Tri-star coming soon

[audiohavoc 24]

Is there a manual available before purchase?

 

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk HD

[xplanery 250]

LeeL, on 27 Mar 2013 - 15:59, said:

Thanks for the info.

 

How are the rest of the systems?

 

Lee

I think in terms of systems it's mostly kind a bit lite version, many switches do not seem to be modeled, however it has some systems that lite style products don't usually include, such as working INS, windshield wipers and some non-default autopilot modes.

 

I would say it's maybe a bit something comparable to QW 757 in terms of system depth, at least that's how it seemed to me after a quick look.

 

Anyway overall like said it's still the best classic longhaul trijet available for FSX, it just feels a bit overpowered at the moment, just my personal feeling, just climbed with weight near MTOW to 20 000 ft, with full thrust it climbed about 5500 ft / min to that altitude.

 

 

Quote

The FDE was developed by an ex-airline pilot and was tested by current pilots, however feedback is very welcome (especially if you are/were a pilot on the real TriStar).

Yeah well I just personally find it hard to believe that Tristar would take off and climb better with weight near MTOW than lightly loaded B757-200 does, but of course I may be wrong too.

 

In any case other than that I find flight dynamics to be what I would expect from such a big airliner.

[SKEWR 364]

 

I think in terms of systems it's mostly kind of lite version, many things do not seem to be modeled, however it has some systems that lite style products don't usually include, such as working INS, windshield wipers and some non-default autopilot modes

 

Quick question: When you say lite would you say as lite as a default aircraft? As lite as the QW757? QW BAe? You may not have these addons, but I'm just trying to get an approximation of buy or no buy. Even though I prefer more depth a/c systems, the QW BAe/AVRO was a good compromise.

Thanks!

[xplanery 250]

Quick question: When you say lite would you say as lite as a default aircraft? As lite as the QW757? QW BAe? You may not have these addons, but I'm just trying to get an approximation of buy or no buy. Even though I prefer more depth a/c systems, the QW BAe/AVRO was a good compromise.

Thanks!

 

Maybe something comparable to QW 757 I would say, it has working INS and other systems that you don't see modeled with "default lite" style birds, however then many systems on flight engineers panel do not seem to be modeled, like some engine and hydraulic system things.

 

Anyway at least it's way more advanced model than the only other classic longhaul trijet model for FSX I know, CLS DC-10.

[TrafficPilot 121]

Got it, a bit mixed opinion about it but overall I think it's great.

 

Graphically it looks good, especially VC is just beautiful, outside model texturing isn't that sharp though. Soundpack is fantastic of course as it's developed by TSS.

 

Direct lift control mode is somewhat modeled like they promised, it works like trim though, you can control the reflection of spoilers through trim controls instead of it responding directly to yoke inputs but I guess there are some FSX limitations with this kind of things too.

 

It flies nicely, however I find it to be a bit overpowered on takeoff & initial climb and slow down too fast on landing, but other than that I find the flight model to be very believable, and of course engine performance and such stuff can be tuned later.

 

 

Overall I think this is definitely the best classic trijet for FSX so far, way better than CLS DC-10 at least.

 

Definitely worth the money, I think I will start flying some charter flights with this, now only thing I need is Black Box to release their A330.

 

Thanks for your review!

 

I nearly bought it earlier. Will only cost me £25 as I have a load of JF loyalty points if I do decide to buy at some point.

 

What stopped me purchasing immediately was also concern over the quality of the exterior model. I'm not normally one for "eye candy" but the TriStar is such an iconic aircraft for me that I was hoping for something a bit more shiny and sharp. The textures in their promotional video look rather matt and low quality IMHO.

 

Still, the VC looks great and the engine sounds are impressive on my studio speakers so I may buy it later once I've read a few more reviews!

[fritzgohl 29]

 

it just feels a bit overpowered at the moment, just my personal feeling, just climbed with weight near MTOW to 20 000 ft, with full thrust it climbed about 5500 ft / min to that altitude.

I believe that is the accuracy of it actually, it's wing is designed for that kind of performance and it had loads of power.

Regards;

 

Fritz

[xplanery 250]

Yeah I guess you might be right, I heard some earlier Tristars were not good climbers at all but maybe the -500 is a different thing.

[cptawsom 19]

I think in terms of systems it's mostly kind a bit lite version, many switches do not seem to be modeled, however it has some systems that lite style products don't usually include, such as working INS, windshield wipers and some non-default autopilot modes.

 

I would say it's maybe a bit something comparable to QW 757 in terms of system depth, at least that's how it seemed to me after a quick look.

 

Anyway overall like said it's still the best classic longhaul trijet available for FSX, it just feels a bit overpowered at the moment, just my personal feeling, just climbed with weight near MTOW to 20 000 ft, with full thrust it climbed about 5500 ft / min to that altitude.

 

 

Yeah well I just personally find it hard to believe that Tristar would take off and climb better with weight near MTOW than lightly loaded B757-200 does, but of course I may be wrong too.

 

In any case other than that I find flight dynamics to be what I would expect from such a big airliner.

