Magestic Dash 8 any good?

[Werner747 107]

May i ask how does this dash 8 relate in terms of realism (flight model/ dynamics) to PMDG's J41 ?

 

Leaving aside the animated drama and blowing up the engines special effects that can be avoided by doing things in the correct order, the climb management you have to monitor (no autothrust) ,     learning to slow down before commencing your descent and so on.the J41 is considered a light to semi-light add-on. correct me if i am wrong.

 

Is the dash 8 more realistic in its flying behavior? 

I may be cursed as a heathen after this, but...   I don't actually own the J-41 so I cannot comment on that, but what I can say is that the FDE seems incredibly realistic!   I am not a Dash 8 pilot, but I like to make intense studies of videos and compare it to what I see, coupled with my slightly limited real world experience in flying light sport aircraft and Cessna's and to me it feels very real indeed.

 

As for the systems, they work like they should, with the occasional one not modelled entirely due to the fact that the Pilot edition is the lightest of them all, but trust me, it cannot really be considered "light"   The systems modelling is really really good and thing like taxiing the aircraft feels very realistic indeed!

 

Also things like prop icing and the way it interferes with the dynamics of the aircraft and the prop itself is modelled in great detail.   The STOL capabilities of the aircraft is very realistically modelled.   Landing it is a bit of a challenge until you master it, but that I understand is the case in the real world as well.

 

So overall, yes, very realistic, but I cannot compare it to the J 41.

 

(Now immediately fetches credit card to buy the J-41 before being discovered as not owning all the PMDG products...) :blush:  :ph34r:  :LMAO:

 

Again, hope that helps!

[Q_flyer 766]

I own both, and to be fair, the PMDG JS41 is a 2009 product, and the Majestic Q400 is a product released in 2013 (albeit with a very long development lead time).....

 

....that said, in all honesty, for me, the Majestic Q400 is superior to the JS41 is pretty much all areas (and VASTLY in terms of performance!).

[Phillip Gallagher 101]

The plane is great and well worth the money...a bargain actually compared to some others.  BUT the load manager and speed card access is terrible!!!  I hope they make a new one.

 

Re: the J41 comparo...the J41 feels more realistic to me, especially the sound/immersion factor. 

[Kerlix 99]

While the plane is great and fun to fly, the lack of environmental interaction really kills it for me. True, it is a very smooth plane to handfly and is a joy for short hauls, but aircraft don't coast through the air on rails.

[HiFly 16]

@ Dave Wegner:

 

   Please elaborate.  What do you mean by "lack of environmental interaction".  I was just about to make a purchase until I got to your post!   Everyone else seemed to think it was simulated very realistically.  I will await your answer before I grab for my credit card. 

[AVSIM Admin 4]

This is an automatic message.

 

This topic has been moved from "PMDG General Forum" to "MS FSX Forum". This move has been done for a number of possible reasons.

• The most likely reason is that the post was off topic.
• The topic could also have contained images or a video that were not appropriate to the original forum it was posted in.
• The images might not have been "illustrative" or "explanatory" in nature.
• The topic could have been moved because we deemed it to be more appropriately placed elsewhere.

Please ensure that your posts are "on topic" and contain illustrative images or videos as appropriate. Do not post videos or images just for entertainment purposes anywhere but in the screen shot or video forums. See our image posting rules here.

 

Members who continue to post off topic posts can be denied entry to specific forums in order to reduce and remove the practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.

[Pict 15]

Basically because the FDM is entirely independent of FSX's FDM system (ie basically a special slew mode), the aircraft isn't affected by FSX's turbulence...not a big deal for me as the more realistic handling of things like p-factor, induced lift, toeque, adverse yaw etc more than makes up for it.

 

--Xavier

[Sincere 19]

It isn't quite as good as the NGX, the textures are quite bad in the exterior of the airplane, and they aren't as detailed anywhere like the NGX.

[Airline2Sim 489]

To answer the OP, the Q400 is superb. Lots of foibles and ocassional weird behaviour just like the real one!

 

On the question of videos, we'll be releasing more details soon about our pilot training program, taught by a real pilot from a very large Q400 operator in Europe and is based on his own type rating experience. The cadet training initially consists of around 10 hours of footage with a very comprehensive briefing on all the flight deck controls and equipment before moving onto the flying portion, culminating in a three sector day done in real time around Europe, again based on our pilots' experience of operating the Q4 against the clock with real pax. There's a huge amount to take in and we're pretty excited about bringing you effectively 'real world' training so stay tuned for more details and teasers soon.

 

Ben

Airline2Sim

[starstream707 70]

you wont be disappointed

[Q_flyer 766]

........... but aircraft don't coast through the air on rails.

 

Too right ........... but....... neither does this aircraft.    If it's coasting on rails for you, you've got something set up wrong.....

To answer the OP, the Q400 is superb. Lots of foibles and ocassional weird behaviour just like the real one!

