Are all default planes bad ?

[ckyliu 1,749]

19 hours ago, jfri said:

For now I have the standard version through Game Pass for PC. But I will not continue using Game Pass so when purchasing it there is no good reason to buy a version above standard if the extra planes are no good... How are the planes in deluxe and premium deluxe in this regard. Which are analog types ?

The extra planes are pretty much the same quality as the basic ones you already have access too but free community upgrades are fewer because the planes are locked. I went for mid-tier to get the analogue gauges but haven't used them much (especially since the DA40 mod only works on the glass gauges), so I'd stick to standard. I know the Lattitude and SR22 are reportedly full of issues, the 787 and 747 aren't that detailed (as expected).

Edited April 14, 2021 by ckyliu

[cobalt 798]

15 hours ago, EvidencePlz said:

Same here. I have REP for many aircraft in XP11 and not just Cessnas. Any plane with REP becomes study-level. None of the default or any third party payware aircraft released so far for MSFS 2020 is REP-like or study level. With REP, aircraft almost becomes a living, breaking machine, almost like real aircraft in the real world where you have to treat them gently and carefully or face consequences,, whereas all aircraft (default or payware) in MSFS feel like toys for kids in comparison. Be it flight model or systems, everything feels extremely arcadey, video-game-like in MSFS 2020.   

1) If you are happy flying a sim like XP11 with artificial scenery, as opposed to flying in the real world with MSFS 2020, your choice. Certainly not mine.

2) "Be it flight model or systems, everything feels extremely arcadey, video-game-like in MSFS 2020". Preposterous statement. 2020 resembles arcade games in no way whatsoever; in fact it is the antithesis of arcade games.

[Cats Eyes Cunningham 9]

I only really fly these but all are great: 

Cessna 152 and 172

A32NX by FlyByWire

Savage Cub Gravvel freeware addon 

FlyingIron Spitfire

[Bobsk8 12,539]

39 minutes ago, cobalt said:

1) If you are happy flying a sim like XP11 with artificial scenery, as opposed to flying in the real world with MSFS 2020, your choice. Certainly not mine.

2) "Be it flight model or systems, everything feels extremely arcadey, video-game-like in MSFS 2020". Preposterous statement. 2020 resembles arcade games in no way whatsoever; in fact it is the antithesis of arcade games.

I guess he would think that the planes I flew in real life flew like an arcade game too.

[jfri 42]

14 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

I bought the Standard version and added the Arrow, M20 Mooney, and Piaggio P149.

No need for the De Luxe version IMHO..

Do you mean the Just Flight Piper Arrow III and the M20R Oviator sold at the marketplace ? If so how do they compare ?

[jfri 42]

4 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

 

The turboprops  unfortunately suffer from the FSX legacy.

 

And what is this legacy ? And what does it mean for practical purposes ?

[blueshark747 1,843]

4 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

The turboprops  unfortunately suffer from the FSX legacy.

Can you explain this please?

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

46 minutes ago, jfri said:

Do you mean the Just Flight Piper Arrow III and the M20R Oviator sold at the marketplace ? If so how do they compare ?

They are each good representations of the actual planes.

The Mooney is much faster, so it depends on what you like to fly.

Personally, I like the P149 the best (of the three..) 🙂

[qqwertz 772]

21 hours ago, Jetman67 said:

C172 and c152 are pretty good

I beg to differ. They are alright, much better than any default airplanes we had in FSX or P3D, look very pretty, but not more. Have you ever flown an A2A C172 in P3D? Where you have to be careful with the engine or it breaks? Where air temperature affects your chances to get the engine started? Where you have to replace the battery if you are too optimistic about starting the engine?

If you want a good GA airplane in MSFS, I think your best option right now is the AT Simulations Piaggio 149D, which seems to model at least some user-inflicted damage. Runner-up is the JustFlight Piper PA 28 Arrow III, which is generally nice, but you can still mistreat the engine and get away with it. 

Peter

[jfri 42]

1 hour ago, qqwertzde said:

 

If you want a good GA airplane in MSFS, I think your best option right now is the AT Simulations Piaggio 149D, which seems to model at least some user-inflicted damage. Runner-up is the JustFlight Piper PA 28 Arrow III, which is generally nice, but you can still mistreat the engine and get away with it. 

Peter

I have missed that one since it had Focke Wolf in the name, so I thought that it was the WW2 german fighter plane. I see it is also less expensive than the Arrow III.

[Jetman67 516]

22 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I have many hours in real life in Cessna's and the 172 and 152 are pretty good. 

Same here at least as good as a Sim plane can be

[Jetman67 516]

2 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

I beg to differ. They are alright, much better than any default airplanes we had in FSX or P3D, look very pretty, but not more. Have you ever flown an A2A C172 in P3D? Where you have to be careful with the engine or it breaks? Where air temperature affects your chances to get the engine started? Where you have to replace the battery if you are too optimistic about starting the engine?

If you want a good GA airplane in MSFS, I think your best option right now is the AT Simulations Piaggio 149D, which seems to model at least some user-inflicted damage. Runner-up is the JustFlight Piper PA 28 Arrow III, which is generally nice, but you can still mistreat the engine and get away with it. 

Peter

Yes I'll agree I'm not hard core Sim because of so many limitations I just use it to fly routes and practise procedures before flying for real

Edited April 14, 2021 by Jetman67

[loop_n_roll 7]

Some time ago there was a video of the ASOBO team discussing the development of MSFS. As I recall, they did not have a goal of creating "study level" aircraft. They did not wish to take over the business of independent developers. Instead, they gave us flyable craft but without a lot of bells and whistles. When I get good enough with these, maybe I'll invest in some others. For now, I'm having lots of fun. I'm not a hard core simmer but I do enjoy what I have.

[qqwertz 772]

45 minutes ago, jfri said:

I have missed that one since it had Focke Wolf in the name,

The same happened to me 🙂

I only took a second look after two friends highly recommended the plane, and now it is my favourite in MSFS 🙂

It appears to have been designed as a training airplane, but it has space for four persons and therefore can be used as a GA plane. 

Edited April 14, 2021 by qqwertzde

[TrafficPilot 121]

8 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

I agree....if I would have known the Premium planes would be premium trash I wouldn't have purchased.

+1

I stupidly assumed that MSFS would be like FSX and have extra features AND extra aircraft in the deluxe version. I'd forgotten how bad the FSX default aircraft were...

Rob Young coded what in the modded G36 - the flight dynamics? If so that would explain why it's so nice and stable to fly now.

I still fly the wonderful Real Air (2004 vintage!) SF-260. It ported over OK to MSFS (minus the VC click spots but that's the fault of Microsoft) - I was using the SF260 to fly around Berlin for my latest YouTube scenery review.The aircraft still looks and sounds great and flies beautifully.- just like the real thing.

 

Edited April 14, 2021 by TrafficPilot