May 15, 201313 yr So, as we all know, both RealAir and A2A are developing a C172. Which will be out first? I am looking for a steam gauge N model preferably, but I will take anything. I hope it will have a GPS530 or similar, not a G1000 though. Do NOT want that! `And, which do you guys think will be the most realistic? I was asking aabout a C172 a while back, but I decided to wait once I found out these two were coming. So, I am wondering what the latest is. Thanks guys! John McGee ORBX- the way to go Sincerely, John McGee
May 15, 201313 yr One things for sure. You won't be able to separate them realism wise. A2A are doing an older variant and RealAir a little newer one but both will be steam. I think the Realair one will have a gps and reality xp configs.
May 15, 201313 yr Author Thanks Lee for the prompt and informative reply. I would like to use Accusim, will the RA one support that? John ORBX- the way to go Sincerely, John McGee
May 15, 201313 yr FSX has a C172 I can't imagine that a payware one would be that much better since its a simple plane and the stock FSX flys about like the real thing. You could try the Carenado C210 its alo faster and looks dang good! But if your after I C172 I'd go with RealAir their Beech Duke is awsome! ATP MEL,CFI,CFII,MEI. Type Ratings B-737, ERJ-190,ERJ-170
May 15, 201313 yr Real Air has a freeware Cesnna 172 for FS9. I think it works with FSX too, but i didn't tried. Just replace default FSX cesnna with this one http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?FileName=ras172_fs9.zip Real air flight dynamics are awesome, i fly airliners in fsx but i will buy new Cessna when it comes Zeljko Budovic
May 15, 201313 yr I would like to use Accusim, will the RA one support that? The RealAir 172 will probably be compatible with Accu-Feel, which is A2A's "generic" module that adds sounds, vibration and turbulence effects, all user-configurable. Accu-Sim has always been specific to a particular aircraft, and adds a lot more - advanced flight dynamics, advanced systems, realistic wear-and-tear, maintenance options. So for that level of realisim you'll probably need to go for the A2A 172. RealAir excels at flight dynamics and has in the past included some failure modes (like the engines on the Dukes) but to date not at the depth of Accu-Sim. It'll probably come down to the models, the flight dynamics, and how much you want to get into the ownership (required walk-around, progressive wear and tear) or rental (maybe random failures, who knows what shape this thing is in?) aspects. Unless, of course, you want to buy both, which seems to me like the only reasonable solution... FSX has a C172 I can't imagine that a payware one would be that much better since its a simple plane and the stock FSX flys about like the real thing. The default is by many accounts not at all bad - improved by the RealAir flight dynamics linked above, and also by RealityXP gauges. But I'd like to see what RA and A2A are able to come up with. A Skyhawk with a really tuned FDE, progressive wear-and-tear, required walk-arounds, etc., on the level of the Aerosoft/4X Katana would be a nice experience. Alan Ampolsk"Ah, Paula, they are firing at me!"-- Saint-Exupery
May 15, 201313 yr Real air website was changed to coming soon about a year ago, no news since then. I would not expect it soon, it might not even be development anymore. Personally, I would have preferred they reworked both dukes to the same level as the Lancair, that would have been awesome. Sadly one of their best planes, the turbine, was ruined with some sort of cockpit bounce effect on landing. They swore by it for some reason, but then left it out of the Lancair! -Iain Watson-
May 15, 201313 yr According to A2A's forums, their C172 is in beta testing http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=34595 I am training in a G1000 C172, but would like steam gauges for the sim. Having a partially modeled G1000 would be a disservice to an aircraft that has had the accusim treatment. I also agree with Alan_A's sentiment about the desirability of an Aerosoft 4x Katana style of wear and tear, preflighting ect... It would make the product that much more personal. Pitch + Power = Performance
May 15, 201313 yr Author So, I think I might get both. But, how much do you think they will hurt my wallet? I really hope they don't chew frames, as I am on a low end system, so how are RA's and A2A's existing products on the FPS? And, one last q, when might they be out? Sorry for the boatload of questions John ORBX- the way to go Sincerely, John McGee
May 15, 201313 yr So, I think I might get both. But, how much do you think they will hurt my wallet? I really hope they don't chew frames, as I am on a low end system, so how are RA's and A2A's existing products on the FPS? And, one last q, when might they be out? Sorry for the boatload of questions John Well I could run decent settings in fsx with the RealAir Duke on my old P4 system and get 20fps so you should be fine ATP MEL,CFI,CFII,MEI. Type Ratings B-737, ERJ-190,ERJ-170
May 15, 201313 yr Author Good to hear. I think it would be fair to assume that the C172 will be even easier on perf. It is only a single engine. ORBX- the way to go Sincerely, John McGee
May 15, 201313 yr Good to hear. I think it would be fair to assume that the C172 will be even easier on perf. It is only a single engine. That doesn't have to be so. A thoroughly simulated C172 will be harder on the system then a regular simulated B777. The size and specs in real life doesn't always translate the same to FSX.
May 15, 201313 yr Author But, based on the Legacy and the P-51 for example, can we expect FPS friendly aircraft or not so friendly aircraft? ORBX- the way to go Sincerely, John McGee
May 15, 201313 yr Don't know... I do know that when I flew the A2A Piper Cub on my PC (a very light and small aircraft in real life) my PC has some problems keeping things smooth. So in the end it's not exactly what plane is simulated but how well and how deep it is simulated.
May 15, 201313 yr Real air website was changed to coming soon about a year ago, no news since then. I think they've always been bad at providing progress updates. The first hint we're likely to have of the new 172's availability will be when it's actually released. I can see the logic behind it, I suppose, but if you have everything else of theirs, and they don't have a forum then there's no real reason to visit their site. I've given up checking it for news of the 172. My simming funds are more limited than they used to be, so if A2A beat them to the punch and I'm still none the wiser about the RealAir release, then guess who'll be getting my money... Don't know... I do know that when I flew the A2A Piper Cub on my PC (a very light and small aircraft in real life) my PC has some problems keeping things smooth. So in the end it's not exactly what plane is simulated but how well and how deep it is simulated. I'm surprised to hear that...my own system would be pretty low-end, but the A2A Cub gives me no performance issues, even in Orbx scenery.
Create an account or sign in to comment