 

On the question of videos, we'll be releasing more details soon about our pilot training program, taught by a real pilot from a very large Q400 operator in Europe and is based on his own type rating experience. The cadet training initially consists of around 10 hours of footage with a very comprehensive briefing on all the flight deck controls and equipment before moving onto the flying portion, culminating in a three sector day done in real time around Europe, again based on our pilots' experience of operating the Q4 against the clock with real pax. There's a huge amount to take in and we're pretty excited about bringing you effectively 'real world' training so stay tuned for more details and teasers soon.

 

Ben

Airline2Sim

 

This sounds good.   :cool:

 

(PS.... I think you need to be set up as a Commercial Member status though, from your post).

[TomEDDW 1]

To be honest i don't see any benefit in outstanding High Res-Textures as some other Addons come up with when you have to

struggle with low FPS and low overall performances even with a high end Rig.

I do prefer a bit lower res textures over all those "almost photoreal" stuff.

I am able to lock and run FSX at 60 FPS all over the world with the Q400. Why give that up for some VC-Texture?

 

This is no offense to PMDG, but they should not only think about realism. Performance eating Addons can really

kill the joy of flying for many people and prevent them of buying their products.

 

Best regards!

Tom

[Q_flyer 766]

To be honest i don't see any benefit in outstanding High Res-Textures as some other Addons come up with when you have to

struggle with low FPS and low overall performances even with a high end Rig.

I do prefer a bit lower res textures over all those "almost photoreal" stuff.

I am able to lock and run FSX at 60 FPS all over the world with the Q400. Why give that up for some VC-Texture?

 

 

+1        Excellent point.

 

That's the brilliant thing with the Q400.      Use it with any weather setting, and traffic, and complex airports and it just laughs them off.  I love the NGX but it can be a comprimise;   Eg.  I either fly it out of default or less complex airports and areas, or else I have to put up with 20-23 FPS which is a bit less than idea when you're using TrackIR as head movement gets jerky

[avhpilot 156]

To answer the OP, the Q400 is superb. Lots of foibles and ocassional weird behaviour just like the real one!

 

On the question of videos, we'll be releasing more details soon about our pilot training program, taught by a real pilot from a very large Q400 operator in Europe and is based on his own type rating experience. The cadet training initially consists of around 10 hours of footage with a very comprehensive briefing on all the flight deck controls and equipment before moving onto the flying portion, culminating in a three sector day done in real time around Europe, again based on our pilots' experience of operating the Q4 against the clock with real pax. There's a huge amount to take in and we're pretty excited about bringing you effectively 'real world' training so stay tuned for more details and teasers soon.

 

Ben

Airline2Sim

 

I've bought it yesterday. flying it is easier than installing it. download 750 Mb ending up with 2 installers without any readme file to explain why so i chose one of them.

after entering ordernumber, email address and last name if got an 'invalid response' message. turning off firewall, ant-virus to double check but still the same, so i tried the other (offline) installer but that required sending a written email to a support address and i didn't want to take the risk of having to wait for any response, so i turned back to the other installer. i always run setups 'as admin' just to be sure anyway. Only after 20 minutes or so i had the brilliant insight to perhaps leave out the 'van' in my last name and bingo! the installer went further, pheww...

next question is whether i want a vc with or without wing and propellor views with a warning that with it a slight loss of FPS may occur. it would have been nice to have a readme file in order to anticipate things like that so to make a sound judgement.

 

I have manged to get the engines running, take off and land it (albeit not without light injuries for some passengers i think) all within an hour of experimenting and not reading any manuals. just by trying a logical flow, I have some practice with the J41 so that perhaps is a benefit not making obvious mistakes like having the condition levers still on taxi instead of fly while taking off + i am by now an experienced simmer. i had expected more difficulties and was a bit dissapointed i could get away with it.

 

The VC is very well modelled, indeed NGX quality with similar reflection effects and high res buttons etc.

performance is SUPERB for an addon, perhaps even smoother than the default fsx cessna. it's like cutting a knife through butter how she flies through those clouds. (as a reference: using REX (latest), UT2, FTXG and was hand flying over Hong Kong scenery Kai Tek). Is this only the first add-on making use of multiple cores? Why hasn't this been done before? It would have made many tweaking threads obsolete.

 

The first landing was quite a shock because i wasn't able to flare, apparently the dash doesn't seem to be able to do that and requires another technique.

 

Apart from some weird behavior like spontaneous vertical jumps in the air while taxiing and some other  strange things i've noticed like freezing of 'movement' during an approach, this is a nice add-on.

 

I am not sure if it;s in the same leage as the NGX, that would be for a real pilot to judge i suppose,

 

Given the excellent smooth performance this will soon become my favourite short-hop aircraft so i can enjoy more of the autogen from FTX Global.

[Q_flyer 766]

The first landing was quite a shock because i wasn't able to flare, apparently the dash doesn't seem to be able to do that and requires another technique.

 

It certainly does! :smile: ..... I think we all got caught out by that at the beginning.   With this aircraft, you must fly the aircraft right into the ground, before retarting power.   So keep your power level on approach power, and leave it there, even after the mains have touched down (it feels strange at first), and only retard to beta once the front wheel touches.    After 10 landings, you'll be doing absolute greasers, just like in any other aircraft. :wink:   ...... but it is indeed, an entirely different landing technique.