Just now, AviatorMan said:

A2A have taken nearly the "lifespan" of MSFS2020 to complete one plane! Hopefully  they will get this one out before MSFS2020 is overtaken by MSFS2024!

But seriously, I too am not too excited about a Comanche, but hope that their Cherokee, Cessna 172 and V-Tail  Bonanza are close behind.

The bulk of their time was spent on developing their core AccuSim framework on top of MSFS. From what they've said the particular aircraft code then sits on top of that common codebase, so I imagine releasing their other aircraft should be much faster (relatively compared of course 🙂).
 

19 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

"long way from making an aircraft that flies accurately by the book & numbers to also one that feels right and on a level that is not in the book"

THIS RIGHT HERE is what nearly everyone misses when debating about "flight models".

Fantastic that it came from a highly experienced IRL pilot and arguably one of the top sim addon dev shops of all time.

1 minute ago, UrgentSiesta said:

THIS RIGHT HERE is what nearly everyone misses when debating about "flight models".

Fantastic that it came from a highly experienced IRL pilot and arguably one of the top sim addon dev shops of all time.

It's true that a flightsim model should feel like the real one - but it's also true that it should hit book numbers because those are the published values.  Even the old bird I fly gets pretty darn close to specs.

The Black Square Bonanza does a nice job with the feel of flying and seems to get close to poh speeds.

2 hours ago, AviatorMan said:

A2A have taken nearly the "lifespan" of MSFS2020 to complete one plane! Hopefully  they will get this one out before MSFS2020 is overtaken by MSFS2024!

IIRC, for a long time, there was an obstacle within the simulator's code which prevented implementation of A2A's trademark Accusim feature. I remember Scott announcing it had been remedied in an SU, but that was at least a year after the sim's release.

I think I found the real problem that annoys me: the ugly green panel! reminds me of russian helicopter/spacecraft panels. Only pink would be worse. There is a reason most airplanes use 50 shades of grey for their panels.

 

2 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

The bulk of their time was spent on developing their core AccuSim framework on top of MSFS.

It will be very interesting to see (feel) the difference between Blackbird’s 310R (plus the other better small GA aircraft) and the Comanche. If there is something really different about how A2A’s first model feels in the sim, I wonder if Asobo will jump on/want what they have accomplished?

Reading on older Facebook post by A2A on the comment section - Regarding a GPS Option:

Quote

yes, we have GPS options for those that want to use them, stock and third party.

Hopefully that means TDS GTN support and PMS support for those who have that option.

Edited June 24, 20232 yr by Zangoose

The video is impressive and I'm excited for everyone, but I'm not at all passionate by the Comanche. A2A is not cheap and I guess I'll wait to see what they'll propose as a next product. Once Accusim for MSFS will be stabilized 🙂 So far, I'll fly with my WB-Sim C172.

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

It's true that a flightsim model should feel like the real one - but it's also true that it should hit book numbers because those are the published values.  Even the old bird I fly gets pretty darn close to specs.

The Black Square Bonanza does a nice job with the feel of flying and seems to get close to poh speeds.

Are you familiar with A2A Sims or SimCoders, et al?

I'm kinda thinking you skipped right past understanding the gist of Scott's video(s).

I'm not particularly a fan of the old school Comanche, but when it's executed at the fidelity level of A2A Sims, why fly anything else?

Edited June 24, 20232 yr by UrgentSiesta

1 hour ago, The Flight Level said:

It will be very interesting to see (feel) the difference between Blackbird’s 310R (plus the other better small GA aircraft) and the Comanche. If there is something really different about how A2A’s first model feels in the sim, I wonder if Asobo will jump on/want what they have accomplished?

Judging by my experience with both devs in P3D/FSX, and with MilViz in MSFS, my money is unhesitatingly on A2A.

52 minutes ago, vbazillio said:

The video is impressive and I'm excited for everyone, but I'm not at all passionate by the Comanche. A2A is not cheap and I guess I'll wait to see what they'll propose as a next product. Once Accusim for MSFS will be stabilized 🙂 So far, I'll fly with my WB-Sim C172.

They had started with the AeroStar because they own one, but a mech failure of some sort resulted in a belly landing awhile ago, and that was that.

I'll tell you this: the A2A Sims addons are almost the only reason I keep P3D installed any longer. Yes, they're THAT good.

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

It's true that a flightsim model should feel like the real one - but it's also true that it should hit book numbers because those are the published values.  Even the old bird I fly gets pretty darn close to specs.

At least the way I read Scott's words was that yes by-the-book and by-the-numbers is important, but it's about that *and* more, including feel (so a superset of by-the-numbers if you will).
 

Like some here, I am not super crazy about the Comanche 250, but will likely take the plunge "just because" to see what this one is like in the sim. I assume it will have a decent price tag ($50-60+ ???). There are just so many great aircraft in the works and so much variety to purchase from. Imagine if this one came out much earlier, it would really scoop up the sales.

21 minutes ago, The Flight Level said:

Like some here, I am not super crazy about the Comanche 250, but will likely take the plunge "just because" to see what this one is like in the sim. I assume it will have a decent price tag ($50-60+ ???). There are just so many great aircraft in the works and so much variety to purchase from. Imagine if this one came out much earlier, it would really scoop up the sales.

Agree on Comanche, but they did that because they own one IRL. Makes validating the code a lot cheaper 😉

Their P3D prices remain at $50 ea.

I'm hoping they do something similar to PMDG or Fenix and really shake up the pricing model.

The "average" MSFS simmer is going to balk at a $50 price tag for a steam gauge piston single. I think A2A would profit more from a $35 - $40 price tag. This would put them in the same price range as other top devs like MilViz/BB C310, SWS Kodiak, FSW Chancellor, et al.

If it was me, I'd price it at $40 and "temporarily" discount it to $35...

Edited June 24, 20232 yr by UrgentSiesta

I am puzzled by your reluctance at flying the Comanche. I logged many hours in P3D with the A2A bird and found her an interesting aircraft to fly in her category. 

Edited June 24, 20232 yr by Dominique_K