Captainsim C130?

[apollon01 28]

Thank you Terry for your comparison and comments re the CS C-130 (I am watching the linked video in patches and am in the middle of it).

I've bought the Transall in the absence of the Herc some time ago and LOVE it. The Herc is still high on my wish list (the steam gauges version; not the J) and this CS version might fit the bill for fun flights... once on sale. No way I would part wirh 40 or so USD for this model in its current state.

I will keep the Transall for more serious and immersive cargo flights 👍

Thanks again and happy landings.

Edited April 22 by apollon01

[keithb77 308]

Next 9.99 sale...

[Luis Hernandez 575]

17 hours ago, Lord Farringdon said:

However, with the addition of the FSX sounds that has been suggested

Would be possible to port the default P3D C-130 sounds?

[The Flight Level 2,116]

6 hours ago, Luis Hernandez said:

Would be possible to port the default P3D C-130 sounds?

We are all waiting to see if someone has a fix for the King Air sounds!

[Lord Farringdon 503]

15 hours ago, Luis Hernandez said:

Would be possible to port the default P3D C-130 sounds?

Hi Luis,

Not sure about P3D, but see post above from @andy1252 yesterday, where he said:  

Terry, I dug out my old FSX version of this and loaded up the sounds and it does indeed work ok with them. See -

https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php/135009-Hercules-fans-you-ain-t-gonna-believe-this?p=1334064&viewfull=1

 

Cheers

Terry

[UrgentSiesta 936]

On 4/22/2024 at 3:44 AM, Lord Farringdon said:

I love the C-130, it was a big part of my life,  and if it was at Azure Poly's standard I would buy it in a heartbeat. But, I won't be buying this one from CS.

Unfortunately, you're absolutely right.

EtA: Pretty much the same conclusion. 😞

 

Edited April 24 by UrgentSiesta
add

[Lonesome Cowboy Burt 165]

Ok its just a pretty face, but I get the feeling that is an increasing segment of the market, after all visuals are in my estimation the main area where MSFS stands above its competitors

Luckily there are a few devs who provide depth, but ultimately MS will throw whatever makes a buck into the market place

[scott967 62]

I guess no LC variant this go-round.  Have a friend who was a USN Herc pilot, did a few Antarctic deployments back when USN had that mission.

 

scott s.

.

 

[Lord Farringdon 503]

2 hours ago, scott967 said:

I guess no LC variant this go-round.  Have a friend who was a USN Herc pilot, did a few Antarctic deployments back when USN had that mission.

 

scott s.

.

 

Hi, Scott.

 I suspect that will be a bridge too far for Captain Sim. I mean they cant even do paratroop doors or a ramp that open in flight let alone air deflector doors (for para) or working ski's!  

I expect your friend was mostly likely a VXE-6 pilot. Every austral summer season, VXE-6 would deploy 'ski bird' Hercs to Antarctica. The first flights for the season, known as Operation WINFLY, started from Christchurch in about August of each year and were primarily focused on sending snow plough and blower equipment to Mc Murdo in order to carve out the ice runway for the wheeled aircraft (USAF C-141 Starlifters and RNZAF C-130's) later in October. As the name WINFLY suggests these flights would occur in low light and winter conditions making the flights somewhat perilous and apt to having to use the designated "whiteout area'' at Mc Murdo in earnest should the weather clag in. This meant flying a specific heading while descending in IMC (ie no visibility and flying on instruments only) at a set rate of decent until the aircaft effectively 'hit' the ground. Flying in Antarctica is a hazardous operation at the best of times, and VXE-6 have had some fatal accidents involving their Hercs. 

Once the ice runway was operational,  the wheeled 'open up ' flights began in October relieving VXE-6 of the Christchurch to McMurdo runs and allowing them to deploy to Antarctica where they would  continue their support to the National Science Foundation (NSF) including regular flights from McMurdo to South Pole Station, for the remainder of the season.

As mentioned earlier, The RNZAF would conduct preplanned flights from Christchurch to McMurdo with about 12 C130 return flights in support of our own NZ Antarctic Research (NZAR) program and Scott Base resupply. 

Weather caused constant cancellations For both us and VXE-6 and so needless to say we used to spend a lot of down-time in McMurdo with VXE-6 crews. So I possibly met your friend at some stage, and while I'm sure neither of us would remember each other, we would most likely have enjoyed each others company. In any case, please give him/her my regards.      

 

Cheers

Terry

Edited April 24 by Lord Farringdon

[eslader 1,801]

1 hour ago, Lord Farringdon said:

a ramp that open in flight

As much as they've deserved blame for... Well... Lots of things over the last few years, I suspect this isn't their fault. There's a bug in MSFS that makes the plane break up if you open a window while it's flying. And I don't mean open the MD80's window at 250kts, I mean open the side window in a prop job that's tooling along at 60. Boom, plane overstresses.

Edited April 25 by eslader

[Lord Farringdon 503]

1 minute ago, eslader said:

As much as they've deserved blame for... Well... Lots of things over the last few years, I suspect this isn't their fault. There's a bug in MSFS that makes the plane break up if you open a window while it's flying. And I don't mean open the MD80's window at 250kts, I mean open the side window in a prop job that's tooling along at 60. Boom, plane overstresses.

Hmmm, well someone needs to tell Azure Poly that because their Transall C-160 can do aerobatics with both the paradoor and the ramp open, no problem! (See the vid earlier in the thread).  But then CS are only using a generic MS flight model so maybe that's where CS has the problem. 

