Accuracy in this case is not appearance but flight characteristics. In my case I use the Maule and Bonanza from Lockheed plus the C152 from Carenado and the Piper Cub from A2A. Each of these all react in flight a bit differently. Those differences are easily seen as the known differences in the aircraft. I also have the A2a C172. It reacts in a manner that is difficult to explain. The most obvious thing is that setting Trim at the usual labeled indicator results in a very exaggerated nose up takeoff. Even getting it under control requires you to immediately adjust the trim. However, taking off with the trim pointer set near the letter K appears, to me, to be a normal takeoff performance. 

 

Setting in a field at full throttle the aircraft does not move. RPM at a max of 2300. Shutting down and doing an overhaul does not help.

 

Setting brakes with CH pedals is tricky but i have them working on all the named aircraft except the A2a C172. The differential braking does not work at all. Other planes it works as expected.

 

Since I am not a pilot and have only briefly been in a GA aircraft I can only feel that something is quite different with my copy of the A2a C172. Or, there is a general significant difference in adjusting it and its operation.

 

The Cherokee is great , but the Carenado PC12 flies right on as well

 

 

I also have the A2a C172. It reacts in a manner that is difficult to explain. The most obvious thing is that setting Trim at the usual labeled indicator results in a very exaggerated nose up takeoff. Even getting it under control requires you to immediately adjust the trim. However, taking off with the trim pointer set near the letter K appears, to me, to be a normal takeoff performance.

 

I'd try replacing the FDE with the one from RealAir (free in the Avsim library).  I did that for other reasons (slow flight, stalls) and it's pretty amazing at that. 

I'd try replacing the FDE with the one from RealAir (free in the Avsim library). I did that for other reasons (slow flight, stalls) and it's pretty amazing at that.

Gregg - how exactly do you do this?

 

Thanks in advance!

Go here and download it...

 

http://www.realairsimulations.com/list_box.php?page=downloads

 

Then go to you A2A C172 directory and back up your air and cfg files.  I'm pretty sure I only copied the .air file from the download but I may have copied the .cfg file too.  Try the air file and see if it flies better. 

I checked and I only did install the .air file. 

The reason I question the popular acceptance of the A2a C172 as a "gold standard" is the quite odd settings on the trim function. Are there other settings or functions that are not the same as an actual C172? I understand that each plane is different depending how its trim functions are set, the condition of the engine, occupancy, etc. It is just that the very odd trim function is bothersome and leads me to question other elements.

 

If there is a better representation of a real C172 flight characteristics then I would use that, or its "air" file. Asking about this on the A2a forum only had responses from others with similar questions.

I've migrated my RealAir SF260 and Lancair across to P3D.

 

Most accurate GA (ish) aircraft I've flown on a PC based simulator.

 

Haven't bothered reinstalling the A2A Cherokee. Disappointed by the handling characteristics.

The reason I question the popular acceptance of the A2a C172 as a "gold standard" is the quite odd settings on the trim function. Are there other settings or functions that are not the same as an actual C172? I understand that each plane is different depending how its trim functions are set, the condition of the engine, occupancy, etc. It is just that the very odd trim function is bothersome and leads me to question other elements.

 

 

 

If there is a better representation of a real C172 flight characteristics then I would use that, or its "air" file. Asking about this on the A2a forum only had responses from others with similar questions.

 

 

I don't have much C172 time, RW, but I've got about 75 hours C152 and C182.  There are a lot of folks around here with more time than me.  When I got the A2A there were many things I liked about it but the way it flew seemed odd.  Particularly slow flight...very nose down.  The flaps will bring the nose down but as you approach stall speed it comes back up in a C152 and the view over the nose is not good.  A C172 has a bigger cowl so it should be worse.  With slowflight being that way, stalls were also going to be that way which was just not right in my book.  I traded out the .air file with the RealAir one and things substantially improved.  I'd also say, the more I've flown RealAir airplanes the more I appreciate how much work they've done that don't get noticed or barely get a nod.  For example, the way the throttle handles in the C172...it lags just like a real world airplane.  You lower it to 20, fly along for 30 seconds and look down and it's 19 or 18.  That's the way they are.  I remember because it used to annoy me in the real world.  Anyway, my 2 cents.

