Best Heavy--lite

[thepitts 30]

Looking for heavy (jet or prop) with:

reasonable price, lite systems, basic autopilot/fmc representation(if at all), no additional failure modelling

but with;

good flight dynamics, representation of inertia, engine spool up,

good main instrument refresh rate (more realair than CLS/ Captain Sim)

good looking (outside and in cockpit...no interest in cabin)

good sounding

 

Thanks TIM

[severniae 78]

I think the PMDG JS41 would be good for you - its a nice plane with a relatively light learning curve for an airline aircraft. Flies very well and has a beautiful fully functional VC. The FMS is very good too and has almost all the feature of the real aircraft.

[Guest Mik75]

I´d like to suggest the QualityWings 757, it is beautifully modeled inside and out and has very good flight dynamics and relatively light (but working!) system modeling. The FMC is easy to set up and with a little pratice, you are flying within minutes!

A little lighter but still beautiful to look at, is CLS´s MD-80. The flight characteristics are believable and its performance, fps-wise, is very good! Autopilot is very basic and it uses the default MSFS GPS to follow a flightplan.

[William J.S.S 173]

QW 757

QW RJ

 

Both of the above perform beautiful, they look great, and you don't have to spend 30 minutes getting ready to put your seat belt on. They are still semi-complex, and I fly them just as much as my NGX and MD-11 by PMDG. I also second the JS4100 by PMDG...while she is not the most advanced systems wise, I find that it is between Lite and Complex, with PLENTY to keep you busy. All she has in advanced Autopilot is LNAV. It will help you with descent points, but will not do it for you, and does not have an autothrottle. Combine the JS4100 with FS2Crew and you will be having fun for hours on end.

 

I also recommend the CoolSky DC-9. She is old school, no FMS, but VOR. Very fun to fly, and handles great. The support is top notch, and when I like it simple she is my go to bird.

[Gazzareth 808]

Another for the QW RJ. FMC is light but does the job well enough. Looks great as well, and is on Flight1 so can get your money back if you don't like it.

 

G

 

Sent from my S3 using Tapatalk. Typing errors expected....

 

 

[PIC007 82]

+1 for QW 757

[BartEnder 2]

If You want an heavy plane with light systems, QW757 is the way to go. Outstanding audio quality, nice power to weight ratio, light on frames, nice documentation, joyful to fly by hand. It was my favorite tubeliner for a long time.

 

Actually, Boeing 757 is 'medium' category (heavy is from 136.000 kg MTOW upwards), but pretty close to 'heavy' wake turbulence category.

[TurboTomato 90]

What about JustFlight's 'freemium' 757?

[PIC007 82]

What about JustFlight's 'freemium' 757?

 

To be generous, junk

[TurboTomato 90]

To be generous, junk

 

:lol:

 

Might be worth a go though, given it's free?

[FloG 148]

+1 for the QW 757! It's just an awesome plane.

I guess that's the best one in the "non-complex" or "not too complex" category.

Their Avro is good, too, but it's abit more advanced.

[Noel 4,486]

I´d like to suggest the QualityWings 757, it is beautifully modeled inside and out and has very good flight dynamics and relatively light (but working!) system modeling. The FMC is easy to set up and with a little pratice, you are flying within minutes!

A little lighter but still beautiful to look at, is CLS´s MD-80. The flight characteristics are believable and its performance, fps-wise, is very good! Autopilot is very basic and it uses the default MSFS GPS to follow a flightplan.

 

The Flight1/CoolSky Super MD80 is ultra-easy on performance--they saved a little by not having the crispest graphics in the VC, but it's plenty fine and night lighting is good. It has a fully functional FMS too. The QW757 is fabulous, fairly easy on performance, and the -200 is great for TO out of shorter runways like KJAC. Since I have older hardware now these are perfect--i.e., my system can handle these quite well ;o)

[FloG 148]

The Flight1/CoolSky Super MD80 is ultra-easy on performance--they saved a little by not having the crispest graphics in the VC

I agree with you, and the second part 's the main reason why I hardly ever use the Flight1 Super80 anymore is that the VC looks strange, since lots of switches aren't really modelled in 3D. I wouldn't care for it that much, if it were only some of the switches on the overhead panel, but having 2D knobs on the VC AP panel, is a bit sad. I did enjoy it some years ago, though, and the exterior model and the outside texturing is still amazing to me.

[Noel 4,486]

I agree with you, and the second part 's the main reason why I hardly ever use the Flight1 Super80 anymore is that the VC looks strange, since lots of switches aren't really modelled in 3D. I wouldn't care for it that much, if it were only some of the switches on the overhead panel, but having 2D knobs on the VC AP panel, is a bit sad. I did enjoy it some years ago, though, and the exterior model and the outside texturing is still amazing to me.

 

Well, it is the best combo of features & complexity w/ very, very low impact (compared to the NGX, or even the QW757), so it's good for folks w/ older hardware. Night flying helps soften it's weaknesses ;o)

[SKEWR 364]

Just to add: the QW Avro can be switched to "lite" mode as well. Another plus id think you like is that it has 4 jets (like a heavy) but is designed for shorter hops. Their 757 fits your requirement as well I believe.