Help me pick a GA to fly around the world with

[hs118 732]

1 hour ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Interesting video about landing a Cessna at O'Hare in the middle of the night:

 

Thanks for this one!! very interesting!

[Mengy 814]

If you are looking at the default MFS planes, then the SR22 would be a great choice for a RTW flight.  Good range and endurance plus decent visibility for a low wing plane.  Other than that the C172 would be fun but you'd need to plan the ocean crossings carefully I think.

One of the Diamond planes would probably be good choices too.

I wouldn't take the TBM, like you state the dash is too much in the way for a sightseeing flight.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Mengy

[Chock 17,769]

Out of the default new MS Sim aeroplanes, I'd be inclined to choose the Citation CJ4. It's speedy at 450 knots cruise, can make it up to 45,000 feet to get over weather, can climb at up to 4,000 fpm if necessary, has a range of just over 2,000 miles. It can get off a 3,500 ft runway with full fuel and land in under 3,000 feet. So the trip won't take you forever in that, but will let you get into smaller airports.

[joec63 253]

4 hours ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

I am currently planning several long distance flights (multi-legs) around the globe to enjoy the world in all its splendor in MSFS. I'm not quite sure which GA plane to pick from to do that, though, and I would very much appreciate your suggestions. Here are some things I value with the plane I'm gonna pick:

• Must be a good view in the cockpit with the instrumentation and dashboard not being obtrusive
• Must have a somewhat decent range, though I am not neccessairly going to fly over large bodies of water (I'm here to see the world, not the water)
• Not be an absolute snail
• And hopefully be interesting to fly 🙂

Any suggestions? 

From the standard edition planes available and your requirements I would choose the Beechcraft Bonanza G36 . Fun aircraft to fly and relatively speedy . My favorite GA's are the 152, 172, and Bonanza in the alpha/beta. 

 

[bonchie 2,310]

If you are really going to explore, I'd say the Bonanza is a good mix of speed, range, and they are good on grass if you need to use some more rural fields in some countries.

If you want to just fly at 40,000 feet, use the Citation. The other jets probably won't be up to snuff at release IMO.

[RobF2 150]

You haven't said if you're going to "cheat" and step up the sim speed?  I'd be another vote for a bonanza - flying the A2A V tailed single in V4 and V5 in realitme makes you realise how much more you can see in a 2hr flight with the extra 25knts cruise.   No A2A initially though of course in FS2020, but the G36 is in there.  The A2A V tail has tip tanks which are very nice for the odd very long hop - the higher performance singles usually have 30-50% more distance than C152/172 if you look at the perforamance figures closerly (even without tip tanks).

Why not do little tours at some stop overs in other aircraft you "hired" so you don't limit yourself too much.  You can then hop back in your chosen steed to continue on the round-the-world when time and energy allows plus get to see further off the chosen track.

 

Re flying into busy airports, really enjoyed this one:

One in a lifetime:  Landing at Melbourne Airport:  

 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by RobF2

[UAL4life 256]

5 hours ago, Chock said:

As others have noted, you might be allowed to land, but whether you will be welcomed, or even happy with how you get treated is another matter. Nevertheless, you would not be turned away if there was no option for you to land elsewhere.

Not that much of the following matters in a flight sim, but if you are trying to be 'realistic' then there is also the fact that landing fees, as well as ramp-usage fees (if you parked overnight) can be massively expensive, even just using a fixed electrical power connection for an hour would cost nearly £100 quid at most big UK airports and there is also the customs infrastructure to consider; smaller airports which are expecting GA aeroplanes (and welcome them) have a customs system which is geared to that and a large GA ramp suited to it as well.

Then there's fuel too. You might be surprised to learn that big international airports don't necessarily have all kinds of aviation fuel on tap, and if they do, it'll be in a tiny bit of the airfield. Most airliners get fueled on stand via a truck which pumps that fuel from underground storage tanks miles away, so there aren't that many actual 'tanker' vehicles at big airports, they're mostly pumping vehicles with no large fuel carrying capability of their own. So if you land in  something which uses a different grade or type of fuel - mogas, or stuff specific to a chopper or whatever - it can sometimes be a bit of a faff to find your fuel and also to upload it too, since the connectors on the big fuel trucks are not the little nozzles you find at most GA airfields.

Again that doesn't matter in a sim, but if you wanna be realistic, you should consider the infrastructure. This is why many 'solo' round the world trips are actually nothing of the sort - there'll frequently be a support team/person ahead to make sure all that stuff goes smoothly, handle PR etc, since many such flights are sponsored.

