Thats not entirely correct. A faster plane places different demands on the pilot , generally less time to correct errors and less time for prepartion eg circuit entry ,higher stall speeds... for example the Real air duke V2 requires a bit of speed and flatter approach and unforgiving if you land below target landing speed usually resulting with collapsed gear if you flare to long.

 

So Higher workload especially IFR regardless if its a high speed single or twin

 

However there are some good reports coming out for this plane and if they continue I may just buy it as I didnt jump aboard the C172 mainly due to release problems.

 

Thats funny because in my flight training, I found the Piper Seminole easier to fly approach and land compared to the 172.   The Seminole was bigger, easier to fly in turbulence, easier to land on a 'spot'.  The Seminole required more monitoring and more planning, but you simply adjust your flight plan to allow for the extra planning.

 

As far as workload goes I think the pilot workload in an AN-2 is more than a 777 :lol:   You can give yourself a high work load in a Cherokee.  You go to a very high elevation airport in the summer, like KLXV.  Load the plane to MGTOW.  Use the 'used airplane' feature to give yourself a worn out plane with half the equipment about to fail.  Set weather to the typical summer thunderstorms and mountain obscurations....Have Fun!  B)   Or how about taking the J-3 with nervous Heidi up front to some remote bush strip that requires tight quarters flying.  Weather is barely VFR, no GPS, just a sectional and compass.  Your workload will be pretty heavy.  You can put any airplane in an environment that will keep you busy.

without going to extreme environments, flying a turbo Mooney (or anything similar) and a C172 from A to B the Mooney will always be more demanding due to speed and being very slippery alone and then of course you have extra systems to monitor not to mention retractable gear to worry about and who hasn't had the horn go off in FSX for gear yet under high work load ?

 

Going back to a 2 hour block in FSX, It makes a big difference to me what I "reach" for even though the scenery will be the same. Thats the reason I was hoping A2A would have gone for something more complex second up

At no point did I enjoy this flight in the Cherokee

 

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Available in 1440p.

 

 

I did have some strange "clicking" sounds when on approach so I guessing I was doing something wrong.  

 

Rob, did you figure out the clicking sounds by any chance?

Can some of you please write more constructive feedback regarding A2A Cherokee?

What do you mean by "it is easy to fly"? I know that real world Cherokee is tend to be quite easy to handle, and this is why I am worried about its FSX version. Does it mean "boring" in terms of FSX? (I know it is eye candy, so I mean putting apart all the immersive sounds and cockpit visuals, etc. - focusing only on flight dynamics).

I own A2A C172 and in real world I am doing my PPL now. I am looking for something demanding to learn as much as I can. I have some of other FSX addons that I don't fly much, so I don't want to buy another one that would be the same.

 

Thanks!

Just out for my first flight and it was quite enjoyable, time for flight number 2.

 

I always wanted to say thanks to A2A for including a Canadian registration!  Now when I'm flying at home I don't need to make up a story in my head about my aircraft being a visitor from the US for some reason

Just out for my first flight and it was quite enjoyable, time for flight number 2.

 

I always wanted to say thanks to A2A for including a Canadian registration! Now when I'm flying at home I don't need to make up a story in my head about my aircraft being a visitor from the US for some reason

 

Just out for my first flight and it was quite

enjoyable, time for flight number 2.

 

lolol, homeland security on coffee break no worries.

 

I always wanted to say thanks to A2A for including a Canadian registration! Now when I'm flying at home I don't need to make up a story in my head about my aircraft being a visitor from the US for some reason

I did have some strange "clicking" sounds when on approach so I guessing I was doing something wrong.

Sounds like the flaps .wav file kept looping... that *was* strange.

 

Btw Rob... fine job with airspeed control on short final (where the clicking starts).

 

 

Thats funny because in my flight training, I found the Piper Seminole easier to fly approach and land compared to the 172. The Seminole was bigger, easier to fly in turbulence, easier to land on a 'spot'.

Yeah... the Seminole wrt to what you are saying having that higher wing loading... and the drag wrt to engine placement when at idle.  And maybe something to do with that T-tail. 

 

I liked the Seminole a lot too.  Solid, good flying airplane.  But bigger?  Not by much.  :P

 

 

for example the Real air duke V2 requires a bit of speed and flatter approach and unforgiving if you land below target landing speed usually resulting with collapsed gear if you flare to long.

One should not have to fly a flatter approach.  No reason to.

 

And unlike C172 or Cherokee 180... you "fly" a twin to the ground i.e. you do not stall it in.  For example, carry power into the transition... slightly nose high attitude right above the runway, pull what power is remaining and let it settle in.

Got it. A frustrating 20 minutes trying to start the Cherokee, ending with a look at the manual, and cleaning up the damage I'd done to the engine! Tried a cross country flight from Full Sutton to Beverley, both in Yorkshire, England. As with the Carenado, it is an easy plane to fly and trims beautifully, but the eager left turn all through the flight was a pain - I need to see if there is aileron/rudder trim, and I need to check out the autopilot too. It looked simple enough to guess at, but was not! 

 

Today I flew TNGs at Beverley airstrip, perfect handling. 

