I actually think the videos are in P3Dv3 based on the virtual cockpit shadows, but I can report it looks just as good in person in P3Dv3 as it does in their video.  Cockpit is gorgeous.

 

Hey Allen, one more question if you would. As you know many are using sgss and some even adding in FSAA within the sim to help with

the shimmering. Not sure what you are using if any, but is there something A2A might be doing with their cocpits to avoid the shimmering?

 

Bob

This looks like a really interesting aircraft (I own the Comanche btw and love it) but I just wonder if this is sort of a gimmicky type of aircraft.  You take it up for a few hours at the beginning but are you really going to fly it in 3 or 6 months?  will you actually take it from one airport to another?  I am just not sure what I would do with it.  At least with the Comanche I am taking some 1 or 2 hour VFR or IFR trips that people would do in the real world.  Am I missing something here?

 

Only you have the answer . It depends of what you expect from simming :wink: .  

 

After 3.2 hours on the Hobbs, I'd say that she has two personalities.

 

She should make a good tourer in the 150/200 nm range, with a great visibility out of the cockpit, a slow speed (140 mph in cruise) and no oxygen (10/12K feet max), well suited for flying large regional sceneries addons from OrbX or UTX with a map and an occasional glance to wikipedia on your other monitor/tablet. I intent to descend the whole of Italy with her on small stages for instance. Well suited for that kind of flying, I guess.

 

She was meant to be a trainer, teaching good airmanship. And the A2A team looks that they have done a good job to reflect that. She has limited automatisms to help the pilot, requiring constant attention in the flight except if you activate the a/p which is optional. As with other warbirds the numbers are indicative, when given, you've to feel and find what is right, according to the weather. Choosing the right flaps for landing with a lever system which is, say, quaint is almost an art. I bought the Six after three weeks touring and aerobating with an old friend, the P-51.  She felt almost shockingly  tamer until I almost ground looped  . Taking off is much easier than with the Mustang or the Curtiss P-40 but landing presents some idiosyncrasies which will require (from me) a lot of full stops or TnGs in various air conditions  not to be laughed at by all these small animated characters that we find nowadays in addon airports.  She hates to be taken for granted, or so it seems.

 

I've not yet flown IFR but she seems to be a  limited IFR plateform with one VOR, no DME and a gyro. She accepts 3rd party GPS  though. So hand flown RNAV should also be possible.

This looks like a really interesting aircraft (I own the Comanche btw and love it) but I just wonder if this is sort of a gimmicky type of aircraft. You take it up for a few hours at the beginning but are you really going to fly it in 3 or 6 months? will you actually take it from one airport to another? I am just not sure what I would do with it. ...

That is a very interesting point. I've purchased the previous 4 GA offerings from A2A, but this one doesn't really interest me, as I feel the same way about it as you do.

 

Further, I am examining every new addon purchase more carefully, because if the DTG Flight Sim is released late this year, I want to be able to have the resources to be able to switch over to it.

The thing is, A2A are so far ahead of any other developer, in a league of its own, it's mind boggling! Without exaggeration! I own also RealAir Lancair Legacy v2 and Turbine Duke v2 and they are good, but they just feels plastic and unconvincing.

 

 

Agree with you completely. A2A aircraft go beyond RealAir's in flight realism. One of the areas  where A2A excel over all other developers, including RealAir, is the way the airframe vibrations are simulated. Flying the A2A Cherokee and Comanche, when you run up the engines the instrument panel, gauges, even the cowling as you look out the front: they vibrate with a high frequency that seems very accurate to reality. The RealAir Duke vibrates, but the frequency seems to slow, and sort of lumbering. I think RealAir should work on that. Their Duke is great, but the vibrations need to be tweaked a bit in my opinion. A2A have got it exactly right, and it really adds to the immersion effect.

The Texan does not interest me, as it is a tail dragger. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that it is a superb simulation of the real aircraft.

Then, I guess, you are better off buying a Carenado planes. Those are exactly for the type of simmer you seem to be...

Very wrong assumption. The only FSX GA planes I've bought for a number of years are A2A & RealAir.  If the flight models are off, I notice. You probably don't have a clue, as to what type a simmer I am, or was. Did a lot of beta-testing in the old days, for various third parties, as well as MSFS. Mostly had to do with flight dynamics.  I do buy Carenado for X-Plane, as they are significantly different than the FSX versions, FD wise.

