There have been a bunch of FSX releases recently, but with much frustration I've found that I had to pass on all of them so far.

 

 

I have to agree with your decision and your reasoning.  Am in the same position.  Also disappointed that Flight1 didn't provide a steam gauge option VC.  Have to say I didn't even know this plane was in the works, and have been waiting for the Milviz King Air 350.  Guess I will keep waiting.  It may be awhile, as they just announced a delay in the 737/200.  Seems they are quite serious about getting it right before they release a new product.

I'd probably get it with the rudder issue.  Different aircraft of the same model are different and I suspect it isn't that bad.  Also, I'm guessing they're looking at it fairly hard.  Alas, I have to wait for LINDA support so it's moot, right now.  Same with the Twotter.

Here are some screen shots, I am enjoying it. The systems modeling is awesome. I don't have a turbine rating in real life, but this King Air is a really good teacher. I would suggest it anyone looking to get their RL turbine rating or a King Air signoff. In the end I will have to ask myself some questions, such as how often would I actually fly it compared to others in my inventory.

 

Anyway, here are some shots showing FLC in use, some cruise numbers for econ and high cruise settings and such.

 

Back to a little reality -

1999 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 (used) US $3,395,000


2013 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 for FSX (new) US $60

You get what you pay for -- and considering the tremendous amount of time and effort it takes to develop a plane like the Flight 1 B200, you are getting a real bargain.

The FSX modeling system has so many limitations and shortcomings, its really quite amazing that developers have advanced so much in the past 7 years, to be able to produce the level of accuracy that they do withing FSX.

FSX is an ENTERTAINMENT Games, and was released as such by Microsoft.
It was never designed to be a Commercial grade Simulator.

IF, say, P3D ever got to the point that a developer "could" produce a significantly more "Correctly" modeled B200 for P3D, to a limited market that would appreciate that extra level of realism, I am wonder what those who are currently complaining about some minor shortcomings in the FSX B200, would be willing to pay.

$600 ? $6000 ?

Like life, almost everything is a Compromise, and this is especially true for FSX developers.

Positive ROI, and they are around to produce another product.
Negative ROI, and they cease to exit, and if lucky, just remain as a FS legend.

Thank you Flight 1, for making a "silk purse out of a sow's ear" -- :p0503:

Back to a little reality -

 

1999 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 (used) US $3,395,000

 

 

2013 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 for FSX (new) US $60

 

You get what you pay for -- and considering the tremendous amount of time and effort it takes to develop a plane like the Flight 1 B200, you are getting a real bargain.

 

The FSX modeling system has so many limitations and shortcomings, its really quite amazing that developers have advanced so much in the past 7 years, to be able to produce the level of accuracy that they do withing FSX.

 

FSX is an ENTERTAINMENT Games, and was released as such by Microsoft.

It was never designed to be a Commercial grade Simulator.

 

IF, say, P3D ever got to the point that a developer "could" produce a significantly more "Correctly" modeled B200 for P3D, to a limited market that would appreciate that extra level of realism, I am wonder what those who are currently complaining about some minor shortcomings in the FSX B200, would be willing to pay.

 

$600 ? $6000 ?

 

Like life, almost everything is a Compromise, and this is especially true for FSX developers.

 

Positive ROI, and they are around to produce another product.

Negative ROI, and they cease to exit, and if lucky, just remain as a FS legend.

 

Thank you Flight 1, for making a "silk purse out of a sow's ear" -- :p0503:

Agree, this is an awesome aircraft and it has raise the bar for GA aircraft. A big thank you to Jim, Kurt (Yoda) and the Flight 1 team for finally making this happen!  :rolleyes:  

FSMP, on 14 Jul 2013 - 2:37 PM, said:

Back to a little reality -

 

1999 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 (used) US $3,395,000

 

 

2013 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 for FSX (new) US $60

 

You get what you pay for -- and considering the tremendous amount of time and effort it takes to develop a plane like the Flight 1 B200, you are getting a real bargain.

 

The FSX modeling system has so many limitations and shortcomings, its really quite amazing that developers have advanced so much in the past 7 years, to be able to produce the level of accuracy that they do withing FSX.

 

FSX is an ENTERTAINMENT Games, and was released as such by Microsoft.

It was never designed to be a Commercial grade Simulator.

