>But in FS9 we have the dreamfleet Baron 58. Do you know how it>compares to the real Baron? I think the DF Baron is better>than the FSX Baron. It feels much smoother. But I have never>flown a real Baron.>See reply #11. He also beta-tested the DF Baron for Dreamfleet.

I think the fsx one at this point is closer due to the new flight characteristics of fsx. I can't wait for Dreamfleet to make a fsx version-but I was surprised when I imported the Dreamfleet fs9 Baron into fsx- it flew very much like a fs9 plane-which imho is not as good at this point.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Geof,Interesting - my experience is the reverse. After seeing the comments on improved flight modelling in FSX, I was disappointed when I first flew the Baron. I appreciate the new interaction with the air mass; but the basic handling did not seem to have changed. OTOH, the DF Baron is as good in FSX as in FS9 {I replaced the basic Reality gauges of course} and the aircraft has retained the smooth and well harmonised controls and reaction to various phases of flight that were characteristic of it in FS9. In my view it provides a much more realistic feel {if that is possible in any simulator} of this type of GA aircraft.That said, I bow to your greater experience as the Baron is an aircraft I have not flown; but if DF go for an updated Baron for FSX {?} I reckon we are in for a real winner.John Rooum

Rats! thats a shame. I nearly got that 24" TFT flatscreen approved but its canceled now we can read again :-)

Well I have never gotten pitch stability in very many fs9 planes at all-I can trim the fsx Baron now and not spend all my time hunting up and down trying to get a precise altitude. I also find the ground handling (lack of rails in fsx) and perception and reaction of xwind landings and takeoffs better in fsx. When I tried improrting the DF into fsx I got the above problems back-so I am going to await an upgrade. It is for sure to the default in almost all respects-but the handling I find much better at this point with the default.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

"If you're a more serious simmer, everything else but the eye candy has precedence (ground effect, flight dynamics, systems modelling, weather influences etc. just to name a few)."I'm a serious simmer and I demand the WHOLE package which includes eye candy, not just flight dynamics. When I flew commerically there was a whole lot of time to look out the window in between blonde jokes. Likewise, I want the aircraft to handle like it should.The "serious simmer" only concerned with the flight dynamics is like building a home with a panoramic view all around for 50 miles and only admiring the brickwork on the walls. I submit that most who never look out the cockpit have never flown an airplane before because the first lesson you will ever get the moment you step into the plane for your first lesson is to get your head OUT of the cockpit and look around.The wonder, beauty and magic of flight has nothing to do how well a 747 rests in ground effect, its the magic of seeing the beauty of the skies and the earth and you can do that aptly in a microlite or Concorde.

Hi GeoFA,Real life Baron pilot, right? Lucky guy!I have a basic question with the real Baron.What is the procedure to feather the prop?Is it true that when the engine is shut down and the prop is windmilling, the air flowing over the prop actually does the feathering? Not electrical or hydralic?I see the console in FS9 and FSX has a feather position but I have not been able to get it to work.Maybe it is not modeled.Best Regards,

That's great! What a statement! I've always figured that simming should be a 50/50 mix of what we see, and how it fly's!Imagine paying insurance, hangar fees, annuals, maintenance, fuel, physicals, BFR's and possibly monthly aircraft payments just to fly in IMC! :-hah L.Adamson

No-the air won't feather the prop-that is why you need to do it-it causes drag. I don't think fs9/fsx does feathering-it doesn't model the visuals for sure. The Dreamfleet Baron does-and I sorely miss that. Also-using fsuipc registered version you can calibrate your props to do it. Sorry-I just got back from a long trip and am a little out of it-hope I answered your question! http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

>No-the air won't feather the prop-that is why you need to do>it-it causes drag. I don't think fs9/fsx does feathering-it>doesn't model the visuals for sure. The Dreamfleet Baron>does-and I sorely miss that. Also-using fsuipc registered>version you can calibrate your props to do it. Sorry-I just>got back from a long trip and am a little out of it-hope I>answered your question! >http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgThank you for the reply.I will have to check out Dreamfleet!I looked at FSUIPC (registered) and only seen "prop decrement" but I have not calibrated them with FSUIPC (using GoFlight throttles now) so will have to look into that also.Thanks again,Best Regards,

Regarding fs9 I can no longer comment on it because I unistalled it. Xplane 8.50 and FSX are on my PC.I assume that I have tried hard to defend Xplane as "the best", with the ultimate flight modeling engine, great for every sort of airship you are willing to design.I have flown for real (got my PPL in 1981), and even if it's been a long while since I last flew a real airplane, the feeling, the sensations, the sensibility to details that only those who have flown for real have is something that I haven't lost, also because I still often fly as a passenger in either in airliners or GA aircraft. I also have been able to fly in a Pitts S2 (CS-DAY http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=216747 ) and actualy had the chance to take the controls and fly a couple of maneuvers!!!All of this "introduction" just meant to give you an insight on me and why I feel that my observations are valuable. The fact, the pure/concise fact is that:1) I never found a flightsim that could reproduce closest to real the sensation of being there like what I find in the Flight Unlimited series. I no longer have any of the FUs installed, but I can perfectly recall the sensation of flying aircraft in FU(DOS), FU95, FU2 and FU3, and I never ever had that particular sensation of being there like in the FU series;2) After all this years I am completely rendered to FSX. XPlane may be an interesting platform, specially when you're up to model airplanes with strange engine/aerodynamic configurations that have no correspondency to any of the aircraft types that MSFS allows to implement, but the fact is that when I compare high standard XPlane add-ons to MSFS (now FSX) high standard add-ons, even for the same aircrat type, I simply find that the Xplane version is less realistic in terms even of extreme attitudes, stability, prop effects (in the case of prop aircaft) etc...There is even an aspect of Xplane that I do not find top-notch, although many try to "sell" as one of it's major pros - fluidity. In my PC I have been tweaking FSX to run acceptably while I do not upgrade to the "next generation PC". I find stutters almost inexistent in FSX, find it fluid, in a word, find it perfectly flyable under even the lowest FPS figures. This is not tru of XPlane and that "schewing gum effect" as I tend to describe it where all of a sudden, and when computing power is requested by scenery and a slice has to be taken from the FM engine, time seems to distend and then contract, making you feel like you're flying at 1/2 2/3 time rate and then, all of a sudden come back to the normal rate. This sensation spoils any otherwise good experience I could have with XPlane. Add to it the fact that the so criticized aspects of propwash and torque effects in FSX not being correctly modelled perfectly apply to XPlane, even if on different ways, and I simply can't find a good reason to give up using FS and move to XPlane.What does it for me is then the completely irritating Autogen scenery generated by XPlane, the stupid AI that puts a Shuttle landing at my local aerodrome, etc... That REALLY DOES IT FOR ME!!!! (sorry for screaming out so loud....)In a word, I'm done with XPlane!... Maybe by v9 something really interesting has been implemented, and then I might consider it again...LAdamson, Geofa and others ARE RIGHT!!!!