Is Carenado getting lazy?

[citationjet 3]

Hi everyone,

 

I do not have the plane for now. I do not expect to have a 100% true to life TBM - simulation ... that was never my problem ... all I want for myself is nice entertainment.

 

What is still holding me off is the fear to AGAIN have the same performance problems with this new release as I had with the Cirrus, which is a great plane , but grounded cause of this.

 

So PLEASE can anyone allready having purchased the TBM give a comparision regarding FPS to the Cirrus, T182 or even the Piper Malibu, which is the only Glass-release from Carenado that performs just outstanding!

 

Cheers and I really would like to give this plane a chance if any possible!

 

 

Hi guys,

 

in comparison to the Malibu I saw no big  difference regarding Frames. I run FSX on a modern Laptop Machine and after a first test flight yesterday I was really happy about the frames.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

Is this company getting lazy or trying to move forward into an all glass line up?

 

I don't think they're lazy.  Their business model seems to be to crank out as many visually appealing aircraft as fast as they can.  They fly well too.  I think their attention to detail is pretty poor outside of those two areas.  It makes me think of this quote between Melvin and Carol from the movie As Good as it Gets...maybe you can see the analogy.

 

Melvin: You make me want to be a better man.

Carol: ...That's maybe the best compliment of my life.

Melvin: Well, maybe I overshot a little, because I was aiming at just enough to keep you from walking out.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FbyP8gbb1hw#t=104s

 

I think the problems are two-fold:

• They have competition that is focusing more broadly...building the entire airplane.  (Milviz, RealAir, Flight1)
• We've changed...looking for more completeness.

They are moving into these more complex airplanes but with about the same level that they did to all of their older planes.  I don't think it works myself but they see the actual results from sales.  As long as people are buying then what they're doing is working and that's pretty much that.  I think if people stop buying then they'll adapt.

[Arklight1 140]

I love the new 850. No complaints from me. I'm actually glad they are doing modern cockpits. The TBM 850 has a ton of glass and so does this one. Thanks to the Carenado team.

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[rjmcgill 15]

 

 

Hey Capt.,



So, what aircraft, in your mind, are comparable?

I really don't have a comparison. I just found it odd for a new product to come on the market and find such harsh bash. I went and purchased this beast and love it. It reminds me of when I got the Turbine Duke. It fly's really good. Throttle response isn't too rash, taking to the runway was easy, if you read and understand a little of the manual it really will surprise you. I have all the Saietek addons so they work for all I have tried. I run FSUIPC registered and SPAD drivers. Kind of shocked me really. One little note the TBM doesn't cross feed fuel so if you look in the overhead you can switch it to auto so on 10 min intervals it switches tanks. Haven't quite figured out how to enter a FPL manually, it is a little different. On my list to learn how though. I have a lawyer friend who owns one of these in real life. The only thing I can really see different is it doesn't have a storm scope, which is really no big deal. I think if they can ever figure out how to make the Glass upgradeable through Navigraph, we might really have something great. Nav Data has always been a problem for FSX. I just wish the developers could use one way of doing it so you wouldn't have to download so many updates. That is about all I can tell you my friend. Give it a go and I don't think you will be displeased. I am happy with the purchase so far. I have found very little wrong with the aircraft. Come to think of it nothing really. You can change the CFG file so the airplane is referenced in the proper name. It is a SOCATA and the other code for general is TBM7 which will make atc call you right. I have done this for all the Carenado airplanes so that is no biggie. Can't stand to hear Cessna Cessna if you know what I mean. Hope this helps in making a choice. I truly am regretful for judging before making my own conclusion. Good luck and Happy Flying Cpt out.

[z06z33 763]

Here I go I'm gonna give it another try see ya 

 

I really don't have a comparison. I just found it odd for a new product to come on the market and find such harsh bash. I went and purchased this beast and love it. It reminds me of when I got the Turbine Duke. It fly's really good. Throttle response isn't too rash, taking to the runway was easy, if you read and understand a little of the manual it really will surprise you. I have all the Saietek addons so they work for all I have tried. I run FSUIPC registered and SPAD drivers. Kind of shocked me really. One little note the TBM doesn't cross feed fuel so if you look in the overhead you can switch it to auto so on 10 min intervals it switches tanks. Haven't quite figured out how to enter a FPL manually, it is a little different. On my list to learn how though. I have a lawyer friend who owns one of these in real life. The only thing I can really see different is it doesn't have a storm scope, which is really no big deal. I think if they can ever figure out how to make the Glass upgradeable through Navigraph, we might really have something great. Nav Data has always been a problem for FSX. I just wish the developers could use one way of doing it so you wouldn't have to download so many updates. That is about all I can tell you my friend. Give it a go and I don't think you will be displeased. I am happy with the purchase so far. I have found very little wrong with the aircraft. Come to think of it nothing really. You can change the CFG file so the airplane is referenced in the proper name. It is a SOCATA and the other code for general is TBM7 which will make atc call you right. I have done this for all the Carenado airplanes so that is no biggie. Can't stand to hear Cessna Cessna if you know what I mean. Hope this helps in making a choice. I truly am regretful for judging before making my own conclusion. Good luck and Happy Flying Cpt out.

I think the reason for the hate isn't the plane or the lack of systems I think people like myself are afraid of the impact all that glass makes on the frames and that alot of folks just don't like glass. How are your frames and what are your specs?

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Carenado seems to have found a happy balance between framerates and G1000 resolution, so that part is pretty good for this airplane.  And yes, it looks great and handles really nicely.

