I think I like this version of the PA34 Seneca better...LOL   Must be unique to Kenya!  (honest! I did not doctor this).  Just did a web search for the V5 and was looking through photos to see how many had that hot screen in front of the left seat.

Edited May 1, 20215 yr by fppilot

1 hour ago, fppilot said:

I think I like this version of the PA34 Seneca better...LOL   Must be unique to Kenya!  (honest! I did not doctor this).  Just did a web search for the V5 and was looking through photos to see how many had that hot screen in front of the left seat.

It does look similar.

Looks more fun. 

But I think I would hesitate to charter those guys any time soon.

Edited May 1, 20215 yr by Will Fly For Cheese

Carenado really knocked it out of the park with this one, a lot comes down to choosing a model that you can't ignore the character and Seneca checks that box big time.

4 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

Sorry, but I fail to see why this bothers you so much. I personally avoid market place because files are encrypted, which makes airplanes a lot less useful for me:

- It is hard or impossible to add custom liveries. I paint liveries for my virtual flying group and had a hard time to get this done with the Carenado Cessna 182. A working livery even stopped working after the last update.

- I create load maps and configuration files for FSCaptain. With encrypted files, there are usually mismatches because the data used by a developer do not necessarily match those one finds on the web.

- I like to adjust fuel capacity and fuel flow so that they fit to the data used in FSEconomy. I can't do that with encrypted files.

I don't have a problem with buying sceneries from market place, but Carenado lost me as a customer because they only sell their airplanes there.

Peter

 

But your actual motivation was to hopefully have others take your position on buying Carenado on the MSFS store.   This is why people are pushing back on you.  

1 hour ago, MediaHypeTrain said:

Carenado really knocked it out of the park with this one, a lot comes down to choosing a model that you can't ignore the character and Seneca checks that box big time.

Is that a HUD or a glare shield on the window?

 

52 minutes ago, Alpine Scenery said:

Is that a HUD or a glare shield on the window?

 

It's a heated glass panel directly located in the pilot's line of sight so as to completely clear ice from the forward view for landings. Functionally, it's basically the same as the heated rear screen in your car, i.e. it has tiny wires threaded through it which are electrically heated to melt ice. on the real things, you can actually see the wires very faintly, but you kind of 'tune them out' with your eyes when looking though it same as you do when looking in your mirror through at rear window of your car.

Edited May 2, 20215 yr by Chock

I'm tempted (yes again I never fly the Seminole)....  but I watched a few YT vids and the external sounds were horrible...like a dying cat...  What do people think about the sounds (that own it)?

29 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I'm tempted (yes again I never fly the Seminole)....  but I watched a few YT vids and the external sounds were horrible...like a dying cat...  What do people think about the sounds (that own it)?

The audio comes directly from a real Seneca so they are authentic, but of course every individual aircraft will have its own tone. I find the recorded engine sounds to be nice and clear, but the tone itself can be a bit annoying if you like to do your flights from the exterior view.

From the interior with the simulated headphones on I think it sounds fine and with the window open I think the audio levels are mixed well. 

Don't let sound hold you back, I'm still finding little details I love about this one.

 

19 minutes ago, MediaHypeTrain said:

Don't let sound hold you back, I'm still finding little details I love about this one.

oh brother, weak knees might buckle with that comment, lol.

What are the nite lights like on the panel...too dark or too bright or just about right? Ill assume no dimmer.

Edited May 2, 20215 yr by hangar

2 hours ago, hangar said:

oh brother, weak knees might buckle with that comment, lol.

What are the nite lights like on the panel...too dark or too bright or just about right? Ill assume no dimmer.

It's a little dark on the forward panel when completely dark outside. Gauge backlighting is good but the dome light needs adjusting so it lights up the panel as it should. The taxi/landing lights could use a little adjustment to properly light up the pavement in front of the aircraft a little better.  

3 hours ago, hangar said:

oh brother, weak knees might buckle with that comment, lol.

What are the nite lights like on the panel...too dark or too bright or just about right? Ill assume no dimmer.

Night lighting is superb and both the Switches and Panel gauge lights are dimmable as are the two blue dome lights. All in all I found I was able to set harmonious lighting levels all the way through from dusk to full dark night. The guy in the video (not Chock's) earlier in the thread failed to realise this.

People have made comments about the sound quality. Exterior sounds are glorious; full throated bass and rumbles and tappy valves, etc. 

In cockpit engine sounds are as you would get from your trusty David Clark headset with appropriate noise cancelling. Just about right; quiet enough not to deafen and present enough to monitor engine health and tone. Like A2A model on many of their aircraft. Open the DV to hear full song, it's like you removed your headset. 

Some of the sound will depend on what sounds settings people have who make the videos you have seen. This is a common problem with people who make music demo tracks then send them to record companies and wonder why they get no great feedback because the thing sounded terrible when the A&R people at the record company listened to it.

