Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
richbonneau

Flysimware Cessna 402 C for FSX/P3D

Recommended Posts

Thanks Dave. Think I'll stick with the carenado 340

 

I wish flight 1 would do another 441. What a sexy plane


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I miss in FSX F1's Cessna 421 would love to see a upgraded version I'd buy it.


Ken Heibel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that Eaglesoft will also focus on twin engined piston aircraft as part of their General Aviation development seeing that they are back in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they're focused on bizjets. Which is excellent because there's hardly any good ones.


|Ryan Butterworth|

| i7 4790K@4.4GHz | 32GB RAM | EVGA GTX 1080Ti | ASUS Z97-Pro | 1TB 860 Evo | 500GB 840 Evo Win10 Pro | 1TB Samsung 7200rpm | Seasonic X750W |

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very sceptical about addons that dont display clear daytime pictures of the VC or inside texturing.  I looked at the pics over at flightsim.com and it doesnt inspire confidence that it will be money well spent.   I do agree though that the Cessna range of twins is seriously lacking.  I actually really enjoy the Carenado C340.  I wish they'd do more.

 

Sadly, I'll give this one a skip

To be fair the provided Youtube video right on the first page of the link does show clearly what the VC looks like in the daytime.


Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure they're focused on bizjets. Which is excellent because there's hardly any good ones.

 

They have a Corporate Aviation and General Aviation section.  They did a brilliant Piper Twin Commanche years ago, so hoping they look at expanding this.  But I agree, quality bizjets are also in demand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


The 402 is ok. It's much better than the last few FlySimWare offerings, (which definitely were freeware quality IMHO). It's not in the top drawer league but it flies quite nice and definitely has some character. It will never be a favourite or a classic but I don't regret buying it, because I really wanted a Cessna 400 series, and it's good enough to be fun.



The weakspot is the engine sounds - I could be wrong but it appears that the 402C is using the default C172 sounds, but with a Sound.cfg for sey up for a twin. I could be wrong, but that's how it certainly sounds!



Internal, switch sounds etc are pretty good though. VC is ok. Averagish.

 

An honest initial appraisal Dave - thank you. It does not however encourage me to go for this one as I fear that I would fly it a few times after installation for the novelty value and then it would sit forlorn in my hanger as have so many 'averagish' addon aircraft in the past, both here in FSX and in FS9. For that reason, I now try to confine my addon payware aircraft to those with great reviews or those from manufacturers with a proven pedigree - sadly this doesn't seem to fit either category as yet. Still, as I mentioned previously my FS self-control is very poor so you never know!!

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that someone has 6 posts does not in itself mean their viewpoint is any less credible than some know-all with 12,000 posts.

 

:lol:  :lol:

 

 

The 402 is ok.  It's much better than the last few FlySimWare offerings, (which definitely were freeware quality IMHO).  It's not in the top drawer league but it flies quite nice and definitely has some character.    It will never be a favourite or a classic but I don't regret buying it, because I really wanted a Cessna 400 series, and it's good enough to be fun

 

 

I'd mostly agree with that assessment, Dave.  I think it's better than OK, but it's certainly not up to Carenado standards on the visual model.  I haven't done enough flying with it yet to form an opinion on the model, but on the surface it seems to be pretty robust.  Sounds are definitely a weak point, and the documentation is poor.  Regardless, I'm going to have lots of fun flying this around New England!

 

Attached are a couple of quick screen captures from my system.

post-176694-0-14355800-1391449269.jpg

 

post-176694-0-58603900-1391449278.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The carenado 340 FDE its awfull, dont flight like the real one! Series 300 the 310 Milviz its the best, done for a real pilot with a real model, dont doubt on that. 

 

This 402 looks ok, dont great like visual of carenado, but i'm will very conform with a good FDE (on the page says that they make this model with help of pilots 402C) and panel funcionality. Those elements make a atractive and only 400 series for the FSX.

 

Redgars 

Robert Bernard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The carenado 340 FDE its awfull, dont flight like the real one! Series 300 the 310 Milviz its the best, done for a real pilot with a real model, dont doubt on that.

 

This 402 looks ok, dont great like visual of carenado, but i'm will very conform with a good FDE (on the page says that they make this model with help of pilots 402C) and panel funcionality. Those elements make a atractive and only 400 series for the FSX.

 

Redgars

Robert Bernard

You could always use the VC from the Carenado 340 there aren't many differences in the cockpit of a 340 and a 400 series. Though the 402's VC looks pretty good but it could stand an HD texture upgrade. Id love to see carenado or milviz do a 421

CFI,CFII,MEI.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of days in, and I have to say I am really enjoying flying this Cessna 402C around New England. :smile:

 

The Flight Handling Characteristics feel pretty convincing and although people are correct, the visuals are nowhere near Carenado level, the FDE seems (to me) more convincing than most Carenado FDEs which I find can feel a bit sterile or generic.

 

It's a good twin.  The Carenado 340 has better visuals (although even that is not quite one of Carenado's best) but for me, the 402C is more fun to fly.  Nice switch sounds and stuff in the cockpit too.    Oh and it's extremely easy on frames.

 

I must admit I did expect to fly it once or twice and then for it to get hardly any action, but I can't seem to put it down!

 

Apologies staff, I know this isn't the screenie section but here's two pics from my flight today with the 402 (a short hop from CEN4 to CEJ4) :-

 

121.jpg

 

 

219.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that Eaglesoft will also focus on twin engined piston aircraft as part of their General Aviation development seeing that they are back in the game.

Erich, thanks for including us in the mix but we'll maintain our focus on Corporate Jets at a high level. B)

 

ErichB, on 03 Feb 2014 - 10:47 AM, said:

They have a Corporate Aviation and General Aviation section. They did a brilliant Piper Twin Commanche years ago, so hoping they look at expanding this.

 

But I agree, quality bizjets are also in demand.

Erich, the Piper Twin Comanche was a joy as was the Diamond DA42 Twin Star but it's likely the last twin we do unless we find a very interesting

Cabin Class twin project that we can't resist. B)


Best Regards,

Ron Hamilton ASEL

Forumsig16.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave do they say anything about reality XP?


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

I am very glad to see a thread opened regarding this aircraft I am obeying since the first day it was released! Thanks for all of your infos and observations so far!

I am also very interested in the RXP integration, besides that I can see a "XP" allready labled on every gauge frame of the garmin 530 on its right upper side ... ?!

 

Cheers!

Andreas


Best regards,

 

Avsim-Banner-2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave do they say anything about reality XP?

 

 

 

I am also very interested in the RXP integration, besides that I can see a "XP" allready labled on every gauge frame of the garmin 530 on its right upper side ... ?!

 

Cheers!

Andreas

 

Hi Guys,

 

No RXP support and I don't think integrating the 530 into the VC would work as they have their own 530 in their with 3D knobs.

 

Of course, RXP as a pop-up works fine.

 

One last thing I forgot to say about this plane - although it does 'feel' nice to fly, it's grossly overpowered.  I have found that flying it with full fuel (even on short hops) negates the over-powered feel.

 

I will also probably look at a CFG tweak to reduce power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    45%
    $11,435.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...