I was kinda surprised myself.. as Carenado (as mentioned) is hit-n-miss on many model aspects.

 

 

Like King Ghidora, I had been considering the F1 B200 and was also surprised at your view of the Carenado.  I own a few Carenado's, and think they are not that bad, but the system functionality seems to be not that deep compared to recent models of some developers (PMDG, Milviz, A2A).  How do you think the Carenado's system functionality compares to the Flight1 B200?

It's not limited to FSX or P3D... X-Plane can't properly model a turbine either...

It's a tradeoff, I believe. And we'd better accept it.

I use ELITE for accurate procedures. The instruments are crystal clear, easy to read, precise... The aircraft respond to power settings as they are supposed to. The GenView visual scenery databases are updated a few times a year, but are expensive. I have just decided to upgrade to v8.6 with the full European database of Genview. But graphics wise it is some 15-20 yrs away from present standards :-/

I like FSX because I have the whole World, excellent aircraft models specially those PMDG airliners, the A2A collection, the RealAirs, some Flight1's, never bought a Carenado, but saw one at a friend's install and like it, and am really tempted to buy the MilViz C310.

Then X-plane10 is promissing, 64 bit, has nice weather effects and a dynamic team behind it. The rotary wing flight dynamics looks good too.

My preferred flight simulator (since I bought it) is DCS World in terms of flight and systems fidelity. I love that sim, but I really don't like air combat :-/

Then, there was SilentWings, a very good soaring simulator, Condor was also interesting, but they stagnated in time and need new versions with new features...

And last, but certainly not least, there was this remarkable flight simulator, which gave me simply the closest to real life sensation of being there, and yet is classified as an arcade sim by many - MS FLIGHT!

Well, you know... we simmers are promiscuous....

We have now fixed the gap issue in the Mindstar version of the C310R.  Note that to get it you will have to have access to the support forums on our site.

 

To get access you will have to provide proof of purchase and register on our site.  Registration has been blocked due to spam so please email roadburner440 aat milviz doot com.

Bill, are you aware of this, and are there any plans to get it fixed up?

Already fixed. Colin beat me to it... B)

Like King Ghidora, I had been considering the F1 B200 and was also surprised at your view of the Carenado.  I own a few Carenado's, and think they are not that bad, but the system functionality seems to be not that deep compared to recent models of some developers (PMDG, Milviz, A2A).  How do you think the Carenado's system functionality compares to the Flight1 B200?

 

 

The system functions are pretty boiler-plate, aside from turbine modeling including startup/shutdown procedures.. (where it shines)

 

It has no FMS.. just two GPSs, and a neat , Avidyne MFD (I'm still playing/learning, looks impressive).

 

I don't have the Flight1 B200... I'm sure it's a great airplane, but this Carenado would be tough to top.

 

If the extra $20 for the Flight1 are a result of the damage/wear/maintenance modeling, and the airframe ice modeling, that's neato, but not worth it (to me)... plus I detest glass cockpits.

 

Funny thing though.. like I said.. If I could have only one twin-prop in my virtual hanger; it would be neither.. It would be the old,  Carenado Seneca..  Next would be a close tie twixt the Carenado B200, and the PMDG J41..  then the RealAir Duke or the Carenado C340.

Guys I don't have the F1 yet, but I think comparing systems in them is not fair. F1 would be mile ahead, I like Carenado just not their King Airs, the Avidynes don't work in them.

Just for ducks, I took a few pics similar to Henry's shot of the T-Duke, OV-10, BT-67, and default King Air.

 

+1 I am really enjoying the Flight1 B200 and the Aerosoft Bronco is the only plane I would keep if all others had to be gone away.

+1 Flight1 B200

So after TJ's screenshots, I bought the Carenado C90 (told the wife I needed a TC-44 to go with my new TC-12). Test flight from KNGP and looked at prop speed vs fuel flow. With the C90, the results are the same as TJ's shots and the default King Air, etc. Some 30-40 lbs/hr less on the lower RPM engine.

I actually prefer the Piston Duke over the Turbine because the Turb has too much power, which is hard to set.  I read somewhere that the real PT-6 engines are a little more responsive.  I actually ended up putting a little chalk mark on my throttles to denote where the approximate places were for takeoff thrust, cruise, approach, because it takes forever to get there, and the torque reading is going to vary a lot as you speed up or slow down.   The Piston is just easier to fly and control.  It will be interesting to see what this next update (to "Lancair standards") brings to them both.  The Lancair is one of the planes I never got, only because I just didn't fancy myself flying a kit plane, (though I hear it is amazing), so I don't really have a good feel for what might be in store for the Dukes.