I already have the FSD Seneca with Jetline 2 RXP gauges. How does this compare to the DF Baron 58 RXP version? Except the GPS which I'm aware of. I understand they are fairly similary or? Is it well spent money to get the DF Baron or might I as well use the Seneca since it's so similar to the Baron?

They're similar but the Baron is just so much more up to date as the Seneca was originally an FS2002 plane. The sound is more realistic, the textures and model are superior, the flight model is better, the gauges are clearer etc. etc. I don't think you would be dissapointed.

I have both as well. Obviously as was already said the Seneca was originally a FS2002 aircraft and the Baron is brand new. I am not sure that I would agree that the flight model is better in the Baron, but it does have some newer eye candy and a much more detailed VC (though with a substantial FPS hit compared to the Seneca). I have just been playing with the Seneca again after adding RXP

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Honestly, most of my "stick time" is in the Seneca. I am fairly happy with the Baron 58TC in the library. But those guages... have me thinking. Isn't FSD still around for an update?Merry Christmas:-scatter

I love both! Both aircraft are very good, especially the Seneca with the RXP avionics. One advantage I give is the Baron visual model. It has some newer features and is quite spectacular. Of course those improvements come at a bit of a hit on FPS. I think everything else overall is pretty even, not having any real stick time in either plane. The Seneca has aged quite well, and is still one of my favorite all time addons. By the way, the Seneca was updated for fs2004, just go to FSD's website. The visual model is nice, just not with all the new features of the Baron. It does perform a bit smoother than the Baron. Although they both are similar from a performance standpoint, I still fly both often.

I have both planes also, and pretty much agree with all that's been said by the others. I've flown the Seneca a LOT although I don't think I've flown it since getting the Baron. Your hardware may be the determining factor. If you've got an older system you might enjoy the Seneca more. If you've got good system specs and want all the eye candy, then the Baron is the way to go.Jim

I have a solid system and I get frequent stutters in the Baron. The general FPS are not bad with the 2D panel, but they really fall off in the VC. I don't mind the lower FPS given the detail, but it seems like every time I change view the textures have to load again and it is stutter city. Even the F1 ATR runs considerably faster and smoother on my machine so I am not sure what is up with this particular aircraft and my computer.P4 3.22GB memory6800GT

One thing to try, is to reduce the resolution in the VC a bit...Open up the panel.cfg file and in the VC section, change:pixel_size=1024 // was 2048I find that the VC textures load a lot faster on my machine with only a slight decrease in sharpness..

>older system you might enjoy the Seneca more. If you've got>good system specs and want all the eye candy, then the Baron>is the way to go.>Regarding performence my system isAthlon 64 3200+1 Gb 400 MHz RAMRadeon 9800 Pro 128MI also have the Aerowox B200 and DF727 which I can run but with some occasional problems with framerates particulary when using ASV and there is a lot of clouds. I also have UT USA FsGenesis 38 m scenery.How does the DF Baron compares to these planes considering FPS and performence?

A thread worth reading:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...id=289586&page=Hope this helps!

>>older system you might enjoy the Seneca more. If you've>got>>good system specs and want all the eye candy, then the Baron>>is the way to go.>>>>Regarding performence my system is>>Athlon 64 3200+>1 Gb 400 MHz RAM>Radeon 9800 Pro 128M>>I also have the Aerowox B200 and DF727 which I can run but>with some occasional problems with framerates particulary when>using ASV and there is a lot of clouds. I also have UT USA>FsGenesis 38 m scenery.>How does the DF Baron compares to these planes considering FPS>and performence?I have a system about the same as you except for a Nvidia 6600GT. I find the Dreamfleet Baron much easier and smoother on performance compared to the B200. The Baron is perhaps a little better performance wise compared to the DF727 for me as well.Tony

That just goes to show how it can really vary from machine to machine. The Aerowrox B200 runs perfectly on my machine but the Baron does not. I am not saying the Baron isn

I see you have the light version. Did you install the Reality-XP equipment? There is another thread around here that suggests some folks are getting better performance with the full version.I agree with you on everyone's milage may vary! :)Tony

I did install the RXP FLT and 530.