 

Try the RealAir file and tell us what you think.

 

Gregg

Go here and download it...

 

http://www.realairsimulations.com/list_box.php?page=downloads

 

Then go to you A2A C172 directory and back up your air and cfg files.  I'm pretty sure I only copied the .air file from the download but I may have copied the .cfg file too.  Try the air file and see if it flies better. 

 

Going to that link I only found an Cessna 172 link for FS2004. Do you mean this and that it works as well in FSX and P3D ?

 

 

Going to that link I only found an Cessna 172 link for FS2004. Do you mean this and that it works as well in FSX and P3D ?

 

It works fine in FSX.  I haven't tried a C172 much in P3D but I'm guessing it works the same.

Thanks Gregg.... I'll give it a try...

Guys,

 

Try doing these procedures and see how it goes. 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflymiami.com%2Fdocuments%2Fmaneuvers%2Fc172.pdf&ei=PNJDVM-YGMSSgwSQ_IGQBg&usg=AFQjCNHGk_5ascIANDbY87p_R8bJ5bdZRQ&sig2=XMxmYmZX0HBGducpbvl1Jg&bvm=bv.77648437,d.eXY

 

You're probably not going to be able to do the turns around a point and things like that since you can't really watch a point and the dash very well like you can in a real plane.  I'd try slow flight, perhaps stalls.  Make sure you're up around 3000 AGL or so before you practice a stall.  It may try to spin on you in a stall.  If it does, don't panic...it recovers nicely.

 

Here's a YouTube video that shows it.  Thing is, compare what the airplane in the video does compared to the aircraft you're flying.  Try both FDEs and see which is closer.

 

 

EDIT:  In terms of spinning...some aircraft don't do it and some do.  You have to be ready for one that does and see that you can recover when it does.  (Note...If you try to level the airplane with ailerons before you recover from the stall you'll make it worse...use the rudder!!)

I just thought I'd jump in to mention that the trim behavior in the A2A 172 is realistic when compared to a 172N that I fly. With the trim in the center of the window, the aircraft will rotate, continue to pitch up steeply and probably go into a stall if no action is taken to push forward on the yoke. I have never let it get that slow to find out, but it sure does feel like it will stall. You need to maintain positive control with the yoke and not let the trim fly the airplane.

 

Note that there is a patch you must apply to update the A2A 172 to the latest version and get all the fixes.

 

Aside from that I've compared several areas of behavior that did not "seem" right to me to a real aircraft and found that my memory was wrong, and the sim was right. This included climbing away at 800FPM with flaps fully deployed after a stall recovery, as well as gliding in at 45KIAS and descending at 400-500FPM with flaps fully deployed and throttle at idle.

 

I find it to be a very good representation of one of the RW airplanes I use.

 

I haven't used the Real Air file in a very long time, but I did find it to be a big improvement over the stock 172. I'm don't recall which 172 the Real Air file was meant to replicate, but I can say from experience that a 172N handles much differently than a 172S. The 172R in the A2A model appears to behave much closer to an N model.

Hey Guys,

 

using different files will of course invalidate support for the Accu-sim C172 Trainer.

 

You will want to make sure you grab the latest Accu-sim update here for the latest files and free new features;

http://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=41279

 

Once you are all updated will have a professional level simulator (Used in flight training) at home in FSX or P3D for $50 (depending upon your license).

 

Any issues, we welcome all feedback here on our community forums with flight simmers and 10,000+ hour pilots on hand to help;

http://a2asimulations.com/forum/index.php

 

cheers,

Lewis