>EDIT:>O, pity, it's a FS2004 plane... Anyone knows if you can simply>install it in FSX...?It works just fine in FSX. I also want to throw in a vote for the Flight 1 Cessna 172, it's a great plane and has been updated for FSX.Jim

>>Uh. . . compas is spelled as here - with only one "s" :->>Yes, thx, but I'm not THAT dumb. :( ;) . . good. . BUT I WAS! :-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol(I had ta take a second look! :-roll ) (but I'll bet I wasn't the only one!) ;)Anyway - it's a GREAT, FREE little Cessna, and I'm sure you'll enjoy it!Regards,

www.flight1.comwww.fsd-international.comwww.eaglesoftdg.com

>Actually, Realair's C172 isn't payware...it's just an airfile>mod and a repaint of the defualt (FS2002) C172...>>Right you are and it's a good freeware plane too. I should have said the Flight1 Skyhawk.BlairCYOW

Thanks everyone for the input.I tried the C150. Great airplane and boy, it is incredible to see this level of detail in a freeware. Hats off to the team that made this ! Special mention for the gyro effect : WOW ! At first, I though that my yoke had some problem... But no, I only forgot that I'm flying with full realism settings. So I really had to apply some pressure on the right rudder as the plane would have left the runway when taking off. That's what I'm looking for.Unfortunately, I found it too hard on the FPS for me. I fly with a 19 fps lock and with the C150, it plunged to 10 FPS. At first, I thought that it was ASX (as I was giving it a first spin also), but as soon as I changed to the default C172, the FPS went back up to 19. Also, some gauges didn't make it during the transfer to FSX. That's a shame because I really liked it. As for the SimAir's C172, I was not able to make it work in my FSX. I looked in the forum for instructions but I didn't have any success...So I'm really considering Flight1's Skyhawk. Did anybody noticed an impact on FPS with that bird? On a final note, I'd like to join the crowd and send my congratulations to the folks at HIFI. Active Sky X and XGraphics really bettered my flying experience. And I thought that FSX was magnificient ! I often fly at sunset (as I think I would fly in real life). So yesterday, I landed on a runnway, taxied off and turned the aircraft towards the setting sun. I then increased the simulation rate to x32 and watched the clouds go by and the sun go down. Amazing.Thanks again folks.Louie.

Louie,Yeah sorry, the Real Air is only for FS9. However as I said, the Flight1 model comes a close second and there is an FSX version. I run it in my sim and there is little impact on FPS even with my moderate AMD XP3200 system, so go for it.I also agree with the other poster who advised not looking at the gauges all the time. In my initial training I was continually being told to look outside. This is VFR after all! You need to learn what the attitude of the aircraft looks like relative to the horizon so you should be able to conduct straight and level flight along with all degree turns just by looking at the horizon. Unless you have a full cockpit sim, this is hard to achieve on a screen. As was mentioned, simming is better for learning systems management, emergency procedures and navigation training. Use the real thing to learn how to fly the real thing :)Ken.www.kennair.com

>Yeah sorry, the Real Air is only for FS9. However as I said,>the Flight1 model comes a close second and there is an FSX>version. I run it in my sim and there is little impact on FPS>even with my moderate AMD XP3200 system, so go for it.Perfect. I'll go for that then.>I also agree with the other poster who advised not looking at>the gauges all the time. I've been told about those flight simmers that make the move and never give a peak outside :) I'll try to keep you advice in mind both in front of my computer and during real flight.Thanks very much for your input.I'll keep you posted.Louie.

Wow, there shure are alot of "High-wing" homers here. lol. As a real pilot myself, I flew both Cessna's and Pipers for training, ultimately finishing in a 1959 172, not by choice, but by lack of pipers, in which I did my 1st solo in. The Freeware C150 is a great airplane for flight caracteristics. The Flight-1 C172 is WAY over-rated, it only looks good, but is not even close to accurate IMO. BUT, if you want to "buy" a good single engine trainer type, look no further than Carenado's Pipers. The 180 and 181 are both excellent in looks and realism, and cheap too. Just my 2 cents. www.carenado.com

I applied the RealAir .air file and aircraft.cfg file to the default FSX 172 and it works fine. I like its stall characteristics better than the default model.I suggest using a program called Winmerge to compare the two aircraft.cfg files, and make appropriate edits to the realair version for new FSX features. I've found Winmerge to be an indispensable tool for my FSX installation for comparing directories and files.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

I second the motion for TrackIR. Make sure to get the TrackIR 4 (as opposed to the 3). It's DEFINATELY a keeper for pattern and landing work. For U.S. purchasers, you can get a $30 discount at my site (no, I don't get any kickback for it). Scroll to the bottom of the homepage.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

How do you install this in FSX?

Go here] and download the FSX version.Regards,Jim KarnNOTHING is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.[/i