8 minutes ago, Khashoggi said:

I have the Flight1 Mustang for FSX and P3D. The Flight1 version had fully operating keyboard, and textures looked very good and it flew great!

Pro's & Con's the F1 Mustang didn't have VNAV or (from memory) the ability to load visual approaches. It was also a massive resource hog...

G

2 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

Pro's & Con's the F1 Mustang didn't have VNAV or (from memory) the ability to load visual approaches. It was also a massive resource hog...

G

Yeah I think from the avionics standpoint the WT G1000 NXi is superior to anything we had in previous Sims.

Systems depth seems to be about default but I'll wait for more reviews.

Problem is, WT is coming out with both the Longitude/G5000 and CJ4 refresh.  Both of those are faster than the little mustang hehe.

I'm really looking for a long range bizjet.  Something that can do mach .90 or greater (Falcon, Global, Gulfstream etc)

8 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Problem is, WT is coming out with both the Longitude/G5000 and CJ4 refresh.  Both of those are faster than the little mustang hehe.

I'm really looking for a long range bizjet.  Something that can do mach .90 or greater (Falcon, Global, Gulfstream etc)

Still quick and good for short distance though. From reading the Discord there are quite a few issues to fix, some of which rely on information/documentation from WT.

The C700 has all the legs I need, although nice to have alternatives. WT seemed to play down the refresh slightly in terms of the C700 - saying it would be less than what they are doing for the CJ4. From the Progress they are showing it looks pretty impressive..

 

G

45 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

I'm really looking for a long range bizjet.  Something that can do mach .90 or greater (Falcon, Global, Gulfstream etc)

+1.  I want something I can flick over to Europe in, maybe without having to stop in Gander or Reykjavik.   Don't get me wrong, I like the shorter-range bizjets, and I can still go transatlantic with the stops, but it's not a G-V or something like that.

Didn't FSW mention that a Falcon was planned (?), but far into the future I think from the sound of it.  Maybe I was dreaming and never saw that post.

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

I'm really looking for a long range bizjet.  Something that can do mach .90 or greater (Falcon

You and me both. I'd love a good 7/8x

50 minutes ago, eslader said:

You and me both. I'd love a good 7/8x

We would have to go to XP12 for the Falcon! I have followed the Aerobask development on the 8X more than 2 years. It is pretty sweet and will likely be a 10/10 in all categories!

1 hour ago, Mace said:

+1.  I want something I can flick over to Europe in, maybe without having to stop in Gander or Reykjavik.   Don't get me wrong, I like the shorter-range bizjets, and I can still go transatlantic with the stops, but it's not a G-V or something like that.

Didn't FSW mention that a Falcon was planned (?), but far into the future I think from the sound of it.  Maybe I was dreaming and never saw that post.

At least FSW had a nice Falcon on P3D.

Karl

3 hours ago, Doering said:

The first release is so critical! The excitement often overrides the proper date to release/publish. Looks like this one was pushed through the door a little early based on the texture flaws for sure and perhaps a couple of other shortcomings stated by others.

Not quite, its had a fair amount of work done on it over time. The developer has been working extremely hard with a team of testers to nail down various issues. the release candidate that went out is pretty much there minus a few bits. Their desire to keep updating and working on it is very much there too. (Not with all developers for msfs)

I'm in the discord of quite a few developers, you can quite easily tell who cares, and who wants to improve vs who wants yes men beta testers, this lot fit into the first category.

Perfect? possibly not. Willing to strive for it? yes. Put it this way, its the one jet so far that has made me WANT to fly them.

My reviews were of beta versions fyi, neither of the videos was the finished sale version.

Edited September 30, 20223 yr by AvAngel

Yep the FSX Mustang's avionics had a noticeable performance tax and I wouldn't call Flight1's Mustang visuals top notch, they were sorta dated compared to Carenado textures back then. Meanwhile the plane flew soild.

This Cockspur version's visuals look good for MSFS standards besides the flaws pointed out.

As far as speed and performance well they call them "slowtations" for a reason, I'd stick with the HJet if one want's a faster bizjet.

@turbomax Thanks for your attention to detail, I actually appreciate you spending your time inspecting textures on payware releases in VR as I do the same. 🍻

 

@AvAngel Completely understand. I appreciate that this model is in the hands of caring and devoted developers. I was certainly not knocking any personality avenues. Just making the point - why not hold off a tad longer to fix minor issues to bring the model to a more polished condition before the first release (rather than back to the computer immediately after release with quick fixes). Perhaps this is just my way about details and quality.

Depending on timing and what is in the queue, I just may give this one a go. So many aircraft to choose from! Cheers and blue skies!

Real Mustang MFD

 

Cockspur

 

Not sure how it resemble real counterpart

 

1 hour ago, Doering said:

I have followed the Aerobask development on the 8X

That's one developer I really wish would cross-platform. I have a couple of their products in XP11 and they are very well done.

 

9 minutes ago, eslader said:

That's one developer I really wish would cross-platform. I have a couple of their products in XP11 and they are very well done.

 

I know! I've stated your exact words so many times in this forum. If I had to pick one developer to cross-platform, it would be Aerobask, hands down!

1 hour ago, AvAngel said:

Perfect? possibly not. Willing to strive for it? yes. 

You have to be honest. Instead of use "possibly" it's more like "definitely". Slowtation is fairly simple jet. Cockspur would better off modeling Slowtation II with analog.

 Cockspur is missing tons of stuff including FADEC N1 take off, climb notification, annunciator messages, mach speed selection on PFD and etc I can't even compare it HJET

Also there is questionable aircraft performance. Full power show max 173 kts. TAS 294

I'm feeling this is an early alpha stage of something 

29 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Also there is questionable aircraft performance. Full power show max 173 kts. TAS 294

WOW! Something way off there! That is one incredible tailwind!