FSX-MS Carenado PA28RT 201 ARROW IV: Still relevant?

[turner112 52]

Hey everyone,

I'm looking for current feedback on this aircraft. The cockpit looks great in the screenshots but I imagine it's not on par with A2A (understandably)...

That in itself is no big deal, as I'm looking to simulate a RW aircraft I'll be checking out in soon, though the RW aircraft is actually an Arrow II. (I realize there are handling differences and this is primarily in interest of having a similar layout in a complex aircraft with a 430.)

Anyway, your thoughts on this aircraft are appreciated.

cheers
Andrew

[hovercrafter 10]

Rarely use this simulation now..... Always have had real difficulty in landing the nose wheel gently. I understand that the T tail causes the nose wheel to lower quickly and is a feature of this aircraft, but it just seems that as soon as the main gear touches the front wheel slams down. OK it might be just my duff landings but I don't have the same issue with other Carenado offerings.

 

In all other respects its OK although the guage resolution by todays HD standards is only fairly good.

 

Gordon

[ryanbatc 12,857]

It's a really old Carenado... I've got it.  I actually picked it up because I flew a few non T tailed arrows in school...  I think the flight model was pre-Bernt so if I remember it was pretty bad.  Gauges are flat I think? (or maybe not it's been so long).  It's definitely not as good as their C337 for example.  If it was on sale for like 10 bucks I'd buy it otherwise no thanks.

 

A2A is soon to release a Commanche 250 actually... still not what you're looking for but retract and fast-ish.

[TTFlyer 0]

I have it and it is a good approximation of a Piper Arrow.  The sounds and the cockpit are faithful to the real thing and it looks good in FSX SE DX10.    It isn't A2A-quality flight model but it's still an enjoyable plane to fly.  My only real complaint is I wish it were the Turbo Arrow.

 

C.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

If the Arrow is what you want... the Carenado airplane will do the job.

 

You can even equip it with an RXP GNS430 if that matches the airplane you are going to be flying..

 

Having said that... if you want a realistic flight experience..

 

I would get either the a2a Cherokee or upcoming Comanche.. the Carenado Arrow is getting long in the tooth..

 

But what you lose is the match on the panel layout...  depends on your priorities..

[turner112 52]

Thanks all.

 

hovercrafter - not sure about whether the real-world aircraft "slams" the nose wheel down but I can imagine the T-tail may instigate that...

 

Hey Ryan - Understood, thanks.

 

TTFlyer - thanks for your input.

 

Bert - yes, the 430 is important. Not completely worried about the flight dynamics, but I do need retractable+constant speed and something close to the panel I'm using....

 

Think I'll pass on this one for now.

 

Cheers,

Andrew

[Jim Robinson 122]

Wasn't that the one that threw the forums into turmoil back in the FS9 days because it was the first one to be released without a 2D panel? If that's the case it's the airplane that turned me from die-hard 2D panel user into a reluctant VC user. I can't imagine flying a 2D panel now! The VC windows went opaque at night in the rain IIRC, I have a personal email from someone at Carenado with an updated .mdl and acft.cfg as an attachment, I wasn't even complaining about the windows, I sent them an email telling them I liked it but asking them to build a turbo arrow as well. I guess they didn't listen, lol. Looks like I bought it in Apr 2009, the installer was 35 megs! :smile:

[turner112 52]

...I can't imagine flying a 2D panel now!... :smile:

Yeah... I hear you, Jim.

 

As I'm in instrument training, I've built a few 2D panels to somewhat replicate the various aircraft I use - not having a 2D panel is not such a big deal since I can make one fairly readily with FS Panel Studio. They're two monitors wide (I only have two at the moment) with full scale gauges (where possible) and just a very small forward view.

 

They're not perfect but I've really just done enough to get the sim set up for training, vs. eye candy; though I absolutely DO like the look of a new panel, some wear and tear "sells it" a little better for me, so I may do that!

 

That said, with certain aircraft such as the RealAir Lancair (which I do not actually fly, but sure wish I did, and it's good for nav training), the 3d Panels are so good, I just zoom in.

 

Three things would remedy the shortcomings:

1) EZDok or similar

2) One wide view instead of two separate windows, so that the views "moved together" and were contiguous

3) A third monitor

 

I did see some notes about the opaque windows somewhere, but as long as I can set low visibility, I don't need rain. Though it's nice. (Would be nice to have an "actual" overcast, too, but that's another matter...)