 

IF, say, P3D ever got to the point that a developer "could" produce a significantly more "Correctly" modeled B200 for P3D, to a limited market that would appreciate that extra level of realism, I am wonder what those who are currently complaining about some minor shortcomings in the FSX B200, would be willing to pay.

 

$600 ? $6000 ?

 

Like life, almost everything is a Compromise, and this is especially true for FSX developers.

 

Positive ROI, and they are around to produce another product.

Negative ROI, and they cease to exit, and if lucky, just remain as a FS legend.

 

Thank you Flight 1, for making a "silk purse out of a sow's ear" -- :p0503:

Absolutely! +1!

 

Kdub

I'm sure everyone is aware but noone has really brought it up.. This is rocking the best G1000 in fsx. Add everything else that it offers over competitor b200s. Should be a no brainer. The standard rate turns may be fixed, but even then does it REALLY detract from everything else it offers. The poster who mentioned pilotedge has a point though. If you're practicing ifr approaches on pilotedge to help maintain currency for your real life training, then maybe this is a deal breaker. But how many of us are doing that?

dcgator29, on 14 Jul 2013 - 4:55 PM, said:

dcgator29, on 14 Jul 2013 - 4:55 PM, said:

 

I'm sure everyone is aware but noone has really brought it up.. This is rocking the best G1000 in fsx. Add everything else that it offers over competitor b200s. Should be a no brainer. The standard rate turns may be fixed, but even then does it REALLY detract from everything else it offers. The poster who mentioned pilotedge has a point though. If you're practicing ifr approaches on pilotedge to help maintain currency for your real life training, then maybe this is a deal breaker. But how many of us are doing that?

I don't think it has anything to do with real life training. It has to do with realistic simulation, for the sake of realistic simulation. I don't think anybody expects a Saitek Yoke and Pedals to match the heavy feel of the controls, but we can at least expect the flight model to have the control inputs be balanced and proportionate to the real thing. In the example we are discussing, if a plane requires full deflection of a control surface to bring it about, and the real thing requires virtually none at all, then I see that as a problem, or an innacuracy. Some people will enjoy their G1000 and fly it around via the heading bug, but others might prefer an aircraft that behaves as close to the real thing as possible when flying hands on. So it isn't necessarily a "no brainer" for everybody.

 

I'll try to leave this thread now and stop the complaining, because I realize that I'm going out on a ledge criticising an airplane that I don't have. My pre-purchase concerns are based only in what others have said,, not first hand experience with it. I'm just trying to explain why I haven't bought it yet.

 

 

I'll try not to say any more about this, because I realize that I'm going out on a ledge criticising an airplane that I don't have. My pre-purchase concerns are based only in what others have said,, not first hand experience with it. I'm just trying to explain why I haven't bought it yet.

 

It's your hard earned money and you should spend it wisely.  Wait a bit and they'll get it sorted out. 

I've done some flying in the B200, and it is an absolutely outstanding plane. If you want a King Air for FSX, get this... you won't regret it.

 

 

There have been a bunch of FSX releases recently, but with much frustration I've found that I had to pass on all of them so far.  I passed on the Q400 because despite having a much touted flight model, it apparently doesn't react to turbulence or chop in any way.  Don't want to fly on a rail through a thunderstorm.  I waited over a year for that plane, but when I heard that, I just couldn't commit to it for that reason. Hopefully they'll fix that.   I passed on the Twin Otter because it has an unremoveable default GPS, and that's a no-go.  Maybe they'll reconsider.  Now I'm passing on this one because of the coordination problem that has been reported.  I don't know if it's a case of me just having developed unreasonably high expectations, or if there is a trend from developers to assume that a sucker like me will automatically buy something just because it's out there, no matter what.  C'mon flight sim developer guys, my wallet is ready, but the days of insta-buy are over.  I'm really anxious to buy a new plane!

 

If neither the Q400 or Twotter are good enough for you, then what is?

I've done some flying in the B200, and it is an absolutely outstanding plane. If you want a King Air for FSX, get this... you won't regret it.

 

 

 

If neither the Q400 or Twotter are good enough for you, then what is?

That's the same thing I thought when I read his post.

I'm using RealityXP in the Otter. I am working on getting rid of their GPS in the VC.  I have the RXP GNS 530 mounted in the VC, but I have to figure out how to get rid of their knobs and frame from theirs, since it is sitting over top of mine.  It's just a matter of time now.