I get what what's being said about accusim. Personally, since I spent years working on real planes, building real planes, maintaining engines, brakes, auto-pilots, radios, etc..................I just don't care to do the same with a simulated aircraft. I just want to get in it (virtually) and fly. Where accusim can really add to the immersion, I just prefer to skip much of it. I'll buy the T-6, but I do not care to maintain it according to the books. I was obsessive about maintenance in real life.  

You and I are on the same page - owned four aircraft over the years so I'm fairly caught up on the nuts and bolts stuff and, with over 6000 hours flying them and others, my airmanship is fairly good.  Those of you who enjoy all these "extras" in the package should enjoy them but a few of us would prefer them a little 'leaner'.

You and I are on the same page - owned four aircraft over the years so I'm fairly caught up on the nuts and bolts stuff and, with over 6000 hours flying them and others, my airmanship is fairly good.  Those of you who enjoy all these "extras" in the package should enjoy them but a few of us would prefer them a little 'leaner'.

Yup! On the same page for the same reasons. I no longer feel the need to do a walk around pre flight and follow a 20 minute checklist when I sim. Jump in, ctrl-e or select autostart and go. I turn off crash detection and disable malfunctions too.

 

Vic

You and I are on the same page - owned four aircraft over the years so I'm fairly caught up on the nuts and bolts stuff and, with over 6000 hours flying them and others, my airmanship is fairly good.  Those of you who enjoy all these "extras" in the package should enjoy them but a few of us would prefer them a little 'leaner'.

 

Alright I also own,  fly, teach yet still enjoy what A2A can offer at the moment with accusim. My philosophy is simple don't like it don't buy it. A2A three time cheaper than  actual SNJ when I rented it years ago. Why bother complaining about it? I don't buy a lot of things and never worry about it

I am with SD, there are CHOICES in the FS world...many choices.  Complaining to A2A and PMDG that their addons are too complex is no different than the people who go on to the Carenado board and complain about how simple or unrealistic their planes are.  They make what they make, they have a demographic to sell to and they obviously sell alot, otherwise they wouldn't do it.  Likewise A2A and PMDG obviously sell enough of their style of addons for them to justify making more.  If you aren't into what A2A/PMDG makes...simple, don't buy their stuff.   

 

There are developers who post on this very forum who make the kinds of addons that are right up your alley.  Support them, so they are encouraged to make more of what you like, instead of complaining to the developers who don't make what you like or going on to release threads of addons you know you are not into.

 

 

Cheers

TJ

Well said, TJ. It's very simple - if you find something too complex, buy one of the many simpler add ons out there; there are far more of those to choose from anyway, than there are of the complex simulations of A2A/PMDG/Majestic quality.

You still have the option of getting in and going with A2A.  You can reset the sim to clear time and start with engines running for a perfect flight.  Or you can clear the timer and start the engines very quickly and go. 

Some one said A2A is the GA man's PMDG. I agree with one difference. A2A doesn't announce a project three or four years in advance, then start dropping little video teaser as if release is soon, then get mad at customers   for asking when do we get the darn thing and it's still two years out. A2A just surprises everyone with an amazing new release.

Some one said A2A is the GA man's PMDG. I agree with one difference. A2A doesn't announce a project three or four years in advance, then start dropping little video teaser as if release is soon, then get mad at customers   for asking when do we get the darn thing and it's still two years out. A2A just surprises everyone with an amazing new release.

Intrigued by your avatar.  I too was class of '81 - Anchorage Tracon.

I am with SD, there are CHOICES in the FS world...many choices. Complaining to A2A and PMDG that their addons are too complex is no different than the people who go on to the Carenado board and complain about how simple or unrealistic their planes are. They make what they make, they have a demographic to sell to and they obviously sell alot, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Likewise A2A and PMDG obviously sell enough of their style of addons for them to justify making more. If you aren't into what A2A/PMDG makes...simple, don't buy their stuff.

I don't hear anyone complaining. The aircraft was purchased because A2A makes a great flight model. the fact that some of us don't want the "nitty gritty procedure detail" any longer doesn't mean we don't like the product. I think you're reading WAY too much into the comments.

 

Vic