 

My new steed: 

 

 

 

So, advertising 3D lights is NOT advertising those illumination lights

 

Sorry, but that's pure semantics hogwash...because if you asked the average flight simmer what he thinks the term  "3D lights built directly into the model" is referring to, most would think the taxi lights that illuminate the ground. This is pretty obvious to me and everyone else...the wording they use should really be changed/clarified instead of defended IMO.

The video by Rob looks great.

 

Nice to see what Alec, who has been flying the real thing, refers to like "running short of elevator" on landing...

 

@Mithras: Alec was specially interested in the prop effects, and he confirmed me that you could use rudder only, like in real life, to counter them. But since the Piper has asymmetrical fuel feed, you have to keep changing fuel tank in long flights or you will experience fuel imbalance. Can you check if that was the cause of your "eager left turn all through the flight"?

 

 

I need to see if there is aileron/rudder trim

 

Just saw the jcomm post... yeah check tanks for fuel imbalance... try it in the FSX "clear wx theme".

 

My short testing has shown so far a very slight left turn... could zero it out with a bit of rudder trim (located in the center floor to the right of the parking brake -- pic on p.84 of the manual shows it well).

 

 

Sounds like the flaps .wav file kept looping... that *was* strange.

Btw Rob... fine job with airspeed control on short final (where the clicking starts).

 

Yeah, not sure what that clicking sound is ... I'll check with the A2A folks and see if they have any ideas.  Thanks for the kind words on landing ... maybe flight school is actually helping.

 

Great job A2A, very glad I paid the $80 for this.

 

Haven't flown a real 180 so can't comment on flight dynamics, but A2A C-172R seems very close to real world.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Sorry, but that's pure semantics hogwash...because if you asked the average flight simmer what he thinks the term  "3D lights built directly into the model" is referring to, most would think the taxi lights that illuminate the ground. This is pretty obvious to me and everyone else...the wording they use should really be changed/clarified instead of defended IMO.

 

     I need to be clear that I do not speak officially on A2A's behalf in this regard. I only occasionally contract for them for video production.

 

     So, the wording that A2A has been using since 2007 (BEFORE any other lighting system) is hogwash? I'm not looking to argue here, but perhaps it seems a bit more "hogwash" that you made an assumption. The C172 was the very first aircraft in A2A's lineup that used the "Lotus" style lights. I'm defending a company who has been using this term since before you bought your first Accusim product from them, and before any other alternative lighting effect was available.

 

     I made my point, and I don't have anything further to add on on this particular subject.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

     Moving on, I'm glad to see so many people are enjoying the aircraft. I'm seeing a lot of positive comments from people, and I myself find this bird to be thoroughly enjoyable. Not a big fan of the red interiors, as I generally just have a preference for blue. Perhaps that makes me in the minority, but I'm already seeing several members are working on major cockpit repaints that look to drastically change what is available, thus giving people even more options! To me, it's a very exciting time to fly simulators.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

     Folks, make sure to balance your tanks while flying. Not doing so could cause the severe imbalance that you guys mentioned. The fuel selector is located against the cockpit wall, near the floor, on the left side. Unlike the 172R, there is not an option to feed from both tanks. 

without going to extreme environments, flying a turbo Mooney (or anything similar) and a C172 from A to B the Mooney will always be more demanding due to speed and being very slippery alone and then of course you have extra systems to monitor not to mention retractable gear to worry about and who hasn't had the horn go off in FSX for gear yet under high work load ?

 

Going back to a 2 hour block in FSX, It makes a big difference to me what I "reach" for even though the scenery will be the same. Thats the reason I was hoping A2A would have gone for something more complex second up

A2A has done things in 'blocks' before.  Prior to the 172/Cherokee, A2A did three V-12 powered warpirds and a civilian GA version of the Mustang.   Prior to the 'slow' 172/Cherokee, you have the Civil Mustang, which is about the fastest GA piston you can fly for FSX.  Hand flying the Civil Mustang on an approach with it's fighter like handling is tricky but not impossible..  However like the many high performance GAs, the workload can be made easier by using the autopilot.   Using the AP is a matter of choice, for me it depends on the situation.

 

Its kind of funny that A2A makes both the simplest piston GA with the Cub, and one of the most complex single pilot piston aircraft with the P-47.  The P-47 is completely manual requires the pilot to do everything...ie monitor temps and control temps, monitor and control supercharger, no navigation aids other than looking out the window with a sectional, no AP.  Good thing you don't have to dogfight too in FSX LOL.   

 

 

Yeah... the Seminole wrt to what you are saying having that higher wing loading... and the drag wrt to engine placement when at idle.  And maybe something to do with that T-tail. 

 

I liked the Seminole a lot too.  Solid, good flying airplane.  But bigger?  Not by much.  :P

 

 

Yeah, our Seminoles were the 'New Piper' models as they had replaced ERAU's older Duchess fleet.  Between the two, I preferred the old Duchess even tho they were old and falling apart.  I thought the Duchess was more pilot friendly, and felt more balanced.  The Seminole was very nose heavy, even with ballast in the baggage hold.  I didn't like New Piper's thick yokes either.  I noticed that was a trend in the next generation of Cessnas and Pipers....thick yokes...guess they were trying to make their pilots feel like airline pilots or something lol.