The Q400 is the best aircraft released since the NGX, and this Kingair is excellent.  I'm sure if there is a problem with the rudder, it will be fixed in a patch.

Back to a little reality -

 

1999 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 (used) US $3,395,000

 

 

2013 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200 for FSX (new) US $60

 

You get what you pay for -- and considering the tremendous amount of time and effort it takes to develop a plane like the Flight 1 B200, you are getting a real bargain.

 

The FSX modeling system has so many limitations and shortcomings, its really quite amazing that developers have advanced so much in the past 7 years, to be able to produce the level of accuracy that they do withing FSX.

 

FSX is an ENTERTAINMENT Games, and was released as such by Microsoft.

It was never designed to be a Commercial grade Simulator.

 

IF, say, P3D ever got to the point that a developer "could" produce a significantly more "Correctly" modeled B200 for P3D, to a limited market that would appreciate that extra level of realism, I am wonder what those who are currently complaining about some minor shortcomings in the FSX B200, would be willing to pay.

 

$600 ? $6000 ?

 

Like life, almost everything is a Compromise, and this is especially true for FSX developers.

 

Positive ROI, and they are around to produce another product.

Negative ROI, and they cease to exit, and if lucky, just remain as a FS legend.

 

Thank you Flight 1, for making a "silk purse out of a sow's ear" -- :p0503:

+1 here as well.

 

Well said.

QuoteIf neither the Q400 or Twotter are good enough for you, then what is?

 

 

I wasn't going to come back, but something about your post is sticking in my gizzard, so I'll give you an example. My example is the Turbine Duke. It has complete Rxp compatibility and in my case that means GNS 530 and 430 with Crossfill, quite an expensive package. The Twin Otter doesn't allow that option. The Duke has no incompatibilities with Active Sky turbulence, or Ezdok, or Accufeel. Some have reported such incompatibilities on the Q400. It will slip and spin, with the apparent concession made that standard rate turns require a little more bank angle than the real thing. The rudder required to coordinate in the turn is very minimal and very believable even if it might be slightly more than the real thing, according to the developer. I've heard that the spoolup time of the Turbine requires a slightly longer time than the real engine, and I also suspect that the torque increase when retarding the rpm is likely too tame. Failure modelling is limited to the engine, but there is rumor of an uprade, timeframe unknown. It will supposedly bring it up to the standards of the Lanceair. Did I mention it looks damn good, too?

 

So is the Duke perfect? Hell no, obviously not. I'm sure the turbines on the Q400 are much more realistic. There are clearly many compromises made, I'm sure a lot more than the short list I gave above. In fact, there were a couple of sloppy things about it that annoyed me very badly, and I only became very pleased with it after the service pack. But now it strikes the perfect balance of features FOR ME and my addons. I have at least 10 other payware planes in my hangar that similarly meet my "standards." and compatibility needs, so it isn't as if I can't be pleased. I never said that the Q400 or Twatter weren't good enough for me, nor am I saying that the Turbine Duke is better than them, only that there are specific compatibility reasons why I haven't bought them yet. Even though I would absolutely love a Dash 8, the designers chose to emphasize a different target audience, and that is their choice. Likewise with the King Air, there are certain issues being reported that I can already tell you would be a dealbreaker for me. If they fix them I can very easily see myself purchasing and enjoying this airplane. Simple as that.

 

In regards to the popular post about what we can expect out of a $60 dollar addon? Given some of the planes already in my hangar, my expectations are quite high, and tolerance for issues regarding basic flight control fundamentals is almost non-existent, especially for a $60 addon.

<p>Mine are/were too, which is why I made a pretty huge stink about something I was concerned with.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Still, the King Air has failures modeled, and while it doesn't have RXP, it uses Navigraph for updates plus ocsnl WAAS updates (if you are a USA flyer) from F1.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think you would like it, but like Greg said maybe wait and see what comes out in their update.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>oh update:  There's a RW KA driver on their forums that had some cool things to say about it:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.simforums.com/forums/excellent-aircraft_topic46366.html">http://www.simforums.com/forums/excellent-aircraft_topic46366.html</a></p>

 

STUPID EDITING issues... does anyone else have that crap come up with Chrome during an edit?

 

 

STUPID EDITING issues... does anyone else have that crap come up with Chrome during an edit?

 

yep, all the time....usually happens after you re-edit a post a few times in a row. I didn't know it was only a Chrome issue though, but yea, I DO use Chrome too.