SSTSIM Concorde (older than 5 but nothing systems wise comes close to the complexity)

Majestic Q400... can be flown seriously or for fun in and out of small strips or using the RPT Hubs.

"As real as it gets" was the motto after all. developers need to start adding maintenance and ware and tear to their aircraft. Ismail Güzel has done allot of work in this area for the

stock baron 58, and A2A on their AC, shows that it can be done well.

The DamageMod as well as EngineSim can be adapted to any piston plane you have in your hangar. You just need to find the relevant information (i.e. limits) for the engine and airframe in question.

Agreed.  Sometimes.  I'll be honest, there are times when I just want to fly.

 

However, getting punished for the abuse you may be inflicting or lack of attention you might be guilty of, that can be a fun option too. 

 

Speaking of, the new F-14 from Aerosoft will put you through the wringer if you don't treat it properly.   And we're not talking a visit to the maintenance hanger here, more like, a visit to your family from someone in a full dress uniform.

Now that is interesting as well.

 

Ray

I would like to officially change my vote for "Best Aircraft Addon in the last 5 years" to the A2A Cherokee.

 

Hey Craig - glad you've seen the light! :smile:  The A2A Cherokee certainly wins the award in my opinion and I try not to miss any opportunity to evangelise about it!

 

It's such a charming little aeroplane which is perfect for a cross-country adventure or just a few circuits at the local aerodrome. Beautiful three-dimensional visuals, bewitching sounds, fantastic custom avionics/gauges and the overall Accu-Sim immersiveness that you describe. I could go on, but I sense eyes glazing over...  :wink:

 

The Majestic Q400 takes a close second place for me and is perhaps the winner of the 'finest technical achievement' category. I still find its performance in the sim absolutely staggering...

 

My vote for 'best value add-on' would have to go to the RealAir Lancair Legacy: I love it and I wish more developers would discount slightly older products in this way (even though I bought it a full price).

 

Nice thread - don't we simmers just love to vote for things!

 

Cheers,

Nick

Agreed. Sometimes. I'll be honest, there are times when I just want to fly.

 

 

^This - not everyone wants damage and wear and tear. I don't always have the luxury of planning everything and avoiding bad stuff. Sometimes I just get in and go for fun. We don't want all addons to have wear and tear - this increases cost and development time. I'm happy with options currently available (lite, medium, and full 'realism' addons). FS addons just get more and more expensive argh.

Would have to be the a2a b17 then a2a p51d mustang fslabs concorde brilliant but dont have time to use it.

^This - not everyone wants damage and wear and tear. I don't always have the luxury of planning everything and avoiding bad stuff. Sometimes I just get in and go for fun. We don't want all addons to have wear and tear - this increases cost and development time. I'm happy with options currently available (lite, medium, and full 'realism' addons). FS addons just get more and more expensive argh.

 

Very true.  I really appreciate it when developers allow for both in one package.  A2A does a remarkable job of that, allowing users to take their time and follow checklists, or just jump in and fly.  It extends to start-up procedures too.  For example, I've been flying the Cera Sim 222b a lot lately; I can follow full checklists and get start it manually, or if my time is limited (or my patience is of short supply), I can just pull up the 2D config window and have it all done automatically.

A2A does a remarkable job of that, allowing users to take their time and follow checklists, or just jump in and fly.

 

Yes - that's very true as well! I'm no purist and will quite often exit the sim with the Cherokee parked-up with the engine running, flaps set and so on. When I next load the aircraft, everything is remembered, so I can basically just carry on where I left off.

 

Accu-Sim certainly isn't all about damage, wear-and-tear and pesky maintenance. For me anyway, it's more to do with convincing behaviour of the instruments (instruments which are actually worth bothering to monitor), immersive sounds and the feeling that the aeroplane has a bit of unique character.

 

Cheers,

Nick

I think about all those folks flying the Carenado Malibu (piston) completely wrong, because the plane will not destroy itself like it would in RW with wide open throttle and props the entire time.

 

On the other hand...

 

The information is there to properly fly any of these planes, whether they force you to or not. The choice is yours. The fact that planes like the Malibu don't make me fly them properly doesn't prevent me from doing so.  And in fact, IRL, most GA aircraft are remarkably tolerant of mishandling and hamfisted power management.  If that weren't the case, 172s at flight schools would've been falling out of the sky for decades.  Most light GA planes tend not to catastrophically fail if mis-flown (though it's certainly possible if you're completely mismanaging things) so much as they simply get outrageously expensive at 100 hours (in rental fleets) and annuals when flogged.  IRL, you fly them properly because you know you should due to long term consequences, not because one small mistake will lead to death and destruction.

 

Don't get me wrong - I love what A2A are doing, and so far I find their failure modeling to be quite good and not overdone as I think there's a temptation to do.  Treat the plane well and the plane will treat you well, just as in real life.  But it's things like persistence, aging and accurate modeling of the interaction between prop RPM, MP and mixture that keep me coming back to A2A's 182 more than immediate damage modeling.  I don't have to burn myself repeatedly on the hot stove like Homer Simpson in order to know not to touch the hot stove.

 

Scott

 

 

The information is there to properly fly any of these planes, whether they force you to or not. The choice is yours. The fact that planes like the Malibu don't make me fly them properly doesn't prevent me from doing so. And in fact, IRL, most GA aircraft are remarkably tolerant of mishandling and hamfisted power management. If that weren't the case, 172s at flight schools would've been falling out of the sky for decades. Most light GA planes tend not to catastrophically fail if mis-flown (though it's certainly possible if you're completely mismanaging things) so much as they simply get outrageously expensive at 100 hours (in rental fleets) and annuals when flogged. IRL, you fly them properly because you know you should due to long term consequences, not because one small mistake will lead to death and destruction.

 

+1

Extremely well phrased, kudos to you sir.

The fact that planes like the Malibu don't make me fly them properly doesn't prevent me from doing so.

 

Well, it begs the question:  How would anyone expect anyone to know?  There's no guide, no checkflight, no explanation what not to do and the bad consequences that follow with any of the Carenado airplanes so I'd fully expect most people not to know.  I've read articles and watched YouTube videos til they're coming out of my ears but, even with that, it's piecemeal.  Get power back to 35 at a safe altitude after departure for cruise climb...then back to 30ish at cruise, prop back to 24.  Or use the cruise table.  Lean to peak (and, of course, the mixture's not right but let's not go there.)  Monitor CHTs. 

 

Gregg

 

 

The information is there to properly fly any of these planes, whether they force you to or not. The choice is yours. The fact that planes like the Malibu don't make me fly them properly doesn't prevent me from doing so.

Very good point.     And even the complex sims like A2A can be "cheated" too, using functions such as "Overhaul" or "Autostart" etc.

So really it comes down to the appetite and interest in the simmer, for realistic ops.

 

 

But it's things like persistence, aging and accurate modeling of the interaction between prop RPM, MP and mixture that keep me coming back to A2A's 182 more than immediate damage modeling.

 

Does mixture work properly in the 182?  That would be a milestone.

Well... unfortunately for the FS community, the overall winner of this Topic (737 NGX) is not yet available for P3D and will cost probably $100-$200 in 2015.

So much for a bright FS future.