Hello,

I am looking for a GA single piston FSX aircraft to practice my IFR and medium / long cross country flights.

So far I used Carenado Bonanza F33A with Reality XP gauges FLT, FLN and GNS 430. Very nice, indeed.

Now I see that A2A came out with a beautiful simulation of Cessna 182. I know it is a bit slower than the Bonanza and does not have retractable gears (the two things are correlated, I believe...), but both are "complex" aircraft in the sense that have constant prop speed control.

 

What is better, especially for IFR?

I see that I could use my XP GNS 430 and an HSI on Cessna 182 as well, but I don't know how good is the autopilot Bendix King KAP 140 that A2A is simulating on the Cessna. 

 

Any comments on this, please? Should I switch to high-wings for IFR?

 

Thanks!

 

What is better

 

In terms of realism and over all quality of product + support, A2A would have the edge there

 

Well that's only my own opinion on it anyway

Unequivocally, unerringly, irrefutably.

 

A2A

There is absolutely no doubt, the A2A wins every time. Probably the single best GA plane FS has ever seen on all levels. ALL LEVELS!! NO DOUBT!!

The F33A needs freeware tweaks to its flight dynamics before it will even fly properly and functionality is on a par with default aircraft. I would take the A2A C182 every single day, it's far more detailed and immersive.

 

A2A have features Carenado could only ever dream of: proper pre-flight walk around, working demisters, real time aircraft wear and tear (e.g. oil changes, battery life, spark plug fouling), customisation (pick the type of tyres, size of battery, oil additives) and a complex sound simulation that allows you hear the engine as you would through a headset.

 

The RXP GNS is already integrated in to A2A's C182 and you won't need the other RealityXP gauges as A2As are superb. The autopilot will undoubtedly show anything from Carenado a clean pair of heels.

The OP asked "What is better, especially for IFR?"

I have the Caranedo A36 and A2A Cherokee, differing planes but I suspect the comparison will be exactly the same.

In general, and as stated above by many the A2A GA planes are in a different class considering fidelity of flight and depth and breadth of simulation.

For IFR specifically, the A2A manual states "The avionics suite in your Accu-Sim Piper Cherokee 180 is so complete, the best source for your information is straight from the manufacturer." and I don't think they're exaggerating.

 

A2A are expensive, but worth it, especially if there might be real world crossover.

 

Cheers

Keith 

Thank you all for your enthusiastic comments, very helpful.

Can anybody comment on expected differences between the two real world models F33A and C182?

I mean, what would make a real pilot choose to purchase one over the other if the mission is to flight VFR and IFR in medium/long cross country for pleasure?

Is speed difference an issue, for example?

 

Thanks again.

I have both, and enjoy flying both.

 

The Bonanza has a well deserved reputation as the Cadillac of the touring market.

It is a very comfortable plane with an excellent cockpit layout.  Big windows also help.

It is faster than the C182.

 

The C182 is the workhorse airplane, maybe more Chevrolet than Buick... but it is

a very capable plane and a2a have done a great job simulating the real thing.

 

The C182 will seem more "alive" than the Bonanza and you will be more alert flying it..

 

It is quite an experience and you will learn a thing or two about engine management etc with the a2a plane, which you can ignore in the Carenado aircraft..

And here I posted on the other thread in the main FSX forum.  OP, it may be nice to only create one thread on the same topic at a time!

And here I posted on the other thread in the main FSX forum.  OP, it may be nice to only create one thread on the same topic at a time!

Its not his fault

 

 

I mean, what would make a real pilot choose to purchase one over the other if the mission is to flight VFR and IFR in medium/long cross country for pleasure?

Is speed difference an issue, for example?

 

IRL, the Bonanza is in a class all to itself.  There's a solidity and overall feeling of quality and control harmony that you just don't get in a 182.  The Bo will, of course, be faster as well.  If what you want is a single built to go from developed airports in style, comfort and speed, the Bo is the way to go.  But horses for courses - if you're flying out of shorter, rougher strips, want a load carrying workhorse or prefer a high-wing for site-seeing, the 182 with it's high wing and rugged fixed gear is what you want.

 

They're both great planes - each excelling in its own way.

 

Scott

Oh yeah no comparison A2A is the choice you want, specially if you don't want to waist time solving bugs. 

I'm sure there will be a xmas sale so why not pick up both !!

 

Dave

Older thread... but anyhow, I'll repeat that the Bonanza has always been one of my favorites in FSX.

 

In XP, as of now, the F33 is very much on par with A2A type offerings!

Older thread... but anyhow, I'll repeat that the Bonanza has always been one of my favorites in FSX.

 

In XP, as of now, the F33 is very much on par with A2A type offerings!

 

Yep, kind of a Frankenthread, but what the heck. 

 

I expect you're referring to the new Reality Expansion Pack that's just been released for the XP version of the F33.  I wonder if anyone who's flown a comparable A2A plane - say the Comanche - and the F33 with the new REP could comment and compare.  The REP certainly sounds interesting, but does it really take the XP F33 to A2A levels?  Color me just a bit skeptical for a number of practical reasons, including the ability of the A2A to include a variety of full-featured GPS's from F1, RXP and Mindstar, but my mind remains open.

 

Scott