FIRST THOUGHTS

[Tracon 10]

Have you verified the taxi with real life SR22's ? I wouldn't go changing stuff so quick.

[V1VrV2 44]

Have you verified the taxi with real life SR22's ? I wouldn't go changing stuff so quick.

Good call. I checked the POH It looks like it does need to be updated: "The nosewheel is free castering and can turn through an arc of approximately 216 degrees (108 degrees either side of center). Steering is accomplished by differential application of individual main gear brakes." The turn radius of the nose gear should be 7 feet. Going to update mine and see what effect it has.

 

EDIT: Here's the line from the Carenado aircraft.cfg file, I misread the previous post that it was not from the SR22... Anyhow, Carenado shows 180.

point.0= 1, 1.3, 0.0, -4.35, 1500, 0, 0.6, 180, 0.1804, 2.1636, 0.6, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

[Tracon 10]

Ahh, nice job. I'd like to know your results

[yellow5 0]

Great aircraft as usual from Carenado. Enjoying this one a lot. I have been looking forward to it. Personally, I like it better than the Eaglesoft Cirrus.

[BilboBaggins 82]

I, too, reported the engine sound bug. It is, I think, a sample editing problem, where either someone did not pay attention to getting rid of the noise that can be created by failing to edit a sample accurately at the zero crossing point (where the waveform is going from positive to negative, or vice versa, in the sample - if you end a waveform anywhere other than at the zero crossing point you will get exactly this kind of glitch), or the sampled sound was extremely difficult to loop and fade from end to beginning, although the latter problem has more to do with the noticeability that you're hearing a looped sample than with the other-than-zero-crossing "tick" noise.

 

Btw I don't know anything about how FSX or the proprietary Carenado sound .dll loads or uses samples, but it would be about three seconds for me to edit the tick out of the sample file if I did. Could cause problems with load or file recognition, though, so I remain shy about indulging my speculations on this.

 

Hopefully Carenado can get out a patch soon that fixes this and reduces memory load by 45%!

[Finn 1]

I downloaded the plane this morning and carefully set up each of the yoke axis, elevator trim, throttle, mixture, flaps and a few buttons to help along the way.

 

First impressions, good eye candy, however one really has to zoom in on the PDF and MDF to get a clear rendition.

 

I agree that steering on the ground is very sensitive and for a better word jerky. What I found worse is the flight dynamics. Just a little touch on the trim wheel and I went through the entire trim range, add a bit of elevator pressure on approach and you get all sorts of jerky response up down left to right. Truly not a joy to fly unless you are in level flight.

 

Touched down at 80 knots full flaps on a 3000 foot runway with full brakes on and slowed down poorly almost felt like no brake pressure and ran off the end of the runway.

 

Just cannot believe the SR22 could be that bad to handle in real life, any input on that. I use Saitek hardware and the Saitek trim wheel, works great with everything else.

 

This aircraft for me anyway is not flyable in it's current state. I reset all my axis settings same results. I have submitted a ticket concerning the flight dynamics

Edited January 24, 2013 by Finn

[JaseMelbo 386]

Bug: My one bug reported to Carenado, is a "skipping" sound nearly identical to that of an old record (vinyl) player skipping on the engine sound. This skipping noise appears at an engine setting at about 65% and the Volume of the skip increases with proportionally WITH increase in engine power. I'm certainly no audiophile, but this bug is rather irritating to me. At 100 % power this skipping noise is very noticeable. This is simply a glitch in the sound file for the engine. It should be easily fixable and not a major problem. However, this does need to be fixed. It's rather annoying to say the least at high engine power. The sound is definitely from the engine sound; with cockpit noise muted it is still there. CARENDO PLEASE fix this ASAP in SP1.

Yep - I've got it as well. Annoying the heck out of me.

 

Jas

 

But you can chnage it.

I dont have the plane

 

this below is example of another plane,

open aircraft.cfg of the plane

 

[contact_points]

point.0 = 1, -9.20, 0.00, -8.0, 1500, 0, 1.08, 25.0, 1.00, 2.5, 0.9, 7.0, 5.0, 0, 120, 250

point.1 = 1, -83.10, -8.33, -9.4, 3000, 1, 1.85, 0.0, 1.50, 2.5, 0.8, 7.0, 7.0, 2, 120, 250

point.2 = 1, -83.10, 8.33, -9.4, 3000, 2, 1.85, 0.0, 1.50, 2.5, 0.8, 7.0, 7.0, 3, 120, 250

point.3 = 2, -95.75, -53.92, -1.0, 1200, 0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5

point.4 = 2, -98.75, 53.92, -1.0, 1200, 0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6

point.5 = 2, -139.00, 0.00, 3.0, 1200, 0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 9

point.6 = 2, -3.00, 0.00, 0.0, 1200, 0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.00, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4

 

the Point.0 line, the 8th figure in the example above contain the turn raduis. In the example above it is 25.0

 

Change this value to 40 or 60 or 80 (or whatever you like). This is the degrees the nose wheel will be able to turn.

Play and experiment to get a value that suit your taste.

 

I wouldnt go changing anything. She turns just fine with the use of diff braking.

 

Jas

 

Touched down at 80 knots full flaps on a 3000 foot runway with full brakes on and slowed down poorly almost felt like no brake pressure and ran off the end of the runway.

