Sign in to follow this  
Richdem

Best Turbo Prop Airliner

Recommended Posts

Greetings,

 

I am looking to add a turbo prop airliner to my fleet. Since owning the awesome Flyjsim 732 I have loved flying with a non glass cockpit.

 

I was looking at either the Embraer 110 or the Saab 340A

 

Would love to hear any thoughts on either of these 2 addons

 

Regards

 

Richard

Share this post


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

Turboprops, my favourites!

 

In my experience, Embraer 110 is actually quite different than 340A. And they fly pretty differently. Think of Saab and something a bit larger, heavier and more "sophisticated" in a sense.

So it really depends on what you are looking for. If something more similar to E-110, I would like you to take a look at Carenado B1900D. It's currently my favourite turboprop. It not only flies beautifuly but Carenado made sure that everything visually is top notch. 

 

On the other hand, I own Saab 340A, and while I prefer B1900D, S340A s an amazing plane that is maybe a bit more challenging than the previous two, but also is really fun to fly :)

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saab is a study level sim that is used by some operators still using the Saab, so it is in terms of systems depth one, if not the most sophisticated x-plane out there.  If you look for somethings that has complete systems like the 732 the Saab is the only serious contender.  That beeing said the 1900D is a joy to fly, the E-110 i dont own sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another +1 for the Saab here. A truly remarkable model. With the addition of X-Plane's built in GNS 530 nicely modelled into the 3D cockpit, you can "fly the magenta line" or go old school radio navigation. Choice is yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too vote for the Saab 340A. It has a few VERY annoying features, but is it the best modelled aircraft I have in X-Plane. It looks stunning - as good, probably better than any Carenado aircraft looks, but is modelled a lot better than a Carenado. Pretty much every system is modelled and is arguably one of the best study aircraft in XP. Unfortunately the documentation is rather poor and it is hard to find manuals on the net (I still haven't).

 

Another thing - you have to setup the Condition levers EVERY single time you do anything which drives me silly (bit like the JS32, I think). Really awful system in my opinion. There are also a number of special keys you really need to setup for the Saab that stuff up your other aircraft. ie the autopilot disconnect uses a non standard dataref, etc. If you change planes a lot these special datarefs might kill it for you.

 

I really like flying the Saab and it is currently my go-to aircraft and I use it a lot in FSE - it seats 36.

 

I also fly the Dash-8 Q400 (seats 76, I think), but this is getting pretty old now and is not in the same class as the Saab. But it is quite fast and carries double the payload, so is very good for FSEconomy. If you want to make money in FSE, this is the one to go for.

 

I have the Carenado B1900D and hate it. Not so much the implementation by Carenado (which seems ok), but the plane itself has pretty poor visibility from the cockpit and has pretty basic navigation systems. Obviously a personal opinion.

 

I also love the STMA PC-12, but that is only a 10 seater. Not sure how small you want to go, but this is a superb aircraft to fly, a real sports car in the air. I have done hundreds of hours in it with FSE and the STMA version is modelled perfectly. I would not recommend the Carenado version (even though it looks better). Also the best support I have seen with any XP product.

 

The Saab seems to get the vote so far and I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real Saab operators use x-plane and Saab?

Yes.  The LES Saab is used by more than one Saab operator in their pilot training.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the E110 and the Saab.  As excellent as the Saab is, it's as mentioned, a study level sim that requires a LOT of practice in order to get cozy with.  The E110 is much easier to handle, I've found.

 

I have Carenado's B1900 in FSX, and I've never liked flying it enough to warrant me picking it up for XP.  Nothing bad, just not an exciting / fun / interesting aircraft.

 

I've looked at the Q400 in XP, but since I'm rather fond of the MJ Q400 in FSX, I have a feeling I'd be disappointed by it, so I've passed on it as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for The LES Saab,You'll become immersed in it's complex systems and won't grow bored in a month or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i do agree with all comments here, the saab 340 is the best turboprop for xplane by a large margin, and also one of the best paywares for xplane.

