Looking for advice before sale ends

[louis8m 5]

The sale is almost over . Thinking of getting either the Seminole, the Conquest or 421 but there always seems to be problems with their aircraft not flying according to real world procedures. Maybe some one here can tell me the best one to get -----thanks Louis CYYC 

Edited December 14, 2019 by louis8m

[FDEdev 955]

I'd rate them as follows: PA44 & C421 ex aequo, C441.   The PA44 has the nice feature that you can switch between steam gauges and the glass cockpit on the fly. 

Not aware of problems with the first two, which would prevent you from flying according to RW procedures.  

---

Edited December 14, 2019 by FDEdev

[louis8m 5]

Thanks FD, that helps me out a lot, and i seen that feature your talking about swaping on the fly and was attracted to it . I come from the analog days of the 60's . I used to fly real world a Cessna 210 and was thought strictly on flying by numbers . I bought it for fsx at the time and it was so far out i deleted it  is why i'm asking ---Thanks- Louis 

Edited December 14, 2019 by louis8m

[FDEdev 955]

The 210 had the old generation FDEs and these weren't exactrly great, but the newer ones since the C377 are way better, usually even a bit better than e.g. Milviz.

If you go for the 421 you need the latest FDE update:  https://library.avsim.net/login.php?Location=%2Fdownload.php%3FDLID%3D211600

Edited December 14, 2019 by FDEdev

[rightseat 277]

"Usually better than e.g. Milviz?" No, sir. 

[FDEdev 955]

44 minutes ago, rightseat said:

"Usually better than e.g. Milviz?" No, sir. 

I'm only talking about the FDE, not systems etc. E.g. the Alabeo C310 definitely has a better FDE than the Milviz C310.

Btw. why did you quote only parts of my post? Looks quite a bit different that way.

[rightseat 277]

"why did you quote only parts of my post?"

-Because your entire post is clearly readable in its entirety directly above....

-And, I disagree. I think Milviz's C310 fde is better than the Carenado/Alabeo. 

[FDEdev 955]

3 hours ago, rightseat said:

I think Milviz's C310 fde is better than the Carenado/Alabeo. 

That's interesting since I've designed both FDEs. In the seven years between the these two I continued to learn and hence improve my FDEs. 

[raymie 81]

13 hours ago, FDEdev said:

That's interesting since I've designed both FDEs. In the seven years between the these two I continued to learn and hence improve my FDEs. 

I have the Milviz C310R and Alabeo's 310R and overall enjoy both of them. Since you were involved in developing or designing the FDE's for both versions, maybe you can answer my question.

First, my understanding is the Milviz 310R is modeled after a real world privately owned Cessna 310R. Apparently, this aircraft can be a handful on takeoff roll and climb out due to its flight dynamic characteristics. The Milviz version seems to model those characteristics quite well. On the takeoff roll, there is a pull to one side, and on climb out there seems to be a tendency to roll to one side?? These two dynamics were modeled on both the original and redux versions of the Milviz 310. On the other hand, the Alabeo C310R does not possess the same characteristics on takeoff roll and climb out as the Milviz 310R does. 

Second, my question is this, why wasn't those flight dynamic characteristics modeled into the Alabeo 310R FDE? It is much easier to handle on takeoff and climb out than the Milviz version. Just curious and maybe you can help my curiosity with an answer.

Thanks and appreciate you FDE work!

[rightseat 277]

Those are some of the same characteristics I love about the Milviz version. It feels more realistic for sure.

[FDEdev 955]

There are a few reasons why both FDEs are noticeable different. Short verion, there are different ways to interpret aircraft handling and how to transfer this into a sim.

Until I did the Alabeo FDE I received a few more pireps and feedback about the 310R. I do have a tiny amount of 310R hours, but that was many decades ago, so I initially disregarded this experience.