DJJose

Carenado c172 G1000

Recommended Posts

I was hoping to get feedback on this new release.

I'd like to ask the mods to please leave this topic here for a few days before it's moved.

Most simmers gravitate to this forum.

Thx

Share this post


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

1 minute ago, Milton Waddams said:

Is it released now? I thought it was still in development?

YES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

A Carenado G1000...basically a repurposed stock GPS

To be fair, Carenado are stating that the G1000 in this plane is a brand new version/development.   It has synthetic vision, which is a first for a G1000 simulation in domestic sims AFAIK.   It also apparantly has other new added functionality, including advisory VNAV, although I say "apparantly" because I don't own it yet!   I'm not sure any 172 is going to surpass the XP11 C172 with REP (for me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Synthetic Vision is an interesting pieces to the puzzle...not unique to the C172 though as it would appear.

emb505.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Info regarding synthetic vision, from the front page:  

Synthetic Vision System powered by WebSimConnect (1 year subscription INCLUDED)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, WarpD said:

Info regarding synthetic vision, from the front page:  

 

 

Interesting, does anyone knows how much is the annual subscription? I like the synthetic vision development and I wonder if it could be applied to other planes IE Carenado Phenom 300 which is one of my favourites.

Regards,

Simbol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what you're actually subscribing for... and when the subscription runs out... does it lock down your G1000's display?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WarpD said:

I'm wondering what you're actually subscribing for... and when the subscription runs out... does it lock down your G1000's display?

Hi Ed, I am wondering the same thing, that would be annoying and sad...

What are Mindstar plans for the future? any chance to get synthetic vision from your gauges? I would become a loyal customer :wink:.

Regards,
Simbol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chapstick said:

Carenado... more like Craptornado. 

Depends on what you are looking for. I personally am not looking for a 100% accurate study sim. I look at any simplification of systems as compensating for my lack of intensive professional flight training. It allows me to fly confidently without having to pore over the manuals for hours to learn something that a professional pilot would know intimately due to their years of training. In this respect, Carenado aircraft are the perfect choice for me in many cases. The fact that their visuals are second to none doesn't hurt, either!!

 

Russ

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one mentionned that the G1000 database is Navigraph upgradable ? Subscription previously mentionned are related to the update of the database.

To supplement Russ, here are my personnal thoughs : I'm using my PC sim to train in the cockpit. I don't care about flight dynamic which from my perspective, is far from "my reality" whatever sim it is (FSx, P3D, A2A, RealAir, x-Plane...). I mainly look for a 3D virtual cockpit with the maximum immersive ambiance to run through checlist, handle switches, etc... Carenado, like its sister company Alabeo, does the job.

I have maybe hundred of C172 G1000 real hours of flight and maybe this Carenado's addons will join my virtual fleet.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chapstick said:

Carenado... more like Craptornado. 

Bit harsh, even when referring to Carenado lol. And probably not too fair if you've not actually bought the thing. I haven't either, because I'm not a fan of the way Carenado do knock out stuff which is ropey on occasion and then don't fix it, but as is always the case, I'll certainly hold off on judging this one until the facts are in from those who take the plunge and buy it.

I like many others will attest to the fact that not all of Carenado and Alabeo's stuff is dodgy, just a lot of it is, and to be fair, their simpler normally aspirated GA aeroplanes are generally not bad flight wise, it's the turboprops which are usually a bit naff, and that's often compounded by the fact that turboprops generally have fancier avionics, which are sometimes not well simulated in their add-ons either.

But I think it is important to note a matter which often gets confused here and sometimes gets wrongly used in their defence: That is to say, it's not that I don't like simple aircraft, or even those with simplified avionics, I've got loads of those and they definitely have their place in my virtual hangar; what I don't like is simplified aircraft, or even complex aircraft with sloppy errors which don't get addressed, and I'm sure that is probably what you are alluding to Alex, because there is no denying that Carenado and Alabeo are guilty of that one, especially where turboprop engine modeling is concerned, but also with more complex avionics when they have had a stab at that.

