Sign in to follow this  
Gregg_Seipp

Will Carenado do 2.0 versions of any of their planes?

Recommended Posts

I have a fair number of Carenado aircraft but I've passed on a whole bunch of them that I might have gotten.  All of their Beechcraft, both Senecas, the Mooney, the King Airs...all passes because of reviews or strange equipment choices...lack of DME or incomplete implementation. So, I throw it out there...if they did 2.0s, would you upgrade?  What would you like to see?

 

Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Carenado's later works (post Baron 58) are pretty decent for Carenado. However that being said, if Carenado did decide to do a 2.0 revision like Real Air did with their Beech Duke I would like to see a discount for those who purchased their original products prior to the 2.0 release. One of the biggest things I have a problem with Carenado aircraft are the sounds and a little bit with the FDE's although as I have stated post-Baron 58 the FDE's are decent.

 

My issues with Carenado Aircraft:

 

1. Glass Cockpit Framerates - I know Glass will inherently cause frame loss however there are many techniques that other developers use that minimize this impact, Carenado's early G1000's are absolute killers of frames, I am looking forward to the H850's PL21 though.

 

2. Bland Sounds - This plagues many of their aircraft across the entire release range, and their Piper Seneca V sounds were TERRIBLE, no where near the real thing, thankfully I am now using Arezone's Senca V sounds and they are much better.

 

3. FDE's - Yes their newer FDE's are MUCH MUCH better than their old, I applaud their forward progress however their FDE's could always be improved or they could even do what QualityWings does and provide a "lite" and a "real" version for people of different tastes.

 

4. Avionics - With the H850 being thier first to include Navigraph I am floored by this, way to go Carenado, keep it up, however it would be nice to see enhanced functionality in their Glass Cockpits prior to the H850, including the B1900D's FMS.

 

5. Mulitplayer Performance - BY MP Performance I am taking about packet flooding (over 1500 packets in 30 seconds) when cockpit sharing, currently some of their aircraft and incapable of cockpit sharing on some servers due to this, its not entirely critical but if this can be "ironed out" then all the better.

 

6. Shared Cockpit Sync - This is different from the performance issue, this is IMHO more important, when cockpit sharing in many Carenado aircraft values & controls become de-synced and some features even lock up entirely, fixing this would make cockpit sharing more enjoyable and less frustrating.

 

7. Advanced Lighting - With P3D's DX11 lighting, the DX10 fixer, and many still using DX9, I would like to see advanced lighting techniques that some developers implement, such as PMDG and Milviz to name a few. The quality of Carenado's lighting in their current aircraft is spectacular however correct "dimming" functions would be GREATLY appreciated. 

 

8. Integrated Payware WX Radar - This would work for ASN and other programs that would allow for direct interaction with the Carenado WX systems, many other payware companies are latching on the ASN WX integration idea and its VERY popular, should be no more intrusive than allowing RXP integration that is currently implemented.

 

9. Visuals - Carenado is TOP NOTCH at visuals, some of their earlier aircraft could use a major touch-up from their current techniques, and even their newer ones down the road could benefit from their future techniques as time progresses.

 

 

Pro's for Carenado doing V2.0 aircraft:

1. Able to utilize earlier work to minimize time loss.

2. Able to "re-sell" an aircraft thus allowing said aircraft to sell more .

3. Most known issues are public and should make for a more stable release thus minimizing time lost between projects.

4. Able to ask the community through voting polls on which aircraft they would like revisited to help improve sales.

 

Con's for Carenado doing v2.0 aircraft:

1. Not working on newer aircraft, just rehashing old models, can be seen as "stagnant" 

2. Some customers will expect the V2.0 to be free since they have owned the V1 for some time, will be upset to pay more money for a newer version of their existing product.

3. Other companies may have released more complex/realistic versions of their "legacy" aircraft thus making it not as marketable; case & point here is the PMDG B1900D, the Carenado B1900D knocks it flat out of the water, this is likely the only time you will see a Carenado product straight up beat a PMDG product.

 

 

For the record I am perfectly fine purchasing a 2.0 upgrade if the changes are as drastic as Real Air's Duke 2.0 was, IMHO the 2.0 upgrade was COMPLETELY worth the money, I think if Carenado does 2.0 upgrades if you own the "legacy" product prior to the 2.0's release you should get a 50% discount. New pilots will pay full price and have TONS of features they should like and will pay for them, the "legacy" pilots will see the benefits of the 2.0 and re-purchase an aircraft they already have, its a win-win for Carenado and the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


One of the biggest things I have a problem with Carenado aircraft are the sounds and a little bit with the FDE's although as I have stated post-Baron 58 the FDE's are decent.

 

I'd agree with the FDEs, in general...very good.  It surprises me how they've been equipping them as of late...especially no DME.  If your GNS goes out there are a fair amount of ILS approaches you can't fly.  The F33 had an awesome package...the A36 not so good.  Just slapping instruments willy-nilly in the dash isn't a good idea. 

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