 

 

Another thing - you have to setup the Condition levers EVERY single time you do anything which drives me silly (bit like the JS32, I think). Really awful system in my opinion. There are also a number of special keys you really need to setup for the Saab that stuff up your other aircraft. ie the autopilot disconnect uses a non standard dataref, etc. If you change planes a lot these special datarefs might kill it for you.

 

 

my advice would be to install an xplane's add-on or a lua script to pre-program your settings on a per aircraft basis to your liking, so you do not have to touch anything while moving one aircraft to another.

 

i.e. every complex payware uses a custom proprietary dataref for -a/p disc- to mimc its real life counter part. mapping your desired button or key to its custom dataref on a per aircraft basis solves this issue.

 

axis assignment, sensitivities, etc. are also required to be tuned on a per aircraft basis, a C172 flies quite different than a B777. also the C172 has mixture control but on the 777 you may use a second axis for split throttle control (L&R). Rudder tuning is also very important to have a good experience on a per aircraft basis, etc.

 

The CLs can also be pre-assigned so you do not have to re-assign them each flight no matter you switch aircrafts. Only consideration is, if you add or remove hardware from your setup the axis indexes may vary and you will have to update them which takes a second or two.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for The LES Saab,You'll become immersed in it's complex systems and won't grow bored in a month or so.

I disagree with this somewhat. The systems are not really that complex. There is no FMS for example, so we are not looking at 737-800 complexity or anything. No auto throttle, no VNAV, etc. It is a step up from plain VOR navigation, which is a good thing. The GNS530 interfaces fairly well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I also love the STMA PC-12, but that is only a 10 seater. Not sure how small you want to go, but this is a superb aircraft to fly, a real sports car in the air. I have done hundreds of hours in it with FSE and the STMA version is modelled perfectly. I would not recommend the Carenado version (even though it looks better). Also the best support I have seen with any XP product.

 

 

 

What makes this one better than the carenado one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CLs can also be pre-assigned so you do not have to re-assign them each flight no matter you switch aircrafts. Only consideration is, if you add or remove hardware from your setup the axis indexes may vary and you will have to update them which takes a second or two.

Well, this is a bit off topic, but I would LOVE to work out how to do this. When I fly the Saab, I generally have to set the CL 4 or 5 times and it gets very tiring. My axis indexes are always the same (31 and 32) so it beats me why I have to assign them so often. I also get the 'engine won't start' problem, so that again means an aircraft reload and yet another CL assignment.

 

I have the CLs set for other aircraft no problem.

 

Any tips most welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with this somewhat. The systems are not really that complex. There is no FMS for example, so we are not looking at 737-800 complexity or anything. No auto throttle, no VNAV, etc. It is a step up from plain VOR navigation, which is a good thing. The GNS530 interfaces fairly well.

 

Kerry, I have to interject here.  You can't reasonably compare the systems of a glass jet airliner to that of a turbo prop. Apples and oranges.  

If you're going to publicly bash an add on that took us 3 years to make, I'd appreciate it if you did it with facts...not opinions.  If you need clarification, you know where you can find us.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kerry, I have to interject here.  You can't reasonably compare the systems of a glass jet airliner to that of a turbo prop. Apples and oranges.  

If you're going to publicly bash an add on that took us 3 years to make, I'd appreciate it if you did it with facts...not opinions.  If you need clarification, you know where you can find us.

Nobody is bashing anything - perhaps you should re-read my comments? I think the 340A is a great plane. I was commenting on the complexity of this aircraft as Phantom88 intimated that it had complex systems. I was suggesting that the systems were not that complex and this should not be  a turnoff. This is a GOOD thing....

 

I would also like to say - EVERYTHING in these forums is personal opinion. The OP actually asked for opinions (ie thoughts).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I find flying turboprops that have lots of things to watch and manage much more difficult.  Enough so, that I have to be in the right mood for it.  When I am, the Saab fits the bill perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes this one better than the carenado one?