So yeah, I see where you are coming from, but let's see what actual users report, because this thing, whilst being a normally aspirated GA aeroplane, so presumably not too bad in that regard, is one which has fancier avionics, and that is something Carenado don't have a stellar track record on. But you never know, the developer might actually be changing their tune a bit, although I'm not going to be holding my breath on that one until I hear otherwise, and really, they've only got themselves to blame for me and others thinking that way even if they genuinely have turned over a new leaf. Because if you give a dog a bad name....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vbazillio said:

No one mentionned that the G1000 database is Navigraph upgradable ? Subscription previously mentionned are related to the update of the database.

The synthetic vision from WebSimConnect is what the 1yr subscription is tied to... Carenado has never offered a 1yr Navigraph subscription with any of their aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard rumor that the Websimconnect subscription will be $10/yr to continue using it.  From what I understand, the G1000 can switch between “regular” and SVS.  So, if you don’t renew subscription, I assume it reverts back to normal operation.   

Just a guess though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious.. what is it about the physics model of the Carenado's that many complain about.. something specific?  What lacks (compared to A2A)?  Sounds like this systems modeling might be ok though with the g1000? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, theskyisthelimit said:

I'm curious.. what is it about the physics model of the Carenado's that many complain about.. something specific?  What lacks (compared to A2A)?  Sounds like this systems modeling might be ok though with the g1000? 

I have 35 real world hours in the Cherokee 140 (Admittedly, that's from 1975, so my memory may be a bit dim...) but , having flown the A2A Cherokee, I find it much harder to land than I remember the real thing to be. The A2A wants to float and bounce all over the place, while I remember the real thing being fairly easy to plant firmly on the runway, even with a bit of extra airspeed. Could this just be a difference between the 140 and 180, or is it the sim flight model? I also have Carenado's Cherokee and Archer, and they seem a lot more like what I remember.

Thoughts?

 

Russ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, b1bmsgt said:

I have 35 real world hours in the Cherokee 140 (Admittedly, that's from 1975, so my memory may be a bit dim...) but , having flown the A2A Cherokee, I find it much harder to land than I remember the real thing to be. The A2A wants to float and bounce all over the place, while I remember the real thing being fairly easy to plant firmly on the runway, even with a bit of extra airspeed. Could this just be a difference between the 140 and 180, or is it the sim flight model? I also have Carenado's Cherokee and Archer, and they seem a lot more like what I remember.

Thoughts?

 

Russ

Ah this is good info.. glad to hear some real world comparisons.. Curious what others would say as well.  And curious thoughts on this particular 172 g1000 (i was considering grabbing this one, but i already have the a2a and the other one for xp11 as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the aircraft yesterday.  Are there instructions on how to install SVS?  There are no instructions that came with the installation.  Shouldn't there be instructions on how to operate it?  Or, is this so simple to operate and turn on and off and install that anyone, including those who are beginners in flight simulation, can do?  To be blunt - is there a guide entitled, SVS for Dummies?  I have done some Google searching and have found many YouTube videos showing the technology in real life and in flight simulation.  I also found by accident a directory that might be related in the main P3DV4 folder called WebSimBrowser but see no instructions there too.  I'm sorry for being so dumb but, when I buy a product that has technology like this included, I would expect some type of instruction and information about how much it costs in the future and how to set it up and stuff like that.  I hope I am not asking for too much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jim Young said:

I bought the aircraft yesterday.  Are there instructions on how to install SVS?  There are no instructions that came with the installation.  Shouldn't there be instructions on how to operate it?  Or, is this so simple to operate and turn on and off and install that anyone, including those who are beginners in flight simulation, can do?  To be blunt - is there a guide entitled, SVS for Dummies?  I have done some Google searching and have found many YouTube videos showing the technology in real life and in flight simulation.  I also found by accident a directory that might be related in the main P3DV4 folder called WebSimBrowser but see no instructions there too.  I'm sorry for being so dumb but, when I buy a product that has technology like this included, I would expect some type of instruction and information about how much it costs in the future and how to set it up and stuff like that.  I hope I am not asking for too much. 

This is the sort of things that I hate from flight sim developers, you suppose to create add-on's that anybody can use and install even if they don't have a clue about computers.

You cannot assume that every user is a tech expert.

I hope you get it sorted Jim, I think your best shot is to contact the websimbrowser developer.

All the best,

Simbol 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is all over the place. Let's calm it down a bit gents.

