Thinking about the Flight1 King Air...

[klamal 282]

So, as the title says, I'm thinking about getting the F1 King Air.  I have a couple questions before I do.  

 

First, I currently do not own rudder pedals.  I have the Saitek Cessna yoke and throttle quadrant but did not opt for rudder pedals as up til now, I've flown only "tube liners" and they don't really require it.  Well, I do have the Q400 too and get away with it there(without auto rudder).  I do have a separate joystick that I use for my rudder/steering control though obviously this is not easy to do when you need to also control throttle input.

 

Second, is it possible to setup and use with just a single Saitek throttle quadrant?  My plan would be to assign one physical lever to two virtual(i.e. 1 physical throttle lever to both throttles for the aircraft).  Is this doable?

 

Third, I've read this is "heavy" on a system.  I of course have to tune things down to run the NGX/T7 like anyone else to prevent OOM and am wondering how this is in relation to those?  I'm assuming it's going to be less VAS than PMDG but is it?

 

Fourth, what do you use to flight plan with it?  I have PFPX but I don't see any templates for anything other than airline stuff.  What do you do for fuel planning and such?

 

That's all I can think of for now.  Thanks!

Oh, I should also mention I am using DX10.  I believe there are no issues with it there either from what I've read, right?  Do cockpit shadows work?

[RWFeldman 159]

Works great for me using saitek throttle and FSUIPC. I enter the FP manually in the Garmin G1000. Uses RW navdata. I dont have that ppfx thing. Dont need it. Frames are good on my computer and I dont use DX-10 but assume it would be fine.

[BillW 210]

If you don't like it, you can return it.

[ryanbatc 12,818]

This is a superb plane!  It had some teething problems which they addressed with a few SP's.

 

It's really really good.  Full LPV/WAAS guidance for RNAV (GPS) approaches, really nice instrument lighting.  Navigraph compatible. VNAV "banana" (note VNAV not modeled but the little arc shows up to display when you'll reach altitude when climbing/descending.)  It's very fast for a twin turboprop - I usually get 320 KTAS at altitude.... FL260 seems to be around the sweet spot for speed.  The thing flies by the numbers (perf charts are available).  There's a maintenance module type thingy and there are failures due to abuse etc.  Lotus style landing/taxi light too.

 

Downsides are the no vnav modelling, no airway entries (by that I mean you can't add an airway to your FP - you have to manually enter the fixes along the route).

 

I don't have split throttle but others have it working fine.

 

I believe someone made a fuel calculator spreadsheet avail at their simforums.  I don't use PPFX either.... just gas and go after looking at winds and weather along my route of flight.

 

VAS - a bit heavy, but no worse than the NGX, and fps are actually decent, a bit better than NGX (I don't have T7 so I can't compare).  The FPS are significantly better than their old Citation Mustang - that thing was a fps hog.

 

I'd say it's the best fully featured turboprop on the market but I'm a bit biased because I love GA.  I know a lot of guys enjoy that Majestic Dash 8.

[Boeing or not going 578]

I wish they offered a classic steam gauge version, I don't like flying GA planes with glass panels, that's what I fly big iron for.

[simbio 56]

It's a really a fun aircraft to fly one cons is no custom waypoint.

[klamal 282]

Thanks for the info so far guys...I am close to pulling the trigger on something soon.

 

My biggest concern with the KA is its resource usage.  What settings are you guys using with this aircraft?  Autogen settings?  LOD?  If I go this route, I want to have at least the same settings as I have with the Aerosoft Airbus X.  Right now with that, I'm running LOD 6.5 w/ Autogen density set to 4 and can do pretty good with that.  VAS doesn't get too high and I have never come close to OOM.  What about those settings with the KA?

 

Due to the resources part, I've also been looking at the RealAir Duke v2 instead as I think that will be much less resource intensive.  My biggest question with that is can one get by well enough without getting a RealityXP 430/530?  What would getting the RealityXP add?  With the default, can you still fly to any waypoints that would be created by a flight plan generator(PFPX is what I use) or is this lacking data?  With the Duke or any GA a/c of this size/equipment, you don't fly SIDs/STARs, do you? (That seems like a really dumb question but I have never flown GA in FS so this is a whole new playing field for me).  I guess I'm asking that because I don't think default GPS will contain SID/STAR info, right?  What about RealityXp?  Does it?  Or, again, are SID/STARs mainly just for the airlines?

[ryanbatc 12,818]

You'll have to run it at whatever you run your NGX with. The king air is better on fps but about the same on VAS.

 

The G1000 is pretty complex - far better than default g1000....

 

The Duke 2.0 - one of my favorite planes of all. It's a piston though - much slower than the king air.

 

With RXP and updated navdata (PM me) you can basically do the same as you can in the king air. Both the Garmin 530W and Garmin G1000 are similar but also different. Some GA will fly SIDS/STARS it just depends on the aircraft. Duke May or may not be assigned depending on where it's flying.

 

Both RXP 530W and the king air's G1000 will accept SIDS/STARS

 

The RXP allows you to amend flight plans while in flight - one of my biggest gripes with stock G1000. You can also fly RNAV (GPS) approaches with LPV (vertical guidance - typically lower minimums).

 

One thing I'm pretty sure you can't use PPFX to load a FP into RXP - you enter the manually. In fact I enter them manually into the G1000 too.

[twharrell 38]

I hear the Flight 1 KA200 is pretty nice. Another option is to hold out for the MilViz King Air 350 that is not far from release. There will be 2 versions released separately: Proline 21 and steam gauge. The external model and VC are second to none. Just a thought.

