I'm just sledding over to KORD at a cruise altitude of 2,800 to 3,500 feet ASL in the Kodiak Amphibian.  I find this range of G.A. altitude gives me the best detail of the FSXG renderings and was wondering what others consider their favorite G.A.  cruise range?

 

BTW, I have to say, that I fly more virtual hours in the Kodiak (all models) when I think about it, than anything else in my G.A. hangar.  This plane can fly at whatever altitude need's be for VFR/IFR and can carry 10 passengers in great comfort in its pressurized cabin, all at 182 knots.  Great STOL capabilities from its modified (for that operation) wing structure. All in all, a great FSX plane to have. Go anywhere, at mountain range clearing altitude...with ample fuel/range endurance.  Just great for those Obrx PNW lakes in the Interior.

 

 

http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Kodiak.html

 

Mitch

When I do fly GA (which is about 30% of the time, with 70% in airliners), I tend to like cruising at 3,500.   Because I own the whole East Coast US in MegaSceneryEarth packs, that's where I tend to do VFR and GA flying, and I've found 3,500' the best overall altitude for MSE.    With FTXG, you have more flexibiltiy and I may fly as low as 1,500.

 

PS... Personally, I thought the Kodiak was one of the worst airplanes Lionheart ever made (after the 'Avelina' imaginary flying car thing).... don't you find the flight dynamics and 'on/off style' turbo prop power delivery unrealistic? .... and the VC I just found very cartoon-like.    

 

Can't hold a candle to the Carenado C208, if you like "Turbo Prop Bus" style flying. :smile: ...... but of course, each to their own; one man's ceiling is another man's floor 'n all that!

When I do fly GA (which is about 30% of the time, with 70% in airliners), I tend to like cruising at 3,500.   Because I own the whole East Coast US in MegaSceneryEarth packs, that's where I tend to do VFR and GA flying, and I've found 3,500' the best overall altitude for MSE.    With FTXG, you have more flexibiltiy and I may fly as low as 1,500.

 

PS... Personally, I thought the Kodiak was one of the worst airplanes Lionheart ever made (after the 'Avelina' imaginary flying car thing).... don't you find the flight dynamics and 'on/off style' turbo prop power delivery unrealistic? .... and the VC I just found very cartoon-like.    

 

Can't hold a candle to the Carenado C208, if you like "Turbo Prop Bus" style flying. :smile: ...... but of course, each to their own; one man's ceiling is another man's floor 'n all that!

Boy..are we talking about v2.6?!??   I have totally linear throttle response, with appropriate prop timbre. I find the flight dynamics smooth, predictable in most atmospheric undertakings, and when you need to drop like a stone into a very challenging STOL landing strip and/or water body...that third flap position sure does the trick. In fact, you can get into huge trouble with that, if you didn't have a subtle, linear throttle...oh boy...can you!  What version did you have?  The v.2.6 has been much tweaked. Again...my favorite urban,bush, and amphib-based sled, Dave.  One other thing, all the pictures of the textures and features, are dead on the money. No tweaked or photo-shopped.  What you see in those pictures, is exactly what you will find as you do your pre-flight walk around.  Very detailed, with great sound fidelity. You can actually hear the prop bite upon throttle increase!  If I have peaked anybody's curiosity with this bird...again, while at about 5,000 feet on your maiden flight, drop your speed to F(fe) and try out a decent with the 3rd flap (STOL flap setting)....and watch what happens as you near about 60-75 knots....))))  Then...go and fly onto that small back-mountain lake, or river, and......after taking her to the shore...build a campfire, set your tent, put a couple of steaks on the pit......and enjoy the night....

I think the last version I tried Mitch, was v2.4 so perhaps it's been tweaked and fixed up heavily since then. Just find it strange that anyone would choose this particular plane as a 'go to' .

 

I find Lionheart releases patchy; some (like the Tri-Pacer) are really very, very, good;  others like the Avelina, Epic, and (IMHO) Kodiak just feel so unreal and 'animated' (cartoon-like) to me.   Haven't you got the Carenado C208B Mitch? .... It's sublime and Carenado's best (on par with the new Malibu Mirage IMHO) and if you like the Kodiak (which is of course a bit smaller), I think you should loooove the Carenado C208. :smile:

I think the last version I tried Mitch, was v2.4 so perhaps it's been tweaked and fixed up heavily since then. Just find it strange that anyone would choose this particular plane as a 'go to' .

 

I find Lionheart releases patchy; some (like the Tri-Pacer) are really very, very, good;  others like the Avelina, Epic, and (IMHO) Kodiak just feel so unreal and 'animated' (cartoon-like) to me.   Haven't you got the Carenado C208B Mitch? .... It's sublime and Carenado's best (on par with the new Malibu Mirage IMHO) and if you like the Kodiak (which is of course a bit smaller), I think you should loooove the Carenado C208. :smile:

Hi Dave, yeppers, I do have the C208 in fact, and enjoy taking that bird off of the pavement.  What I love about the Kodiak though, is (v2.6) how wonderfully modeled is the STOL performance. I do a lot of (PNW) virtual taxi for passengers out of Vancouver to back-country lakes and lodges within Orbx's PNW and Northern Rockies.  I find this plane unmatched for this type of enterprise. In real life, and if I had the money to purchase...it would ABSOLUTELY be this beast. It was designed for missionary work, in some of the worst landing scenarios upon the planet.  Go to YouTube and watch real-life Kodiak pilots do their 'thang. It will cause hair-loss!  

I also do the East Coast US VA/MD hops with MSE 2.0 and I normally chug along at 3,500 ft also. I can't stop flying A2A's C172. 

"GA" is an awfully broad term, and some of the more tube oriented guys here seem to equate it with low'n'slow.  I expect what you mean when you say "fly GA" is not exactly what I mean, as GA for me is all I do and I do it in many of its myriad forms.

 

Horses for courses, so when I fly, I fly as appropriate to the purpose - short scenic flight, VRF crosscountry via pilotage, IFR practice, IFR crosscountry... - the route being flown - over water, low mountains, high mountains, TEC route in an urban environment... - and the plane - non-turbo charged piston single or twin, turbo-charged piston single or twin, turbine single or twin, oxygen equipped or no, pressurized cabin or no, de-icing equipment or no, and so on.  Each plane and scenario is flown differently IRL, so that's how I fly them in the sim.

 

Tons of variety and styles here, and that's what makes it fun.

 

In other words, for me there's no such thing as a "GA altitude".  There's only the altitude appropriate to the intent and equipment of the flight.

 

Now, if you meant what altitude looks best or is the most fun for a low'n'slow sightseeing flight, that's different... and still depends on the type and quality of scenery loaded up. :lol:

 

Scott

Depending on the type of GA, I generally fly 4000-8000 ft on Pilot Edge. I may go higher due to MEA's or if flying a turbocharged, turboprop or turbojet GA.

 

For VFR, again depending on airspace confugurations, anywhere from 1000 AGL to 17,500 ft