default AS-K21 in X-Plane10 :-)

I have found this C-172 SP Widescreen HD (Steam Gauges) to be a very good aircraft.

 

Find it here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=12118

 

John

One thing that I wanted to try at home would be x-wind landings.

 

One can hardly get better than a RealAir flight model.

 

I just took the default C172SP up with a 15 knot right quartering crosswind, ie.(the 4unway 174 degrees a 15 knot wind at 219 degrees. The default plane held the runway with about half left rudder to keep from weather vaneing but after takeoff held right down the runway with the nose turned 45 degrees right of the runway, which is about right. On final I could hold the runway line with about half left rudder and a bit less than half right bank, with my CH Flightsim yoke and CH pedals. I found it to be a very good exercise, the plane would keep a 500 ft per min. sink rate with 1700 rpm, which in most of the 172 I have flown was pretty close. I haven't flown a SP model in real life, the newest I have flow was a C172R model, which was brand new at the time, 1998 I believe. Since then I have flown mostly N models.

 

Many of the models do not have good ground handling characteristics in wind on the ground, but most are acceptable in the air. The ground characteristics can be adjusted in Plane Maker if one wants to put in the time to learn. :smile:

 

All in all, I believe that the default will help in training mode. I don't really get where some people think these flight models are that bad. i teally think some have another agenda that they are not sharing with the rest of us.

 

Now having said all of that, let me repeat, one can hardly get better than a RealAir flight model. I wish they would start making X-Plane models.

I have found this C-172 SP Widescreen HD (Steam Gauges) to be a very good aircraft.

 

Find it here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=12118

 

John

 

Thanks for the heads up on the updated panel, and I'll give that a try.