 

Todd

[klamal 282]

 

 

You'll have to run it at whatever you run your NGX with. The king air is better on fps but about the same on VAS.

The G1000 is pretty complex - far better than default g1000....

 

Yeah, so that's really what's making me lean towards the Duke.  If I'm not flying with the purpose of moving people from A to B, then I want to enjoy the scenery more and be able to mix in as much photo real too without worrying too much about VAS like I have to do w/ the NGX.  The KA is not much of a departure from airliner flying - that's both good and bad for me because that means it would be somewhat more comfortable and what I'm used to but that's also what I'm trying to break away from too I think.  I'm kinda getting bored of locking myself in to just airline routes(Yes, I know I could take the NGX anywhere and just pretend but I don't like to do that.  I stick to real world airline routes with actual type aircraft and at their scheduled times).  So, I'm looking for the freedom of just flying anywhere and being able to get into some airports that right now are just not possible.

 

 

 

The Duke 2.0 - one of my favorite planes of all. It's a piston though - much slower than the king air.

 

Yeah, I'm totally ok with that.  I'm not looking for speed as a top criteria though I do think I want to have a twin and want to be faster than a 172/cherokee. My biggest criteria here is something that is as close to NGX depth/quality as you can get in GA twins.

 

 

One thing I'm pretty sure you can't use PPFX to load a FP into RXP - you enter the manually. In fact I enter them manually into the G1000 too.

 

Yeah, I kinda figured that too from what I've read but that's ok too.

 

The problem with the RealityXP stuff is now this Duke just became a ~$100 add on instead of ~$40 one.

 

Also, another question that hasn't really been answered yet here is how easy or hard is it to fly either of these aircraft without an actual set of rudder pedals?

I hear the Flight 1 KA200 is pretty nice. Another option is to hold out for the MilViz King Air 350 that is not far from release. There will be 2 versions released separately: Proline 21 and steam gauge. The external model and VC are second to none. Just a thought.

Todd

Thanks Todd.  Yeah, I've been seeing this mentioned a lot too.  I wonder how that will be on VAS/performance?  This is one of the things that has me leaning to maybe do the Duke first and wait for the MilViz in hopes it's better on VAS than the Flight1.

[ryanbatc 12,818]

How do you fly an airliner without pedals? I guess the YD is on all the time.

 

But I flew with a twist joystick for a long time before I got my Saitek pedals.... Never with the king air or Duke but it worked fine with Realair's old SF260.

 

You mentioned VFR type flying... Did you consider the Realair Legacy? Better visibility than the Duke and a little faster lower down too. Similar instruments to Duke... IFR or VFR capable.

[klamal 282]

How do you fly an airliner without pedals? I guess the YD is on all the time.

 

But I flew with a twist joystick for a long time before I got my Saitek pedals.... Never with the king air or Duke but it worked fine with Realair's old SF260.

 

You mentioned VFR type flying... Did you consider the Realair Legacy? Better visibility than the Duke and a little faster lower down too. Similar instruments to Duke... IFR or VFR capable.

 

Yeah, I've never felt the need for rudder pedals with the airliners.  For the few seconds after takeoff and on landing that they'd be useful, it just isn't worth the money/hassle of having them.  I have a twist joystick too that I use for the rudder when I need it, but that's mainly on the ground for steering. I do use it some for takeoff with the Q400 before engaging the autopilot.

 

To fly GA, this becomes way more important.  Especially in a single engine.  That's mostly why I think I'm preferring twins at this point because I think you can again "get away" with not having rudder pedals a bit more than with a single like the Legacy.  Is that right?  Will the KA and/or the Duke's use of twin engines minimize the need for rudder pedals?  I don't know, maybe it's still the airliner guy in me too that still just likes the idea of two engines too.

 

Anyway, this is why I ask though.  If either the KA or the Duke really require rudder pedals to not totally ruin the experience and/or make takeoff or landings impossible, I may have to re-think this as now again, you start adding to the total $ amount.  If I really get into the GA side of things, then I would look into rudder pedals down the road, but my overall preference yet is still with airline type flying.  I think anyway.

 

This is going to be kind of an experiment for me to see how much I will actually fly GA.  I know at the moment that I at least want something very detailed and in depth but that doesn't require all the other "stuff" that goes along with planning and flying an airline route.  I still want to have to go through configuring the aircraft properly and all that great systems depth that you get with something like the NGX but just something that you can just get in, pick a destination and go.

[ryanbatc 12,818]

Twins can require more rudder than singles. Twins that have counter-rotating props make rudder work easier

 

Why don't you just fly the default GA to see if you like them?

 

Otherwise there's low cost addons like Ant's Airplanes or Alabeo which are GA typically.

[klamal 282]

 

 

Why don't you just fly the default GA to see if you like them?

 

Because I still want something detailed.  I haven't flown default A/C in FS for a long time and I don't want to go back to that.  I think with the GA side of things, I like the idea of the maintenance side of things that these aircraft are doing - that ownership feeling or whatever you want to call it.  I think that will be fun too.  But, above all, I know I definitely want to feel, as close as can be possible in a sim, like I'm flying the real thing.  Default A/C come no where close to that.

 

So, I don't mind the $40-$60 price tag to get a "as real as it gets" plane.  But, I don't want to go much past that right now until I really fully see for myself just how much I will do GA type flying.  I will be more tempted to stay in it if the aircraft I choose has that high level of realism.  Otherwise, I'll just end up back in the airliners.

[ryanbatc 12,818]

Maybe the Aerosoft Katana 4x? It's cheap but very "accusim-ish"

 

It is very slow though, and not IFR capable.

 

I'd try the Legacy - it's very cheap on Realair's site