 

 

Since I've been burned twice (Flight-1 ATR-72 (*), QW-757 (**)), I tend to trust only the following (in random order) FSX addon aircraft developers:

- PMDG

- Leonardo

- FS-Labs

- SimCheck

- Level-D

 

Also JustFlight has published many other things which I do not consider to be even marginally average.

 

Those being explained (why I am very skeptical about a developer I do not know), I have a few questions to ask:

 

1. Which variant of the TriStar they have simulated? (eg. 100, 150, 500 etc.)

2. Does it have full 2D panels? (this is a must for me)

3. From pictures of the VC, I see that the INS system is the exact same that was on the Concorde (which I have and know from FS-Labs) and the Airbus A300 (which I have and know from SimCheck). Does it follow the flight-plan flawlessly?

4. Is there an easy way (automatic) of aligning the INS, without inputing coordinates (LAT/LON)?

5. Is there an easy way to import an FSX PLN file into the INS?

 

 

 

 

(*) Very known critical autopilot HDG-SEL and LNAV bug, as described here:

http://atr.flight1.net/forums/in-progress-crazy-autopilot_topic5650.html

 

http://atr.flight1.net/forums/topic3858.html

 

 

(**) - serious bugs with the VNAV profile

- no custom waypoints in the FMC, which is a must

 

Maybe something comparable to QW 757 I would say, it has working INS and other systems that you don't see modeled with "default lite" style birds, however then many systems on flight engineers panel do not seem to be modeled, like some engine and hydraulic system things.

 

Anyway at least it's way more advanced model than the only other classic longhaul trijet model for FSX I know, CLS DC-10.

 

 

So, for instance, if you have the SimCheck A300, how would you compare the flight-engineer's system modeling, of the two aircraft?

[xplanery 250]

1. Which variant of the TriStar they have simulated? (eg. 100, 150, 500 etc.)

 

500, normal civilian version of it, RAF Tristar C2 version, K1 (pax/air to air tanker),KC1 (cargo/air to air tanker).

 

2. Does it have full 2D panels? (this is a must for me)

 

Yes it does.

 

Can't answer to INS questions now, I haven't tried the INS system yet, for start I will be probably flying the GPS fitted version.

[cptawsom 19]

Can't answer to INS questions now, I haven't tried the INS system yet, for start I will be probably flying the GPS fitted version.

 

 

What do you mean "the GPS version"?

 

The way I understand it, it's not a matter of GPS or INS.

 

It's a matter of FMC or INS.

 

By saying INS, I am referring to the instrument as seen in the attached picture (it is from a concorde cockpit, but the same was featured in Airbus A300, and in the Tri-Star).

 

 

[xplanery 250]

From the manual:

 

Two navigation devices are available for the TriStar: an Inertial Navigation System (INS)
and a GPS.

The GPS variant of the aircraft has a GPS/NAV toggle switch on the GPS 2D pop-up. The
switch should be moved to the GPS position before engaging navigation hold mode if
you want the autopilot to hold the GPS flight plan.

 

Basically it includes a tool which allows you to choose either INS or GPS based navigation for any particular repaint, so you can assign INS navigation for some paints and GPS for others.

 

Of course INS would be more realistic to use with this bird, however I'm planning to do some longhaul flights and sleep during some of the cruise & thus I need to be able to load more waypoints at once than INS can.

[mazelda 124]

I so want this to be a true version of the L1011 but will hold off buying this just yet until I've seen some more reviews.

Having worked on this aircraft for 6 years with an airline I have a real soft spot for her .

Think someone asked if it was overpowered the early 211-22b models were'nt but when they put the 524 version in,it made a big difference.

I don't normally like to nit pick but I think there were more -1,100,200  versions than the 500 so to say it was the normal civillian version I think may be incorrect.

Apart from the 500 which for obvious reasons was a lot shorter the easiest way to tell the if it was a 100 or 200 model was the body to no2 eng fairing as the 200 had a much more aerodynamic shaping .

[TechguyMaxC 516]

I think in terms of systems it's mostly kind a bit lite version, many switches do not seem to be modeled, however it has some systems that lite style products don't usually include, such as working INS, windshield wipers and some non-default autopilot modes.

 

I would say it's maybe a bit something comparable to QW 757 in terms of system depth, at least that's how it seemed to me after a quick look.

 

Anyway overall like said it's still the best classic longhaul trijet available for FSX, it just feels a bit overpowered at the moment, just my personal feeling, just climbed with weight near MTOW to 20 000 ft, with full thrust it climbed about 5500 ft / min to that altitude.

 

 

Yeah well I just personally find it hard to believe that Tristar would take off and climb better with weight near MTOW than lightly loaded B757-200 does, but of course I may be wrong too.

 

In any case other than that I find flight dynamics to be what I would expect from such a big airliner.

 

126,000-156,000 lb/ft thrust will do that though

[xplanery 250]

Hmm yeah I guess so, I thought I would never find any major commercial airliner with better climb rate than B752 but maybe this is it then.

 

In any case I like this model very much.

[captjames 19]

Anyone care to review / sum it up so I can see if it's worth getting or not.