I consider a key feature in a study level simulation of an aircraft is the inclusion of faults and authentic results to faults.  Neither the PMDG JS-4100 nor DC-6 are in this category, whereas the 737/747/777 products do satisfy this with comprehensive fault simulations.  Not sure about the other products.  The study level simulation has utility for a professional pilot that needs to prepare for sim checks and that is a segment of the market that PMDG does well with.

I do not mean to detract from the excellent flight dynamics you find in the DC-6 and probably in the A2A products, but they do not fall into the "study sim" category as I understand the category to be defined.

Not really study level but just a notch below:

Flight1 Kingair B200 (soon P3D v4.1 compatible). The G1000 suite is really good.

1 hour ago, downscc said:

I do not mean to detract from the excellent flight dynamics you find in the DC-6 and probably in the A2A products, but they do not fall into the "study sim" category as I understand the category to be defined.

I also don't consider the A2A planes study level but the OP did say "or as real as it gets" so I guess they fall into that category. Maybe the OP should add 'study' and/or 'real' to the list of planes so people know which ones are actually study and which ones are also or only as real as it gets.

53 minutes ago, downscc said:

I consider a key feature in a study level simulation of an aircraft is the inclusion of faults and authentic results to faults.  Neither the PMDG JS-4100 nor DC-6 are in this category, whereas the 737/747/777 products do satisfy this with comprehensive fault simulations.  Not sure about the other products.  The study level simulation has utility for a professional pilot that needs to prepare for sim checks and that is a segment of the market that PMDG does well with.

I do not mean to detract from the excellent flight dynamics you find in the DC-6 and probably in the A2A products, but they do not fall into the "study sim" category as I understand the category to be defined.

Downcc is 100% correct. This term “study level” , all too often used to describe anything that’s okay or ok+ can only describe an aircraft that includes failures and allows the simulation of abnormals.

 

 

Study level. (Simulation of abnormals).

1) By a good margin = FSL A320

2)

3)

4) Q400 Training  edition, not yet released.

5) PMDG 737-777-747

 As real as it gets!

In no order,

Leonardo Maddog MD 80 (to come), TDFi 717, CLJ25, A2A, Real air (closed down), Q400 <best in class,

There the ones I've own cannot think of any other Study level, as real as it gets!, Alan (Chock) is the man I think could answer that one really well.

 

6 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Study level. (Simulation of abnormals).

1) By a good margin = FSL A320

2)

3)

4) Q400 Training  edition, not yet released.

5) PMDG 737-777-747

 As real as it gets!

In no order,

Leonardo Maddog MD 80 (to come), TDFi 717, CLJ25, A2A, Real air (closed down), Q400 <best in class,

 

I almost totally agree. But i would place Leo Maddog in study level definitely

1 minute ago, lodestar said:

I almost totally agree. But i would place Leo Maddog in study level definitely

Interesting, That would be great, I don't know what amount of abnormals it comes with, really looking forward to it. Would love to know more.

What are A2A Accusim aircraft missing that keeps them from being considered study aircraft by the above criteria?

12 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Study level. (Simulation of abnormals).

1) By a good margin = FSL A320

2)

3)

4) Q400 Training  edition, not yet released.

5) PMDG 737-777-747

 As real as it gets!

In no order,

Leonardo Maddog MD 80 (to come), TDFi 717, CLJ25, A2A, Real air (closed down), Q400 <best in class,

There the ones I've own cannot think of any other Study level, as real as it gets!, Alan is the man I think could answer that one really well.

 

Have to disagree with the Q400 here: imho the Pro version of the Q400 definitely is a study level sim. The few options that the Training version brings when it comes to the simulation of things don't make such a huge difference. If the Pro Q400 isn't study level then some of the PMDG ones aren't either imho.

17 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Interesting, That would be great, I don't know what amount of abnormals it comes with, really looking forward to it. Would love to know more.