The problem is this: People mix their music track on their PC using their super-duper bass enhancing headphones and their 30-slider graphic equaliser and 5.1 surround sound and all that stuff, which makes it sound great on their PC, but when someone else listens to it who doesn't have those exact same super-duper bass enhancing headphones and all those same settings on their system, it sounds bloody awful, which is why they should mix the sound using either monitor speakers, or monitor headphones (aka DJ headphones) with a flat sound response curve, so that it sounds good without all that artificial enhancing to make your drum n bass gangsta rap song by DJ Twonk featuring DJ Killa Driveby Deejay, sound 'awesome dude!'.

Since I use monitor speakers and monitor headphones on my system because I do a lot of music recording, this is also the sound system I use for my flight sims, and that's why the engines sound alright on my PC. I make sure that sounds alright in Adobe Premiere too when I make video reviews, and make sure it is exported with a flat response so the file I send to youtube at 96Khz, so doesn't have any compression on it. This is another mistake reviewers make; they edit their video in an NLE and they want their voice to sound good, so they add the voice enhancer to the audio track, but that also adds it to the engine noise as well, putting compression, reverb and EQ on it, and then they want their video to export quickly, so they bang it out at 33 Khz, which is the same frequency response that MP3s have, and that compression which makes MP3 files small, is achieved by chopping the top and bottom ends off all the frequencies to make the file smaller, which is why MPs (at 33 Khz) are not as good as Vinyl, CD, or studio quality, which are at 48, 44 and 96 Khz.

Then after all of that stuff, you have to target your peak sound average to -12dB so you don't run out of audio headroom and it also prevents the Youtube compression from arsing it all up too. That's what understanding and using stuff like this all the time gets you:

Chock's Hangar Reviews - accept no substitute lol.

If you watch my review of this thing, you will notice that I specifically change the sound on the review by putting it up at one point to demo the engine sounds, and so long as you don't have all that crappy super sound enhancement stuff on your PC when you listen to it, you'll hear that the engine sounds are very good, and that they have simulated the muted sound in the cockpit which you get from wearing your big David Clark headphones when flying the real thing.

 

Edited May 2, 20215 yr by Chock

11 hours ago, Tierborn said:

But your actual motivation was to hopefully have others take your position on buying Carenado on the MSFS store.   This is why people are pushing back on you.  

I am not sure I understand what you mean and how you can know anything about my motivation to write that post. I am not a Carenado hater and have bought quite a few of their airplanes for P3D. I was simply surprised to see how offended some people get if someone else does not like market place, and I explained my personal reasons to avoid market place.

As for people pushing back on me: I believe your speculation about my motives was the first reply I received.

Peter

Edited May 2, 20215 yr by qqwertzde

I might give this one a pass. Watching @Chock’s review i don’t doubt it’s decent enough, including the sounds. 
 

Just think I won’t use it much. Got their Seminole, which I’ve only used a couple of times. I keep coming back to the same aircraft: the TBM and Caravan in the turboprop category I’ve used frequently since the release of the sim. I used the Carenado Mooney a fair bit after I got it. Recently I’ve been very happy in @robert young’s excellent rendition of the Bonanza turbo. And now that he’s working on a DA62 I’m afraid a Seneca would end up unused in the hangar.

22 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I might give this one a pass. Watching @Chock’s review i don’t doubt it’s decent enough, including the sounds. 
 

Just think I won’t use it much. Got their Seminole, which I’ve only used a couple of times. I keep coming back to the same aircraft: the TBM and Caravan in the turboprop category I’ve used frequently since the release of the sim. I used the Carenado Mooney a fair bit after I got it. Recently I’ve been very happy in @robert young’s excellent rendition of the Bonanza turbo. And now that he’s working on a DA62 I’m afraid a Seneca would end up unused in the hangar.

Yup, that's a fair point and it's something we have to watch out for with flight sims; the temptation to buy the latest shiny new thing, which then ends up being a hangar queen because we then buy the next shiny new thing. What I will say about this latest offering however, is that Carenado appears to have upped its game a bit with this one and so it is undeniably pretty shiny.

It's as well to be aware too when considering alternatives, as you wisely are doing, that the DA62 doesn't have the climb rate or ceiling of the Seneca - in fact it is about 500 fpm less capable in climb rate, and about 5,000 feet lower in terms of ceiling - nor does it have the same ability to maintain altitude with one engine out which the Seneca possesses, and being able to maintain over 16,000 feet on one engine comes in handy. On the positive side however, the DA62 is quite a bit faster than the Seneca, has a glass cockpit and it's kind of funky-looking as well, which is probably why I even have a radio-controlled model of a DA62.

When it comes to shiny new toys turning into virtual hangar queens, that's less of a problem for me because I tend to add them to my Air Hauler fleet and so even if I'm not flying them, I still see my AI pilots flying them around in the sim, although on the down side of that, the crew I assigned to that Bredok3D 737 MAX which my airline leases, seem to damage it on landings with depressing regularity. Last night I had to spend 1.5 million repairing the thing because of their ham-fisted flying skills. 🤣

 

Edited May 2, 20215 yr by Chock