1. The Carenado c172 is a good bird. Documentation is lacking on how to activate/install the SVS. Jim, if you would like help please PM me and I'm more than happy to guide you. That said, if you open the SimObcjets/Airplanes/C172_G1000 (or whatever it's called) folder you'll see a SVS manual that is, at best, a minimum start guide.

2. SVS can in fact be applied to other Carenado G1000s (a la Phenom). I'm not an expert, but from what I gather, someone with beginner experience in XML can add it to any of the Carenado G1000s. Anyone up for the task?

3. WebSim Connect isn't charging anything for SVS at the moment. That said, it's absolutely correct that you can enable or disable SVS. If, whenever that point arrives, there is a subscription involved and you choose not to invest in it, you can fly the aircraft just fine without any loss besides SVS.

4. As a rw pilot and someone who's been in the hobby for over a decade, Carenado is fine. Bugs galore at times, but beautiful aesthetics and adequate immersion for sitting behind a monitor. Frankly, I enjoy this hobby for the ability to relax while still experiencing what I love about flying. The rw stuff is where I get my jollies off with procedure porn.

Alex

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, N2382R said:

this thread is all over the place. Let's calm it down a bit gents.

Isn't this topic about the Carenado C172 G1000 you can purchase at Carenado and is advertised to include "Synthetic Vision System powered by WebSimConnect (1 year subscription INCLUDED)".  I do not see how it is "all over the place" and it seems to me to be on-topic.  Being a forum moderator here at AVSIM it appears to me to be on topic so your comments are strange.  Please be careful with your language when posting here on AVSIM.

Not understanding why the manual is not with the Carenado C172 directory and hidden in the aircraft folder.  Thanks for the info. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, theskyisthelimit said:

I'm curious.. what is it about the physics model of the Carenado's that many complain about.. something specific?  What lacks (compared to A2A)?  Sounds like this systems modeling might be ok though with the g1000? 

Without getting too much off topic, I have found that the A2A Commanche is particularly good at simulating sideslips, far better than most flight sim aeroplanes, it has a lot of other nice attributes which are like the real aeroplane too, but since I very often sideslip aeroplanes in real life, I appreciate ones which can do it in a sim.

In comparison, let's take the Alabeo (which is essentially Carenado) PA-38 Piper Tomahawk, which is one of their better aeroplanes. But it cannot be made to spin or sideslip easily at all. This is an important point because when Piper designed the PA-38, its flight characteristics and indeed the interior layout (which is a bit roomier than the competing Cessna 150/2) were as a direct result of consultation with many flying instructors about what they wanted in a training aeroplane; two things instructors asked for above all, were elbow room, and the ability to spin the aircraft so it would make a good training aeroplane. Thus the PA-38 gained the nickname of Terrorhawk, which is unfair, as it is born of fledgling pilots being worried about spinning, which admittedly is sort of scary the first time you do it or at least are preparing to, but of course any decent pilot knows that intentional spins are fun, they give you an appreciation of how to avoid them. So with that in mind, the simulated version of it should really be able to be fairly easily put into a deliberate spin, because the real one can and that is actually its purpose, thus the flight model should reflect that.

Apart from the simulated PA-38 not spinning as easily as its real world counterpart can, I actually like it, but its flight model is not as accurate as it should be for the aforementioned reason.

Back with the Cessna 172 however, although that is sometimes used for training, it is somewhat larger than necessary as a pure training aeroplane and like the PA-38 and the Cessna 150, both of which are getting on a bit these days, the 172 is being eclipsed as a trainer in favour of more fuel efficient modern types, so it's a bit less of a concern as to whether than could be flung into a spin in its simulated form. Really, all it needs to do is climb and descend at the proper power and pitch settings and turn at an accurate rate when following the turn and slip indicator settings, as that is how it should be flown, especially in its G1000 synthetic vision equipped form, since the whole point of that kind of thing is for flying in IMC.

Anyway, I'll be interested to see what people think of the new Cessna from Caranedo, and I hope those who have bought it will have some good comments on the thing and how it suits what they bought it for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have come to the realization that Carenado airplanes offer a great value when they go on sale. Most are simply over priced and under maintained.

I wish this model well, but I simply doubt that this G1000 (even with its new bells & whistles) will be anything like the one offered by F1's 182T. It's highly unlikely that the FD & sounds is anywhere near the A2A version, but it's certainly a pretty looking model.

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