Would you be kind enough to tell me what you think of it. How it compares to Carenado/DF/F1 GA aircraft.Thanks, and please don't start a flame war.

I think it's got the best interior/panel/VC, both in looks and action. I haven't flown it as much as I would like. I own all three, and I found flying wise that the DF model was closest to the performance of the Cherokee Challenger 180 I am a part owner of. I also remember that with the joystick I own, the Aussie was not as stable about the elevator axis as it should have been, though it was more stable with the CH Yoke. The main reason I have been flying the DF one though is that it was the first of the three that I converted the panel to match that of my own panel. But I don't like the fact that the VC is not as active as it should be in the DF model. I happen to like using VC the most, so I have turned off the 2D views of the DF model. My next project will be converting the Aussie. The other problem is that the Aussie is a 160 with the tapered wings, and my real airplane is a 180 with the Hershey bar wings and stretched fuselage. But I think the performance between the two is not that much different. I haven't flown my real airplane in about 3 years, but hope to start again in a few weeks.I like the Aussie, and the author is very responsive and always willing to help. He is supposedly working on an upgrade right now, but apparently ran into some snags he wasn't expecting in programming a GPS I think, I don't know really what the issue is. But he keeps saying it'll be out soon. But I'm happy with the model as it is. My real plane doesn't have a GPS, so I'll be taking it out anyway. We may upgrade someday, but not soon as I just don't have the cash at the moment (needs a paint, too, engine is good though, and it's hangared :-) ). I may play around with the GPS to see what it's like (I use PocketFMS on an IPAQ), but I use the sim mostly for training and practice.Thomas Perry

Thanks!Anyone else care to comment?

Disclaimer: I only fly the Warrior II, not the III.It's the best single engine general aviation aircraft I've come across so far. Several of its features impress me:1) It has an extremely fluid and detailed VC. This is one of those rare aircraft where you'd have to be crazy to use a 2d panel. This scores big points in my book, because a good VC really improves immersion.2) Everything in the aircraft works, right down to the circuit breakers! No kidding .. the CBs actually work.3) The clincher for me is that the flight model adheres closely to published data. Speed, rpm, and climb/descent rates are spot on.4) VERY easy on the framerates.

I agree with everything in the above post. There are only two things I don't like, but everything else is darn close to the real thing:1) The engine sounds seem to have a very short sample and you can hear it cycle, also they seem "off" a little, maybe too high pitched?2) The Warrior III panel is ugly.everything else I love and it runs circles around flying the default 172.

"2) The Warrior III panel is ugly."Heh, that is precisely why I only fly the Warrior II. One downside to the Warrior II is the lack of a DME (which I hear is typical). The author is working on a patch which will include a DME.

Its Australian made :-hah

Its a gem, definitly on the top of my collection along with the A36 and 172R pay-models.http://www.lemosnet.com/misc/gpilotsig.jpg

>2) The Warrior III panel is ugly.It's not only ugly, but it's realistically ugly. Try staring at the real one for 3 hours under the hood.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

What school are you flying with? I saw the green Warrior III in your signature and thought for a second it was a UND Warrior, but then I saw the shield on the tail.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

I fly Archer III's at Rocky Mountain College, in Montana :)

That's an Archer? Bah. I hate Piper's Cherokee frame, they're hard to tell apart. Our Arrow III and our Cadet have the exact same paint job and look identical from a distance if the wheels are down, unless you can spot the scoop on the Arrow.I fly Warrior IIIs and a Cadet at Spokane Falls Community College's aviation program run by the University of North Dakota. Soon to be flying an Arrow and then a Seminole. I hope to be done with both by the end of the academic year.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

Why do you hate the Cherokee frame?

I think he was just saying he hates how hard it is to tell them all apart....but then you have cessna....

Nice looking exterior.Difficult to read 2D and VC panel (which shimmers for some reason)Poor flight dynamics compared to the "real thing".Believe me I should know - I was flying a Piper Warrior last weekend with my local flying club. The Dreamfleet Archer has the most realistic (within confines of FS2004) flight dynamics.I prefer the look of the Carenado model (exterior) but the Dreamfleet 2D and VC panels are excellent.Enjoy making your choice!