New pics of the Carenado TBM...

[fakeflyer737 992]

Carenado is garbage is my opinion. The 152 was great but that was it for me, I've purchased a number of there planes and flew them once

[ryanbatc 12,857]

Garbage... a little harsh don't ya think?

 

I think their recent releases have been pretty good.  You've got to consider what they make best... usually steam HD planes.  I admit the SR22 doesn't have a well modeled G1000, but it looks cool, flies very well, decent sounds, beautiful interior etc.  I also like their C337... probably one of the best GA with RXP 530W in it.  I just don't see how anyone could call that C337 garbage.  FDE done by Bernt Stolle, excellent visuals, decent sounds, good RXP integration.  

 

If you look at how their planes advance they really do listen to customers.  First we screamed 3D gauges... they delieverd.  Then people wanted newer tech, like glass.  They put a Aspen in their Bonanza etc.  Now it appears they are adding some sort of in-game flight plan functionality.

 

Hardly garbage.

[1mikel151 71]

Carenado is garbage is my opinion. The 152 was great but that was it for me, I've purchased a number of there planes and flew them once

Now there is an opinion with no merit.

Carenado has some of the best visual models in any sim. It's to bad that customers tend to focus on what they don't have over what they do. I'm looking forward to the TBM, always wanted a high quality model of one.

[Boeing or not going 578]

With the RXP GPS, flightline gauges, Berts mod, and sounds from Simmarket, their C208 is my favorite prop airplane ever released for flightsim

 

They just need to accept they are not good with system modeling and work with Flight1 to bring out their G1000 avionics package, for example. Or someone that allows navdata updates and full features.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

I just don't see how anyone could call that C337 garbage. FDE done by Bernt Stolle, excellent visuals, decent sounds, good RXP integration

 

+1

 

 

 

Now there is an opinion with no merit.
Carenado has some of the best visual models in any sim. It's to bad that customers tend to focus on what they don't have over what they do. I'm looking forward to the TBM, always wanted a high quality model of one.

 

I just wish they wouldn't rush so much.  We're an impatient lot and they could take some time and really pull it together and get on par with RealAir and Milviz.  They have the graphics...no one is better.  Bernt isn't with them any more but they could go back and do a v2 (or 'Pilot's Version') of a number of planes that he did for them.

[tttocs 301]

Yeah, I've gotta dump on the "garbage" comment as well.  They make several of my favorite planes, and their 337 remains my all time favorite.  With a few tweaks some of their planes could be downright exceptional.  While I've not bought any of the latest glass releases due to a few issues that are key to me, I still look at every release they do with interest.

 

Scott

[BilboBaggins 82]

I'm also excited about the TBM. The glass cockpit is no doubt going to be a challenge to run in a dense environment, but that's the beauty of FSX: if I want to gaze out the window lovingly at my ORBX scenery and 4096-res REX clouds, I'll do that with steam gauges and leave the Garmins at home, thank you; if I want full on multi-screen glass cockpit, it's one click to swap my default FSX scenery back, another, to reduce the REX cloud textures, and boom! Smooth frame rate.

 

Or, I can go hunting for fjords outside ORBX Juneau, AK in the TBM at speeds and altitudes that are ridiculous for the terrain...... it's not reality, after all!

[stans 703]

Wow!  Garbage?  I will not say that Carenado is garbage, but they do seem to have a habit of developing what could be a stellar aircraft, but fail to fully realize the potential in some way and often do not offer a fix.  My only Carenado purchase to date is their Baron B58.  Great model, flies nicely and I loved it until I tried the night vc lighting.  They failed to properly back light the radio selector and the transponder lacks features that a certain freeware version contains.  Two little things that I think they should have caught during testing, but did not and it seems the back lighting issue is not user solvable except to turn on the cabin dome light.  I still keep my eyes on Carenado, I hope that one day they will get it right.