Well, even fs9 version has all kind of failures simulated, random and caused by pilot error. You have instructors panel too, failures can be triggered using the panel or you can set them automatically. Automatically was default until the latest FSX version, and was disabled becouse of VATSIM users. if you set it to automatically trigger the failures, random failures can happen(but not realy so often), the most interesting are failures caused by your action - like engine failures if you set too much trust manualy, icing, and many more. Of course you need manulas for this plane, Leonardo Maddog was the first complete study level aircraft for MSFS sims. Systems and Flight Dynamics are out of this world  

You know i love FSL A320. Maddog is not realy programed in that way, to simulate systems interaction in real time, but anyway, anything you try with this plane from manuals simple works like it should, and it flies beautifully

28 minutes ago, lodestar said:

Well, even fs9 version has all kind of failures simulated, random and caused by pilot error. You have instructors panel too, failures can be triggered using the panel or you can set them automatically. Automatically was default until the latest FSX version, and was disabled becouse of VATSIM users. if you set it to automatically trigger the failures, random failures can happen(but not realy so often), the most interesting are failures caused by your action - like engine failures if you set too much trust manualy, icing, and many more. Of course you need manulas for this plane, Leonardo Maddog was the first complete study level aircraft for MSFS sims. Systems and Flight Dynamics are out of this world  

You know i love FSL A320. Maddog is not realy programed in that way, to simulate systems interaction in real time, but anyway, anything you try with this plane from manuals simple works like it should, and it flies beautifully

Thank you for info, that sounds fantastic. It could be right up there with FSL. Cannot wait for it.

 

34 minutes ago, J van E said:

Have to disagree with the Q400 here: imho the Pro version of the Q400 definitely is a study level sim. The few options that the Training version brings when it comes to the simulation of things don't make such a huge difference. If the Pro Q400 isn't study level then some of the PMDG ones aren't either imho.

I can't remember a way to set failures with Q400 J? I know and agree it's fantastic and you can break it but can you set failures up if so I just cannot remember that...getting old. PMDG you can do just that and the FSL is like a level D or as close as we can get. When pilots do there 6 month level D checks they set failures up for the pilots to deal with. Can you do that with the Q400? I truly cannot recall them options. With or without its a stunning aircraft and by far best in class.

58 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Thank you for info, that sounds fantastic. It could be right up there with FSL. Cannot wait for it.

 

I can't remember a way to set failures with Q400 J? I know and agree it's fantastic and you can break it but can you set failures up if so I just cannot remember that...getting old. PMDG you can do just that and the FSL is like a level D or as close as we can get. When pilots do there 6 month level D checks they set failures up for the pilots to deal with. Can you do that with the Q400? I truly cannot recall them options. With or without its a stunning aircraft and by far best in class.

Yep that Maddog is quite a beast and a build with quality like a tank. Looking forward to the V4 version. 

As for the Q400 Pro i agree that the failure system is complicated to understand with those scripts. There is a control instruktor like panel to fail systems in real time over network for instance. Up there as a study sim in my own opinion 

Thanks Michael Moe 

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

I can't remember a way to set failures with Q400 J? I know and agree it's fantastic and you can break it but can you set failures up if so I just cannot remember that...getting old. PMDG you can do just that and the FSL is like a level D or as close as we can get. When pilots do there 6 month level D checks they set failures up for the pilots to deal with. Can you do that with the Q400? I truly cannot recall them options. With or without its a stunning aircraft and by far best in class.

Yes, you can. Don’t forget that the Majestic Q400 is made for training purposes, not just for us simmers. There even is a specific system panel for setting up failures. Haven’t used it myself though. ;)

1 hour ago, Holdit said:

What are A2A Accusim aircraft missing that keeps them from being considered study aircraft by the above criteria?

I guess not being able to trigger failures at will.

However, I think A2A's aircraft model real-world 'failures' better than most (any) designer's aircraft. A few examples: plug fouling, carburetor icing, magneto malfunction, landing impact damage and oil consumption, to name a few.

A2A is general aviation and military trainers. Not airliners; so I would say they're in a different category.

I would add the Aerosoft Catalina to the list, let it be as real as it gets or something else.