16 minutes ago, RichieFly said:

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.

...and you can trigger failures at will from the FSX/P3D built-in failures dialog, which while not exhaustive, does feature quite a lot. Fair enough regarding airliners but the opening post didn't make that distinction, and the distinction needs to be made, lest A2A aircraft be made, undeservedly, to seem like they are lacking. I would take the view that the A2A Cub is every bit as much a study aircraft as the FSL A320 (which I also own and love). The fact that its systems are so simple doesn't mean that they aren't modeled to "study level".

There are several good ones out there.

But Prosim Cockpit Suite + Flightmodel is the most realistic and the most expensive one.

Everything by the Boeing book.....

1 hour ago, J van E said:

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. ;)

Fantastic, yep it should go on the list. Stunning aircraft. 

When it comes to GA aircraft I think people are right, but it should be a different class of study level. A2A Accu are study level GA IMO also.

Compairing simulation of a cub to simulating an airbus A320 is interesting!

7 hours ago, BamaKevin said:

Would TFDI 717 make it?

You bet it is!!

A2A Aircraft are definitely study level. They are just easier to learn than a B747 by nature! That's why you generally start your training in a 172!

On another note, I'd replace the Aerosoft Twin Otter with the Milviz Beaver!

I've been in this hobby 30+ Years and owned aircraft from probably every major developer. Including the old days when Dreamfleet was king of the hill. And PMDG products from day one. IMO the TFDI 717 is every bit a study level aircraft!

1 hour ago, RancidViper said:

On another note, I'd replace the Aerosoft Twin Otter with the Milviz Beaver!

Why? The Twin Otter models structural icing, you can fry the engines by either over temping or over torquing them. Comes with a payload and fuel planner. Has a data recorder, allows IAS climbs. Offers start locks for the float plane these are just some of the things off my head...what exactly is so great about the Milviz Beaver? 

17 minutes ago, Ident said:

Why? The Twin Otter models structural icing, you can fry the engines by either over temping or over torquing them. Comes with a payload and fuel planner. Has a data recorder, allows IAS climbs. Offers start locks for the float plane these are just some of the things off my head...what exactly is so great about the Milviz Beaver? 

Fully modelled electrical system down to the last watt!
Realistic battery operation in cold weather
Oil viscosity
The icing effects on this aircraft are incredible! From the manual - (an assortment of failures follow in the cockpit with the vacuum system driven gauges becoming unusable, carb icing and engine issues eventually leading to a forced landing with or without deliberation depending on the correct procedures in the particular circumstance)
Wobble pump to get the fuel pressure ready
Correct weight and balance behaviour
Flight dynamics especially for STOL where the ailerons are linked to the initial flap deployment is brilliant! Not to mention the sound effects for all these things!

For me in general Aerosoft while producing great aircraft with lots of systems modelled, do still try and make it somewhat easier to use than it would in RL. It's been that way with almost all their aircraft, the Twin Otter is definitely on the better end of that scale, but i'd still personally go with the Milviz.

How about the CRJ, DaveCT2003 here will attest its a fantastic addon. 

35 minutes ago, tooting said:

How about the CRJ, DaveCT2003 here will attest its a fantastic addon. 

That plane is far from study level.

Thanks all. Interesting discussions for sure.

Study level and realism might not always go hand in hand, but both sorts can be hi-fi add-ons.

Anyone tried the A2A Cub in P3D v4?

1 hour ago, snapshot21 said:

That plane is far from study level.

explain study level for me I do love these buzz words.

whats the other word that gets banded around its study level and something else level 

 

 

If you mention the crj as a study level aircraft then I guess you actually don't know what it means.

Being good isn't enough,  the crj probably is a good representation of the  aircraft but to be called a study level sim you would need more.

- Complete and accurate system recreation,  not something that look like  it and is just the most recent version, but something that is accurate in its behavior  in every aspect.

- Accurate flight  dynamics in all phase of flight and  ground in normal and abnormal  operations

- Accurate failures and handling and performance degradation caused by these failures

IMO the  only jets that  fits this description  are PMDG, fslabs en  the majestic dash 8

People are aware that these are not training tools, but  you can actually learn a great deal from them. thats what a study level sim is. Something that is true to its real life counterpart and not just made so that it is easy to fly and operate to appeal to simmers that don't want to have to read 300 pages of manual to fly  a plane

To me, an important aspect of a study level airliners is the possibility to have failures.  Scanning instruments in cruise when nothing can go wrong ... How boring is that! PMDG, Majestic dash 8 and FSlabs a320 are my favorites.

jos.