 

The bigger challenge IMHO is getting the G1000 functionality right..  At present, there are still a number of niggly problems, that can be fixed if the Carenado team puts their mind to it.  SP1 will be telling.   The previous G1000 equipped aircraft (182T, Cirrus) are no longer installed on my system, because they left the task unfinished..  I've got my fingers crossed that this time they will follow through.

 

Please report any bugs you find to Carenado directly!  At this stage they are actively working the code..

[Jimmy RFR 406]

My reasons for disliking glass panels such as the G1000 have nothing to do with being boring, although there is some validity to the argument that it robs some personality from a plane.

 

I just simply find them hard to use in a desktop environment for GA VFR flight.  It's hard to narrow in on a zoomed out glass panel for critical info in your lower peripheral vision, whereas I can tell with barely a glance at steam gauges a rough idea of my altitude, rate of climb or descent, speed, attitude, etc.

 

I had posted on a different thread that Carenado should make a tablet version of their G1000 that interacts deeply with their planes and would allow one to shut off the gauges in the cockpit.  I know there's a couple of options for iPads that already exist, but they don't quite fill the bill, in my opinion.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

My reasons for disliking glass panels such as the G1000 have nothing to do with being boring, although there is some validity to the argument that it robs some personality from a plane.

 

I just simply find them hard to use in a desktop environment for GA VFR flight.  It's hard to narrow in on a zoomed out glass panel for critical info in your lower peripheral vision, whereas I can tell with barely a glance at steam gauges a rough idea of my altitude, rate of climb or descent, speed, attitude, etc.

 

 

This is actually something I appreciate about the TBM850 cockpit layout..

 

You have attitude, altitude, speed right in front of you (steam gauges).

 

Whoever designed this panel (at Socata) did their homework.

[JimmiG 244]

The previous G1000 equipped aircraft (182T, Cirrus) are no longer installed on my system, because they left the task unfinished..  I've got my fingers crossed that this time they will follow through.

 

That's the sad thing about Carenado - the "trail of broken airplanes". They may have found the balance between sharpness and FPS, and implemented much (but not all) of the needed functionality *now* - but the otherwise awesome SR22 and T182T are forever doomed to the dark shadowy corners of our virtual hangars, because these new features will never be backported. Likewise, the TBM-850 will probably be abandoned in a half-finished state, while the Stationair picks up where they left off in terms of bug fixes and optimization.

 

If they would only slow down for a while and fix the KingAir, T182T, SR22 and TBM-850 completely before moving on to the next shiny new thing, I think a lot of people would stay loyal to the company. I understand they make no money from supporting old products, but the SR22 is only a few months old...

[XPX64man 130]

I like the TBM850 and I like the glass cockpits.  They have put together a great aircraft with this release. Carenado has also improved on the G1000 to where you can build the flight plan right on the G1000 now, which is more realistic, so they are not just putting out a canned G1000 for every aircraft.  They are improving on what they have, so is not a true statement.

I really look forward to having this aircraft in X-Plane 10/64.

[HawkDsl 50]

z06z33, on 17 May 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

alot of folks just don't like glass.

That's a pretty broad statement! One of the largest segments of FS is Virtual Airlines. PMDG and other "Heavy Metal" developers make their bucks with "Super Glass" planes. No one screamed to the heavens on NGX, Citation X, or Mustang releases..?

 

I guess I'm still trying to figure that part out...

 

Sometimes it looks like the RXP people (after all, they spent that money), sometimes it's the low end computer people, sometimes it's the "Fully Functional" people (which does not exist... from anyone)... Yet... those planes are selling like hot cakes. :huh:

 

SOMEONE likes glass.

 

I'd like to be contacted by this shadow, secret society.. I'd like to join it.

 

 

I have two hours in the 850, and it is the single best aircraft by Carenado... Ever.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

I have two hours in the 850, and it is the single best aircraft by Carenado... Ever.

 

How's it on my pet peeve...is it checklist complete (skipping obvious things like walkaround and circuit breakers)?

[LeeL 272]

I so wish there was a reality xp style G1000 do developers could build around that. Have it as an option for those who want it.

 

Those would sell well for G1000 pilots looking to train too

[HawkDsl 50]

 

 

so wish there was a reality xp style G1000 do developers could build around that.

 

Mindstar Aviation maybe?  Don't know them well, or seen their stuff in use... But yes, RXP G1000 would be great. I'm sure it's license this, lawyer

that, and copyright this.. that could be the hold up for some of this stuff.  Heard a rumor that's why there are no 3PD Gulf Wings.

 

 

 

How's it on my pet peeve...is it checklist complete (skipping obvious things like walkaround and circuit breakers)?

 

Sorry Gregg, not that deep yet, but will do my own review after some time with it.

[Q_flyer 766]

........ the new 850's G1000 is clearly a copy and paste from the C182 as it shows that the aircraft is a C182 in the menus. 

 

Seriously? ........ that is poor quality control! ......... I made my mind up after wasting hard earned money on their SR22 that is was my last spend with them, until they start to offer a bit more than flying textures with unconvincing flight characteristics.

 

Funny, back in 2004/5, all I flew was Carenado GA in FS9..... I couldn't get enough of them!

 

In FSX it's been a sliding scale downhill IMHO ...... nice HD texturing apart, the bar has actually dropped IMHO.    I love the C208, but all other purchases have been dreary and unconvincing to me, and the SR22 was the last straw.        

 

If this TBM is anything as sterile as their last single turbo-prop (the PA46T), I'm pleased I'm leaving it well alone.