Like alot of others I was waiting to get more feedback on it before buying and seeing there is not much out there I sold some Google stocks and bought it.First the good. I own just about every payware out there and the graphics are right there on top. Alot want to compare the Cheyenne's graphics to the Aeroworx King air and IMO are even nicer. I have a 34 inch LCD and only the best looking, highest quality cockpits/gauges look really good. The Cheyenne is the nicest looking Ive seen.The vr pit is A+. Gauges are sharp,clear and move very smooth. The night lighting is the best ive seen.Looking around the vr is impressive with everything fully detailed right down to the rivots on the wings. Very well done textures with the dash being the nicest Ive seen.All around its one of the best I own.Sounds- Some of the best Ive heard.Flight model- A real joy to hand fly and is on par with the Aeroworx. Feels just as you would expect a med twin.Performance- From what Ive seen they are simular to the Aeroworx being very good considering the detail.Bad- Still alot of minor bugs but reading over the forums, its appears they are on top of it and a patch is imminent.The gps is confusing and the plane has a few quirks. For ex hitting scroll lock will disable keyboard commands. Its IMPORTANT to visit their forums and read the faq.The price. IMO should be around $30 along with other planes of simular quality.Being so close to FSX and never hearing of digital aviation, I had to really think hard about spending almost $40.But the bottom line is that the Cheyenne is one of the best overall looking,flying and fps freindly planes considering the details I own.I was looking for another GA twin that was in the same league with the Aeroworx King Air which is one of my all time favorites. Well I found it.

Digital Aviation is comprised of several veterans of flightsim development. You can see the team members here: http://www.digital-aviation.de/crjsite/l_html/team_main.htmlHans Hartmann has also done a lot of work with Flight1, namely the programming for the ATR.Marcel Felde has done much in visual model work, namely the original Dreamfleet Archer.Alex Metzger also worked on the Flight1 ATR, Dreamfleet A36 and B58 as the flight modeler.Tobias Ahlbrecht is new on the scene, but his work is greatly demostrated with the Cheyenne.As a fellow developer, I highly recommend their work and I agree with JIMJAM - this is high quality stuff!Regards,Owen

Hi Owen! Long time.Not much info out there on the plane so I just wanted to pass on my opinion. Good to hear ya.

Performance is a key criterion for me. Some have suggested the Cheyenne gives frame rates only 1-3 less than default or RAS planes. I was sorry to read that you found them only comparable with the B200, and the latter is a little tough on frame rates on my system. Would you care to expand on this aspect of your evaluation?Thanks,Noel.

As you know there are many variables other than the plane that can effect performance.Im basing my comparison on the king air because I flew it alot yesterday. In the same area with variable weather conditions, the Cheyenne was no worse and maybe slightly better than the KA.Im also running in the background, Active Sky with Flight Enviroment dxt3 clouds. My traffic 2006 25% ai, BEV, Fspassengers/fscargo,Ultimate terrain,Fshotfx.Blue Sky textures and Xtra water which BTW I highly reccomend.Im getting 20 fps constant which is my set limit.So basically I think whatever performance someone is getting with the Aeroworx can expect the same or slightly better with the Cheyenne.The textures are quick loading,no stutters or pauses at least on my system.

Thanks JJ! I appreciate the extra info. Sounds like a terrific system you have there. Me, I also run Active Sky 6 weather with Flight Enviroment dxt3 clouds, 90% AI Traffic, BEV, Track IR3 pro Vector, CH pedals and Sidewinder FF2 joystick. When flying IFR I add Radar Contact. I'm at 34 fps locked, which is higher than your setting. But it can be hard to maintain, particularly with detailed planes or clouds. Any lower and TrackIR3 becomes noticeably jerky. The system has had the FS-GS treatment and that helped a lot. I'm running a 19 inch Sony CRT at 1600 x 1200 resolution, 75 Hz refresh rate. What resolution do you run your monster LCD at and how close is it to your seating position? Do you need a really good graphics card to get enough resolution? I'm interested in getting a 24 inch Dell LCD but worried I might not have enough horsepower to drive it at native resolution. Cheers,Noel.

Its a Samsung ln-r328w. Max rez is 1380x768 with a refresh of 60.I originally bought it to use a tv in a spare room but one day hooked it up to my computer and have never looked back.I was running a 25 inch crt at 1600 with a refresh rate of 85. It took a couple days to get accustomed to the lower refresh rate which gave me headaches. Also the reduced rez looked bad at first but now that I am use to seeing it, the graphics look great to me.Sounds like alot of reason why not to buy one but my entire flight,gaming and online experince has been greatly improved. Bigger is better!There is just so much more screen area that I can now distinguish landmarks and navigate vfr. Also have had a few cases of vertigo.BTW my vid card is a 6800gt.

Thanks JJ. I have the same card. I'm surprised that you ditched a 25 inch crt for the LCD. I would have thought the smaller screen at higher resolution would have been better. But since I have not tried it myself, I'll have to rely on your experience. That must have been one monster CRT!Cheers,Noel.

Like alot of us Im always looking for anything to enhance my simming experience. Having full scale gauges,seeing details Ive never noticed, a runway that does not look like a grey line,being able to read print.Besides its BIGGER! So it must be better right? My car has 435 horsepower yet I rarely break the speed limit.Guess Im a hardware,horsepower junkie.And yes, I sit back at least 3-4 feet from the screen.

I don't doubt its on a par with other payware stuff out there, but it's priced way, way above it. I worked it out to be $45.00 US at todays exchange rate. I'm gonna pass on this one.Rob

Hmmm I though it was $38 US.

The Cheyenne costs 34.99 euros on SimMarket, which is about 44.5 USD.

>The Cheyenne costs 34.99 euros on SimMarket, which is about>44.5 USD.Without VAT (which I don't believe the US buyers pay) it's $38.65Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/tfbeta.jpg

You are correct, Mike. There is no VAT for U.S. purchases.

>>The Cheyenne costs 34.99 euros on SimMarket, which is about>>44.5 USD.>>Without VAT (which I don't believe the US buyers pay) it's>$38.65>>>Regards, MichaelThat's still about $8-$10 too steep for this type of plane, IMHO.Rob