 

I am over the threshold at around 80Knots and she flares nicely with no issues here as far as braking goes. Maybe check toe brake settings? Don't know what else it could be as it works fine for me.

 

Jas

[BilboBaggins 82]

Yes the plane is quite easy to fly. The elevator trim feels a little over sensitive to me but nothing significant.

[HawkDsl 50]

I noticed that the liveries are in DDS instead of BMP.

 

About to take it for a spin now.

[Merkava3 0]

Is it so impossible to make correct propeller animation? So many years in developing and the same mistakes. The blades rotating as they want. Left, right, fast, slow... Even you don't touch any controls. I don't see NO blades in real life in flight. How long time have to developers can understand this simple thing? Shining is great, yes. Carenado is the first one, and it's really great. But please, stop paint that blurred rotated blades. Or make something for correct rotating direction and speed for that, like RealAir does for Lancair and Duke.

[flying_bob 38]

Good call. I checked the POH It looks like it does need to be updated: "The nosewheel is free castering and can turn through an arc of approximately 216 degrees (108 degrees either side of center). Steering is accomplished by differential application of individual main gear brakes." The turn radius of the nose gear should be 7 feet. Going to update mine and see what effect it has.

 

EDIT: Here's the line from the Carenado aircraft.cfg file, I misread the previous post that it was not from the SR22... Anyhow, Carenado shows 180.

point.0= 1, 1.3, 0.0, -4.35, 1500, 0, 0.6, 180, 0.1804, 2.1636, 0.6, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

 

The 180 means it is freecastering.

change it to anything else then 0 or 180 and that will become a steerable nosewheel.

I suggest a 50, 70 or 90 to start with

[V1VrV2 44]

The 180 means it is freecastering.

change it to anything else then 0 or 180 and that will become a steerable nosewheel.

I suggest a 50, 70 or 90 to start with

Yep - Bob is absolutely correct (as I found out when testing it). 180 works fine for me and always did. But, for those reporting problems, if you have pedals with toe brakes maybe see if you can adjust the sensitivity so that tapping the left or right toe brake does equates to a slight application (the slope setting in FSUIPC, I think, is what I used).

[SpeedBird219 183]

so, all in all, worth purchasing, then? I already own the rockwell Commander 114, if its that Standard i will get it

[V1VrV2 44]

so, all in all, worth purchasing, then? I already own the rockwell Commander 114, if its that Standard i will get it

 

I don't have the Commander so I'm not sure what to tell you for a comparison. However, here's my take on it after logging a few more hours in it:

 

At first, I'll admit that I was disappointed. I had expected the Perspective system to be at least half way usable as released... Evidently that's not the case but, to be honest, I tried a few things with it, saw the limitations and immediately merged my RXP 430. Sure this kills the realism but you get the majority of the navigational related stuff that the Perspective can do just with a different means of entering it (though, both systems would be Garmin so the logic is fairly same across the board - the Perspective just makes it easier and adds some whiz-bang). After all, there have been GNS430 equipped Cirruses for 15 years now. So, avionics wise it's not that good but can be made to work just fine with a RXP merge. The fact is with the RXP 430 and the "default Perspective" you'll be able to fly 99% of the procedures you'd want to fly anyhow, you just don't get to use the remote keypad. Their GFC700 autopilot works well if you know its quirks - coupled approaches with the 430 are possible and work reasonably well.

 

Visuals - Another Carenado visual masterpiece. I created a somewhat fictional repaint for a 2011 X-edition SR22 (N112TR) for my own personal use and am in love. It's every bit the plane I'd hope to purchase out here in the real world, ignoring the $700,000ish price tag. There's some anomalies (ADF in the VC - not typical equipment on the vast majority of Cirruses, no TKS panel on the v-stab so I added my own, TKS wing panels are a bit dark for my taste, main VS eyepoint too low). But these are easy to fix or ignore.

 

Sounds - Engine sound looping as has been reported is annoying but can be fixed. The "500" foot call is not realistic (replaced it with the sound from my G1000 Flight1 T182). Interior sounds are muffled like they did with the King Air so if you want to move to the exterior view, be sure to turn down the volume before hitting that S key.

 

Dynamics - For the most part, I don't have any complaints. It climbs like a bat out of hell and flies mostly like a Cirrus should. For me (might be a controller issue), while flying an approach at 80-85 knots I get some slight dips coming down toward the runway. Not a huge deal but it seems a little unstable. As I noted before, manifold pressure is about 2" too high - not a big deal. Fuel consumption has been pretty spot on for the tests I've run - 8000 feet, 17.6 GPH at 85% power (MP was high though).

 

Limitations - Aside from what was mentioned above... No CAPS is the other critique I've heard. My take is "who cares" - simulating a pull in FSX is pointless anyhow as you're not going to encountered any engine failures without a failures module. The eyecandy is nice and Eaglesoft nailed it with their's, but it unnecessary IMHO.

 

Hopefully that info is somewhat helpful in your decision. I, for one, am not regretting purchasing it but I've been known to have the urge to spend lots of money on Cirruses simulated and real. :( lol

[SpeedBird219 183]

Thank you V1VrV2 , i think i'll get it tonight