And on the subject of that, why not see about a sponsor for your virtual attempt. That'd be kind of fun and you could either youtube it or facebook it and give the money to a charity appeal or something. It doesn't have to be a massive amount, that sort of thing is good PR for companies and can get a charity a welcome boost, and if you're gonna be doing the flight anyway, might as well try and help people whilst you're at it.

I’m def gonna do this. 

[Paraffin 2,197]

I started what might have been an around-the-world flight in the FSEconomy game this year, in a PC-12 Pilatus in X-Plane.

Every flight was completed point-to-point airports in no more than 2X accelerated time (because that's all X-Plane supports). Starting in the Pacific Northwest WA state, up through BC Canada into Alaska, over a long water stretch to Japan, and down into the Philippines before I bailed out on the project due to time constraints and other interests. I wanted to at least end up in New Zealand, and then move across Australia to the Mideast and Europe back the the USA,  but just didn't have the time or energy.

So having done at least part of this, I'd recommend the MSFS TBM for cruise speed and "legs" between airports. It can be done in a C172 but it will take forever, unless you use ridiculous amounts of time compression, and you won't be enjoying the scenery along the way.

[Torsen 506]

Actually the 182 isn't bad for that task too. The new camera/view system is a nice change and paired with TrackIR I had some really nice flights up to now. The xcub is cool to but maxed out at around 120 kts. We are doing a Pole 2 Pole tour in our VA atm and I am in the same position to choose aircraft as I never intend to continue it over landclass even if that means to switch away from my a2a crafts... 

Cheers T.

[ThomseN_inc 1,128]

Well... I don't know if this plane is even planned to be available for MSFS/FSX but for a trip like that i'd go for the Quest Kodiak. Modern avionics, good payload and quite a good range plus some extra safety due to the turbine engine. But not too fast so you have time to enjoy the landscapes. And she's really compact too!

Edited August 9, 2020 by ThomseN_inc

[Dominique_K 10,156]

4 hours ago, bonchie said:

. The other jets probably won't be up to snuff at release IMO.

Will the TBM and Caravan turboprops be up to it ? 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Dominique_K

[simon747 185]

6 hours ago, bonchie said:

If you are really going to explore, I'd say the Bonanza is a good mix of speed, range, and they are good on grass if you need to use some more rural fields in some countries.

 

Agree, it is a great aircraft.

Edited August 9, 2020 by simon747
error

[Paraffin 2,197]

Other considerations if you wanted to role-play the flight for realism:

Single engine or twin? Any round the world trip will involve some extended routes over open water. The safety conscious pilot would probably go with a twin engine plane, although the single PT-6 in planes like the Caravan and TBM has a very good track record. Of course in a sim the engine won't fail unless you want it to, but this is something anyone would be thinking about with a real-world trip.

Pressurized cabin? Some of the more scenic routes might take you over mountain ranges high enough that you'd want a pressurized aircraft.

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Thank you everyone for your tips and contributions so far. Please, if there are other options you would like to share, please do so 🙂 

Now, my considerations at the moment, on top of those I already stated initially, are:

• I do not need to fly the same aircraft the entire route. If there are stretches that would either require another aircraft or it would at least be very beneficial to swap airplanes, then I will do so. Ie, flying longer stretches of water, or at higher altitudes.
• I am probably going to use the C172 as my main frame, since it has a high wing and a pretty non-obstructive dashboard. It also has acceptable range and speed. The Bonanza is a good swap-in when I need a change, and the caravan when going for longer stretches. It also has the benefit of a high wing. 
• I will have to evaluate each aircraft in regards to "sim-performance" on release, and certain aircraft might be prone to bugs etc which might disqualify them for my journey (basically I am probably going to try out many if not all the aircraft before or during my initial legs of the trip). 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Andreas Stangenes

[Der Zeitgeist 1,575]

35 minutes ago, Andreas Stangenes said:

• I am probably going to use the C172 as my main frame, since it has a high wing and a pretty non-obstructive dashboard. It also has acceptable range and speed. The Bonanza is a good swap-in when I need a change, and the caravan when going for longer stretches. It also has the benefit of a high wing. 

The C172 should work fine for you out of the box, it's implemented pretty well and has a solid autopilot and systems.

If you're trying to cross over the Greenland-Iceland-UK-gap, however, make sure to check the weather. Greenland has very high elevations, and the weather could be a problem because you probably will have to stay below the clouds when you cross the ice shield. Remember, the C172 doesn't have any deicing equipment, I learned that the hard way on a recent crossing of the Alps.

Edited August 9, 2020 by Der Zeitgeist