[LeeL 272]

I agree. But I get lots of joy from some Carenado products. Especially the 210

 

 

If they have upgraded the G1000- I'll have to wait for some reviews to really see if they did- then I will buy it because I love the 850

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

If I were to guess, I would say that they probably test their airplanes from starting up on the runway instead of Cold and Dark.  If they used the checklist they provided they would probably pay more attention to those aspects of the aircraft.  They did a great job on the early singles, in part because those aircraft are inherently simple.  They've been struggling to advance into some really wonderful airplanes, but skipping some important things in those airplanes and, seemingly, not noticing.  A fair amount of it is not too hard, I wouldn't think.  I've been flabbergasted that they don't put a fully functional off-standby-on-alt in a transponder or skip implimenting IAS and VS in an autopilot in these airplanes...things that they've done in the past.  (The transponder thing isn't important but it speaks to their attention to detail.  The IAS/VS thing is hugely important.)  And yet they also put some pretty amazing things in the airplanes and continue to improve.  Their glass continues to get better.  But, in the same airplane, you have to counterweight that with the airplane doesn't have an alternate static air switch...or no timer.  Someone there is trying because they do get a fair amount of it done with the systems and then it seems they push it out as is and rarely revisit it.  After spending so much effort getting the graphics perfect, and having an excquisite FDE they muddle through. 

 

If I could, I would convince them to slow it down a little bit and spend some time on the details, fly the checklist they're providing day and night.  Make sure all of the switches and knobs work the same (the Achilles heal of a fair number of aircraft developers).  Do a decent beta and, during the beta, get some volunteers to create some docs and tutorials.  There are people that are absolutely nuts over these airplanes and yet, has anyone made a complete tutorial for a Carenado plane?  The airplanes would be like the 337...superb.

[LeeL 272]

Well said Gregg

 

I would gladly help beta test, I offered once but got no reply...

 

Lee

[BilboBaggins 82]

I feel the same way about Nemeth Designs.... probably a much smaller team but they also have that almost perfect if they'd only fix a few last things issue.

 

I wonder why that happens?

 

[z06z33 763]

I'm old fashioned and like to fly at night sorry but the g1000 is far from pretty at night I think Ill skip this one and buy the staggerwing instead it looks amazing

[ryanbatc 12,857]

Oh crap I forgot about the beech 17S argh it's only money right?

[tttocs 301]

Gregg_Seipp, on 04 May 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

If I could, I would convince them to slow it down a little bit and spend some time on the details, fly the checklist they're providing day and night. Make sure all of the switches and knobs work the same (the Achilles heal of a fair number of aircraft developers). Do a decent beta and, during the beta, get some volunteers to create some docs and tutorials. There are people that are absolutely nuts over these airplanes and yet, has anyone made a complete tutorial for a Carenado plane? The airplanes would be like the 337...superb.

I don't think the big issue is really beta testing (which is not to say that some of their planes couldn't do with a bit more thorough beta before release). I think there's a conscious decision made to take it so far and then call it good and move on to the next. And honestly, I think this worked OK when Carenado was making simpler planes, but as they've moved up to planes with more complex systems it has become more problematic.

 

Same thing with tutorials and extensive docs - they've not been needed as much when the planes were simpler, but as the planes grew more complex the information gap became more painful. For the record, Kurt "Yoda" Kalbfleisch did do an excellent tutorial for the C90 King Air - it can be found in the library.

 

In any case, yes, slowing down would probably help. In this, I think we the consumers are part of the problem. We clamor for developers to "hurry up and give it to us", seemingly convinced that the developer is holding back just to torture us (just read the PMDG forums :lol: where "release it!" threads run hundreds of posts), and then complain bitterly about being paying beta testers when a release is premature.

 

BTW, I agree with you on switches. It's bad enough that switch behavior varies between developers, but worse still when on the same plane, for switch "A" left click is on and right click is off, but on switch "B", left click is on and off and right click just brings up the standard menu. Grrrr!

 

Scott