Aerosoft Twin Otter Extended Released!

[Nyxx 6,993]

Thank you Griphos, that was useful.

[Jimmy RFR 406]

Is there a proper list anywhere showing why the Extended version is better or improved over their original Twin Otter release?

 

Other than the obvious visual improvements, I understand that the FDE is supposed to be much improved, and the systems depth is improved as well, with a bit more realistic engine  / torque management.

 

Of course, I'm just repeating what I've heard - I'm very curious if this will prove to be true.

 

 

 

I wonder how a totally new external GNS 430/530 unit would be received...Given that support by RXP seems totally non existant any more....

 

 

I would think it'd be very well received if it had most of the functionality + the ability to update.

[tttocs 301]

 

 

I wonder how a totally new external GNS 430/530 unit would be received...Given that support by RXP seems totally non existant any more....

 

I'd say that depends.  The RXP gauges do what they do almost flawlessly.  That is, they accurately simulate the RW Garmin units (they should, they use Garmin's own trainer), and do so with little impact - in fact in a number of planes, they're better on frames than the default-based units they replace.

 

Given the current support in GA planes from many vendors, I'd say any replacement would have to meet these criteria:  Do what the RXP's do (see above), work with existing RXP integrations, provide good support directly from the vendor and offer database updates.  Oh, and support P3D.

 

I doubt we'll see something like this.

 

Scott

[ryanbatc 12,836]

For GA, other than RXP, the only option is Flight1's G1000, with navigraph support. It would be better with VNAV (something the F1 Tech standalone version has).

 

RXP is great but there's no good way to get NAV database upgrades.

[pilottj 198]

It looks very nice, tho since I just got the An-2 not long ago so I don't have need for a cabin bush plane ATM.  Saving my $$ for A2A 172 and PMDG 777.  Maybe someday I'll eventually get it for the realistic PT6 operation.

[Wendall 50]

It looks very nice, tho since I just got the An-2 not long ago so I don't have need for a cabin bush plane ATM.  Saving my $$ for A2A 172 and PMDG 777.  Maybe someday I'll eventually get it for the realistic PT6 operation.

This is my stance of this completely. I have the older Twotter and rarely use it. And with the An-2 out now, I just don't have the use for the Twotter like I did. The only way I would use it is for an occasional landing at SABA. But who knows, maybe I'll cave in tomorrow morning. 

[McDaniel 48]

for V1 owner its a no brainer.....the VC is just a beauty....the icing effects are the icing on the cake....

 

Go get it...

[HansRoaming 73]

The P51 shot is at the worst angle to show how it looks. It's not awesome when seen from the front but alright and fine ish from the captains seat on other aircraft (hence the buttons have the perspective they do). If you're a Reality XP user you put up with the looks and the 1106 AIRAC because by using the Garmin trainer it really is like the real unit, fantastic avionics to go with a fantastic aircraft.

 

All I'd want is an option for a 2D area in the VC to plop the RXP in really, nothing more. Have it as a separate VC model to link in via the aircraft.cfg if need be.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

The P51 shot is at the worst angle to show how it looks. It's not awesome when seen from the front but alright and fine ish from the captains seat on other aircraft (hence the buttons have the perspective they do). If you're a Reality XP user you put up with the looks and the 1106 AIRAC because by using the Garmin trainer it really is like the real unit, fantastic avionics to go with a fantastic aircraft.



All I'd want is an option for a 2D area in the VC to plop the RXP in really, nothing more. Have it as a separate VC model to link in via the aircraft.cfg if need be.

 

Yeah...that'd work, I think.  I have it in my ol' faithful Carenado C182Q...was never designed for Reality XP but someone helped me get it in there.

[pilottj 198]

Yeah Mathjis pic of the P-51's RXP unit is flawed, you don't fly the P-51 from that angle.  The GPS unit in the P-51 is directly in front of the Pilot's point of view so you really don't see '3D' buttons anyway.

[Jimmy RFR 406]

 

 

The P51 shot is at the worst angle to show how it looks.

 

 

 

Yeah Mathjis pic of the P-51's RXP unit is flawed, you don't fly the P-51 from that angle.

 

Not only that, but his logic is incredibly flawed as well.  He doesn't want the option to put a 2D gauge there 'because it looks bad'.  The problem with that logic is that they're shipping the product with a nice fancy 3D unit that looks good.  The only way that a user would see a 2D GPS panel is if the user added it by choice because it was something that they wanted.  It's not like it's inclusion would even be noticed anyone who doesn't own a RXP gauge. 

 

It would be similar to a clothing store refusing to sell you a huge down parka in the winter time because it's unfashionable.

[Manny 1,293]

It would be similar to a clothing store refusing to sell you a huge down parka in the winter time because it's unfashionable.

 

Abercrombie and fitch refuses to make/Sell Plus size clothing for precisely the same reason. . LOL

[gojozoom 21]

 

 

Jeez, just look at this thread for a sec (in fact look at all the other threads regarding product releases)... A developer comes up with a new product and 80% of the replies are complaining about the missing RXP integration, which isn't even Aerosoft's fault. I do understand that this is a valid issue, but do we really need 20+ posts about it? What's the value? Yes, they all need constructive criticism that helps them perfecting the products, but don't make it a nagging-fest, especially before even completing a full flight with the product. Why don't we try and keep up the positive culture of our community before the developers loose motivation and stop producing after all. Believe it or not, they're on our side! That's why we have so many add-ons coming to us each months.

 

It's not my intention to offend anyone here but I'm getting concerned about the increasing amount of blunt criticism on these forums (stuff like incorrect wingflex animation or a missing rivet). Back in the old days, the community helped the developer to sort these issues...

 

Dan Vary

[Nathan3219 113]

Thanks for the perspective Dan.

[ryanbatc 12,836]

It's hard for me not to comment when I see a beautifully modeled GA type plane with a stock GPS. I see a perfect opportunity for RXP530 in that spot.