How do the default planes rate?

[michal 44]

>Also, like I said, I'm not running in a huge resolution at the>moment (only 1152x864), and many of the panels in good>freeware can sometimes be quite difficult to read in such a>low res. I get the impression that at least 1600x1200 is>required to see the details properly in many of these panels.I am not an expert on add-on freeware panels. I only use payware and most of them look phenomenal - I use 1280x960 resolution.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

[Guest pvs1]

>I've found that when using the easiest realism settings ->control settings - are MUCH harder to control - the react too>quickly to the slighest control input.Really?>You simply cannot compare flight dynamics unless you list the>realism settings.Okay, then, I've got all the realism sliders set to full. I'm using autorudder because I don't have any pedals yet (twisting the joystick is far too unsatisfactory), and using automixture because it seems like unnecessary hassle to do otherwise, but maybe I'm wrong?I've turned "aircraft stress causes damage" off because there's no warning of impending damage. One moment I'm flying fine, the next moment my aircraft is destroyed, with no indication that I'm nearing any kind of limit or threshold. Some creaking or something would be helpful as a warning.I am enjoying FSPassengers immensely though, the damage in that is far more realistic, like when I apply flaps at too high a speed and freeze the suckers! Makes me feel like a complete fool, but at least I can carry on flying and still have the challenge of landing the compromised aircraft, instead of a stupidly instant "game over".Paul

[Guest Alan van der Vyver]

> I've always suspected that the default aircraft were suspiciously easy to fly.I am not an expert either, but after struggling with both default and other aircraft to trim pitch correctly, maintain an assigned altitude, line up with a runway, judge distance and altitude and, in some cases manage speed while landing, I decided to get some idea of what it really was like.I had been flying the free Diamond Katana quite a lot, so I signed up for an introductory flight in one - hoping to get the controls for a short while.I was pleased when the instructor suggested I taxi it to the runway, but was startled when, after lining it up on the runway, he said:"Ok, apply full throttle. No all the way forward.""Apply a bit of right rudder. A bit more. Now ease back on the stick. A bit more. Ok we are flying!"With similar instructions, I climbed, levelled off, trimmed for level flight, flew around the area, returned to the airport, descended and joined the traffic pattern. I was VERY relieved when the instructor then took over and landed.My conclusions from this were: 1. The instructor did not think flying basics were particularly difficult. He had no knowledge of my simulator hobby. 2. It was not particularly difficult. 3. Apart from the wobbly air and other motion, FS2004 does a reasonable job with the Katana. It is a bit better with the Aerosoft version. The simulator was not dramatically different from reality. 4. In a few key areas, such as pitch trim, maintaining altitude and reducing speed, the simulator was noticably more difficult than reality.I am aware that this is based on a total of .75 hours of flying time and may only be relevant to this one aircraft, but still I thought it might be helpful.By the way, I see in another posting that you have advanced all your realism settings to full. I have seen it suggested on these forums that the middle three, relating to torque and gyro effects, should be in approximately the middle position for maximum realism. This was born out by my jaunt in the Katana. Again, it may be different for other aircraft.regards,Alan.

[LAdamson 240]

>I would even argue that if you ever want to get a real pilot's>license you should stay away from default airplanes as you can>only acquire bad habits.Disagree. The default 172, as well as the Caravan are reasonable in flight characteristics. Mooney is a bit pitch sensitive, and the Cub suffers from a "once and a while programming virus". With the two I've listed above, I see no real reason for bad habits. L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

>Exactly how do you put the 172 into a spin BTW? The>documentation says to pull back on the stick and move the>rudder full left or right, but do I need to go into a dive>first or something? And do I need to disable autorudder>first?Few aircraft for FS2004 spin with proper inputs. That's something that RealAir Simulations specializes in, and I believe a few others are capable of spins. The RealAir update for the 172 will spin. Other than that, the 2004 default 172 is much better than the 2002 version, and the RealAir update does not have as much impact, as it did with correcting the older version.>>I've tried flying without autorudder, but without pedals I>just can't control the rudder accurately enough - twisting the>joystick is too awkward to control.>If I didn't have pedals, I'd stick with auto-rudder sometimes too. My pedals are very much like the real thing, but twist grips are often to twitchy for the takeoff roll.L.Adamson

[Guest Debosonic]

This reminds me back in 96 when I was talking to some guys regarding TV channels. I was happy to boast that, (when there was humidity) I could receive one english tv channel here (in U.A.E)They told me that they had no interest in terrestial TV channels. They were getting everything by satellite.The above situation is analogous to default planes and add-ons.default planes = terrestial tv channelsadd-ons = satellite TV channels.

[Guest william273]

personally, i don't have much of a problem with most default aircraft. that out of the way, make sure your stick is calibrated and in the options section under controllers, make sure the "trim" setting is all the way to the left. it defaults to the right which makes multiple movements every time you hit the trim button. can cause erratic aircraft movement. william

[Guest Shalomar]

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Do you mean "repeat rate"? The erratic movement is just the result of large movements of trim. Try the middle setting maybe so it doesn't repeat as fast, it might be better than hitting the trim button for every notch, if the movement is still erratic- don't hold it down!Best regards, Donny:-wave

[guy 24]

I fly also payware aircraft (FSd, pmdg,pss etc), but each time I return to the default aircraft( i like especially the c172, the Baron, the Kingair and also the Lear and the 737) I must admit to myself that, after all ,they are a good (if not very good) compromise.For sure the default planes are more frame-rate friendly because they are more simple, but on the other side I would say that in general the good payware aircraft are easier to fly, because they have better pitch and roll stability.Guy

[Guest beana51]

I was just thinking reading the posts,of the first time ,I used my then "new state of the art" FS9.How great ,I thought,nothing can beat this,not for a long time.The planes,then, all of them were so great.I even excused the "Crazy Cub".But the more familiar ,for me ,C-172 was just great.Flying over a "pool table top" environment I was happy."As real as it can get" I thought, retracing the aircraft legends and trips that I was flying. But as we now know,it was all an illusion.That default FS9, was just the starter kit,a vehicle for a now, new level of realism. New planes,scenery,and the sophistication of the currant simmers,is amazing. At this rate of interest and development where will we be in a few months,or years. Where ever it is ,we all will never be happy.I guess thats the true motivator for pursing simming excellence.Hope it don't end! VIN "DON'T WORRY BE HAPPY,FOR THE BEST IS YET TO COME"

[Guest Shalomar]

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Have you tried the enhanced .air file for the default Extra at the link in my first post in the thread? It's still a little hard to taxi, but easier. In the air... I see what you mean about mass and inertia. I tried my customary inverted climbout and the thing KEPT rolling... with my Logitech Force 3D I was using at the time it's not so easy to stop a high rate roll whenever I want. Plus it's possible to get into a PIO situation. Probably not on a par with the Marchetti, but above the default... got an opinion?Best Regards, Donny:-wave

[Dillon 2,194]

All the default planes are great except for the Jets and Helo but there's no comparison to payware such as DreamFleet's Baron 58 or LDS's 767....I hope everything returns but in better condition. Mircosoft out did themselves with the Cessna 182 FDE...