November 28, 201411 yr Can you really compare an apple with orange? No. But you can compare two GA aircraft, as a potential purchase, especially when they're both from the same developer. No arguing they're very differrent aircraft in real life, but in the sim, they're both a bunch of pixels and the OP just wanted feedback and views on why people preferred which. :smile:
November 28, 201411 yr I have the cherokee 180 and really enjoy it. Very realistic. Regards Lamar Wright
November 28, 201411 yr Commercial Member Speaking of the Cherokee's 'character', I though I'd borrow this screenshot which is one of my favourites posted on A2A's forums. It's taken by community member 'Papa-Lima' (hope he won't mind me respositing it here) and I think it does an beautiful job of showing the wonderful contoured panel. Prior to the Cherokee I always had a taste for newer GA interiors, but this add-on changed all that... The A2A C182? Ah, now I love this plane. Heavier and gutsier, and you get there quicker. I like the way the CSU prop is modeled. Sounds are great. You feel the beef in the turbo engine. And it climbs. Agree with all that Gareth, except the bit about the turbo engine! A2A modelled the normally-aspirated C182T (though I think a few people are hoping for a T182T as well!) :wink: Cheers, Nick Nick M - A2A Simulations
November 28, 201411 yr yes, a lot of people are mistakenly thinking their new A2A C182T is turbo-charged! .... Placebo effect I guess!
November 28, 201411 yr Can you really compare an apple with orange? I have the C172 but not the Cherokee. I find flying the A2A C172 frustrating compared to the real thing which is a pretty docile and graceful plane really. An interface problem maybe. The A2A C182? Ah, now I love this plane. Heavier and gutsier, and you get there quicker. I like the way the CSU prop is modeled. Sounds are great. You feel the beef in the turbo engine. And it climbs. Similarities with the C172 'panel' I found were short-lived once you got into actually enjoying the 182's advantages. And don't discount the tasty GTN integration. What? You haven't got GTN? So, I won't bother with the Cherokee despite the accolades. But if I should change my mind I'll call round Ron's and ask to try it out on his rig first. At his Sunday Fly-in that is. Have you tasted his home brew? Best, Turbo in the 182? There is no Turbo unless I got the cheap model. F1 has the Turbo model. "Why, he just jumped into the air and kept right on going."
November 28, 201411 yr I'll just say, for what it might or might not be worth, RW, I'd rather fly the C182 than the Cherokee. They say that you're biased toward airplanes similar than you learned in and I learned in Cessnas. I found the Cherokee boring to fly when compared to Cessnas (in part because of the rudder interlock but also the view was better in the Cessnas.) On top of that the 182 has better speed. Gregg Gregg Seipp "A good landing is when you can walk away from the airplane. A great landing is when you can reuse it." i9 64GB RAM, GTX-5090
November 29, 201411 yr Commercial Member I'll just say, for what it might or might not be worth, RW, I'd rather fly the C182 than the Cherokee. Gregg - I reckon that's really the crux of it... Both simulations are first rate so it's really down to the real world aeroplanes. Are you a low wing or high wing person? Old or new? Piper or Cessna? Lycoming or, er, Lycoming? I'm hoping that A2A's next GA release gives us the best of both worlds... A complex, low wing single with retractable gear and 'retro charm'! For example that Bonanza that TJ had me convinced was on the horizon, or the much-awaited A2A Comanche... Actually, that's not the 'best of both worlds' at all, but hopefully y'all know what I'm getting at... Character and complexity! (Just like a good single malt! :wink: ) Cheers! Nick Nick M - A2A Simulations
November 29, 201411 yr Where A2A are concerned I'd be happy with anything civilian / non-military that they develop. Fun is to be had in all types of aircraft. For example I'd love them to do a high quality, accu-simmed 'plastic LSA' ; like a CZAW SportCruiser or a Jabiru, Flight Design CP or Tecnam. A proper simulation of a Rotax 912. :smile:
November 29, 201411 yr Author hi guys, Idid not expect so many replies. I am still undecided... I read somewhere that the C 182 is oversensitive in pitch. Is it really true? Thank you My gallery: http://s1075.photobucket.com/albums/w430/yankeegolf/
November 29, 201411 yr I read somewhere that the C 182 is oversensitive in pitch. Is it really true? Do you have FSUIPC? It would be a non-issue if you did. You calibrate your controls. Gregg Seipp "A good landing is when you can walk away from the airplane. A great landing is when you can reuse it." i9 64GB RAM, GTX-5090
November 29, 201411 yr Commercial Member I read somewhere that the C 182 is oversensitive in pitch. Is it really true? I don't have any complaints about pitch control in the C182. Actually, the recent A2A offerings have a setting (a custom slider) to allow the user to tune pitch control. Effectively you can reduce elevator authority at higher airspeeds to make hand-flying in cruise flight less sensitive to pitch inputs. Nick Nick M - A2A Simulations
November 29, 201411 yr The Milviz Baron is good, but their 310 is OUTSTANDING! In what way is their 310 better than their Baron ? I prefer the cherokee. As mentioned above it has more character. In what way do you mean that the 182 lack character compared to the cherokee ?
November 29, 201411 yr In what way is their 310 better than their Baron ? Trust me, it really, really is. The Milviz C310R is still the best ever twin released for FS in my opinion. Beautifully immersive VC (it's a 2010 development but still stands up). Fantastic immersive sounds, way above average. (Just turn on the batteries, and then avionics and you'll see what I mean..... the sounds just ooze realism). Extremely nice FDE and hand flying characteristics. Just feels fantastic and realistic. Comes with a a 'blank panel' model option - a fantastic idea that hardly anyone else has done, where you can choose all your own gauges and place them whereever you like within the VC. Excellent performance and frame rates... (their B55 is very heavy on frames for a lot of people, including me. It's heavier than the RealAir Duke 2.0 or even the NGX or PMDG 777 on my system). In what way do you mean that the 182 lack character compared to the cherokee ? Well it's subjective isn't it...... look at the panels. The C182 is very 'standard Cessna' and shares a number of gauges with the A2A 172 ...... whereas the Cherokee has modelled vintage gauges and is more customized and an older model. I definitely agree that it has a lot more character than the C182. I bet even A2A would agree with that! ..... although of course their Cherokee has modelled a 1965 aircraft, and their C182 is modelling a 2003 aircraft, so they are very different. Both have their places. The 182 has more features. The Cherokee has more character and personality.
Create an account or sign in to comment