Well, I am somewhat biased because I flew the STMA one for a long time before I bought the Carenado one. So I was already used to a certain flight model. The STMA version is light and fast - very much like a sports car. It goes where you point it and is very responsive. The systems are also very good - detailed exactly.

 

The Carenado one is totally different. Not the same aircraft at all. It feels like the B1900 (or really, any Carenado aircraft). It is slow and heavy. It even looks bigger from the outside. The HSI is totally unreadable - and as that is my main navigation instrument, it makes the plane unflyable. The ammeters are also totally wrong - they show readings all the time, when they should be 0. My system takes a 10 fps hit, which is very bad for me. Little documentation. There are probably other things, but these are the main things just off the top of the head. The HSI is a show stopper though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see thank you.

 

So whats the best turboprop to fly that's like a 5-10 seater?

 

Other than a PC12

 

For x-plane 10.

 

Thanks

Ian 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is bashing anything - perhaps you should re-read my comments? I think the 340A is a great plane. I was commenting on the complexity of this aircraft as Phantom88 intimated that it had complex systems. I was suggesting that the systems were not that complex and this should not be  a turnoff. This is a GOOD thing....

 

I would also like to say - EVERYTHING in these forums is personal opinion. The OP actually asked for opinions (ie thoughts).

 

Having an FMS, Autothrottle, etc, increases the number of complex systems in an aircraft, but doesn't necessarily reduce the systems complexity in the Saab.  

Most people consider the depth of the simulation to represent complexity, not the quantity of the systems that are modelled.

You can have a freeware A380 and compare it to the Saab, and the quantity of the systems of the A380 will outnumber the Saab.  But the complexity is another matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The ammeters are also totally wrong - they show readings all the time, when they should be 0.

An ammeter comment here....

 

Ammeters can be wired to show the actual load, or wired for input versus output, which is the "0".  I don't know which way the actual aircraft is wired. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with this somewhat. The systems are not really that complex. There is no FMS for example, so we are not looking at 737-800 complexity or anything. No auto throttle, no VNAV, etc. It is a step up from plain VOR navigation, which is a good thing. The GNS530 interfaces fairly well.

Hello.I guess you could say The Complex Systems statement is somewhat subjective and based on the aircraft operators experience in Turboprops.

Just speaking for myself[not a real pilot] I find myself fully immersed for hours using the Saab's many different interactive menus,This coupled with the Amazing graphics and great sounds are features that make me very satisfied with this purchase.

Here's a great video highlighting some of the Saab's finer points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Saab is incredible, like pmdg of the XP world

 

There is an autostart config that will get you mostly setup for takeoff.

 

Read the tutorial once and you'll be good.

 

It's a reasonably fast plane, cruises well in the high teens, hand flying is touchy (apparently very realistic from reading up on it - just that the real pilots have a yoke with more travel than my joystick hehe). Auto flight is nice for the most part. Modeling is gorgeous inside and out - night lighting/effects = yummy! It's one of those planes that makes you think you're really flying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ammeter comment here....

 

Ammeters can be wired to show the actual load, or wired for input versus output, which is the "0".  I don't know which way the actual aircraft is wired. 

The PC-12 shows the input vs output - ie 0. In fact, the checklist requires that the readings be below 15A before takeoff is allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not try the Twin Otter from Pedro which is free, to me it is fantastic. I don't know how good the systems are but I really enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have Carenado's B1900 in FSX, and I've never liked flying it enough to warrant me picking it up for XP.  Nothing bad, just not an exciting / fun / interesting aircraft.

 

You should never try to compare the FSX or P3D Carenados with its X-Plane counterparts.

There is no way to convert an FSX Plane to X-Plane or convert a Plane from X.Plane to FSX. It is more a recreation, since their flight models have different foundations. As an example X-Plane always calculates the drag of propeller blades, FSX does not. Since Carenado doesn't recreate the flight model like the RealAir Turbine Duke or the Majestics Dash 8it can't land as these planes really do. Push Condition and Prop levers full forward, while you havea low throttle and the plane slows down even when it descends. The FSX version lands more like a jet.

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