S340 versus F50?

[regis9 4,014]

That’s a great breakdown Peter.

[JLuis 409]

20 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

Funny how these discussions always focus on the definition of "study level". For the OP, it might be better to get an idea what you can do with which airplanes and what you cannot do. I would identify the following categories.

Category 1: The most in-depth simulations enable you to simulate failing systems according to the aircraft's operational manual. These planes tend to be expensive (>$90). As far as I know, this category includes PMDG Boeing aircraft, Majestic Q400 Pro (the Training, which is to be published, offers a more things, but the Pro already covers a lot of failures), FSL A320 and FSL Concorde X.

Category 2: models that enable you to simulate normal operations according to amplified checklists, and all normal systems work and need to be operated properly to avoid in-flight problems. This includes Aerosoft DC-8, Leonardo Maddog MD 80, Aerosoft CRJ and TDFi Boeing 717, for instance.

Category 3: models that enable you to simulate normal operations according to amplified checklists. Most buttons work, so one can go through the checklist, but many systems are actually not implemented. Hence, if you make a mistake, such as not turning anti-ice on, it will not have an effect on your flight. This is the category in which most Carenado airplanes can be placed.

Category 4: models in which a concise checklist can be simulated. CLS DC-10 would be an example. One can do the main operations during a normal flight, but most details are not simulated.

Category 5: models that mainly use default instruments and don't go beyond the things you can do with default airplanes.

I personally almost never simulate failures. Hence, there is no practical difference between category 1 and 2 for me. I would guess that people who are passionate about "study level" would only consider planes from category 1.

Peter 

 

 

Nice!