 

Cheers

Terry

 

[Lord Farringdon 503]

14 hours ago, Lonesome Cowboy Burt said:

Ok its just a pretty face, but I get the feeling that is an increasing segment of the market, after all visuals are in my estimation the main area where MSFS stands above its competitors

Luckily there are a few devs who provide depth, but ultimately MS will throw whatever makes a buck into the market place

Quite agree. I don't think CS will be the least bit worried by my mine or anyone else's negativity toward their products or marketing approach. Ably assisted by the MS market place, CS appear to be targeting and quite successfully reaching a newer cadre of simmers who have a different perspective of flight simulation. That cadre specifically enjoy three dimensional freedom of movement across a a globally accurate and diverse scenery and landscape  while often using an external POV and/or connected with multiplayer. To this end, they require control simplicity and 'external POV friendly'  flight models that don't require too much attention to keep flying and, the  'prettier' the better . Complexity, 'study level' and true to life flight models that require handling skills, are not much use. 

As you allude to, earlier flight simulators were not blessed with the visuals and activities of MSFS and so I suspect those most interested in the pursuit of flight simulation did so from a more technical perspective. 

For better or worse MSFS has really turned that upside down. As the old adage goes, and with out referring to one perspective or the other,  "one mans rubbish, is another mans treasure"!

Of course it is not binary and there is lots in between. Fortunately our developers to continue to amaze all of us with their offerings.    

[andy1252 3,929]

On 4/25/2024 at 3:08 AM, Lord Farringdon said:

a newer cadre of simmers who have a different perspective of flight simulation.

Hey, I'd like to think it isn't just me <grin>!

As far as the simming goes, I've been a computer/PC buff for ever (mainframes since '67, PCs since '85) and was originally a proper little geek, but even in geek mode I could never see the attraction of anything visual based on wireframe graphics, and so the early flight sim environment was checked out and then abandoned, as indeed were pretty much all games. I never did acquire any real interest in games generally (except maybe pinball), and sims only made it back into my attention with MS Flight, as that was the first one with good visuals (for me, anyway). Then via FSX/P3D2+/XP10+ to MSFS and the current quite amazing world representation.

As to the flying/aircraft side - well I always have been a bit of a wingnut, with a fairly healthy library (books, remember them?) of aircraft books all the way back to childhood observer books and similar, but in terms of actual flying - no interest at all. Well not so much the flying part, as it is great fun to zoom around in the sky in the sim(s), but definitely not the piloting part. First thing I do with any sim I get in to is figure out how to turn off the ATC - why would I want some other b*gger whining at me in my own cockpit all the time? Best analogy I can think of is driving. I sort of enjoy driving, as in I am happy to settle down to a long drive with a bit of music on etc, but I'm well aware that most of the time while driving you can't (shouldn't) really concentrate on the scenery other than your immediate and nearby surroundings - you need to focus on what's going on around you. And so you actually miss out on a lot of the environment you might be driving through. I remember the first time I drove down the Pacific Coast Highway from SF to LA I found myself having to pull over and stop every few miles in some parts because I was aware that I was driving through some of the most remarkable scenery and not really seeing it. The whole journey took me over twice as long as it should have, but I got some great visual memories (and some lousy photos, but that's another story) out of it. And the sim is the same for me. I keep having to pause and get out of the plane (external/drone view) and have a proper look around, otherwise I might as well still be flying in a wireframe environment.

Actually, the driving analogy is apt in other ways as well. If you're driving competitively, such as rally or racing, then control of the vehicle is much more demanding, and no doubt rewarding if that's your thing, and you will have to develop all sorts of other skills to do it properly, plus of course you are really only going to be interested in the very close external environment. And that's the approach a procedural sim pilot will have.

And as we've both said, that's the real beauty of MSFS, in that it's the first sim that fully (or at least 90%) caters for both types of simmer pretty much out of the box.

Oh, and re the C130 debate - I have just been playing with the C17 from DeltaSimulations on .to, and it too has a fully modelled interior but also the ability to fly with doors open. And for me it does run the C130 pretty close as my favourite STOL transport. I've just been attempting to land it at EGHE - managed successfully the fifth time round!

Now if someone would just do the C5, and maybe a bunch of things like the older Stratofreighter, Cargomaster, Globemaster and similar, my hangar could get back to something like it was in FSX (which I got when MS Flight was canned).

Life, and simming, is good!

[STK 103]

Looks like livery pack 1 was released through CS's own webstore, featuring three liveries so far. a 70s-era USAF (green and tan camo), a current Japan Air Force, and a decade-old Royal Netherlands Air Force livery (which users have noted has a number of inaccuracies). 

It sounds like the next update/patch for the model itself is forthcoming and will introduce a custom sound-set, and will fix a few systems and pilot visibility issues. If they release that and another livery pack with US Coast Guard, Israeli Air Force, and pretty much any other interesting livery, I think I'll go for it. Captain Sim seems committed to not supporting/allowing third-party repaints unfortunately, so we just have to hope that upcoming packs are good. They are accepting livery requests on their official forums, but with no guarantees as to what they'll pick, and no indication as to how many packs/liveries they will release. 

I have asked on their forums for a rough development roadmap that addresses approximately how many liveries and livery packs they will release, what they hope to accomplish with future patches/updates, if additional features and model variants are forthcoming, and if their ethos may change regarding restrictions on allowing end-user liveries, as they are the only developer I know of that actively blocks (or makes it difficult) for end-users to create their own. 

I'm tentatively excited about this one following new sounds / next patch, and an assurance of numerous forthcoming liveries, even if their end-user concept doesn't change. 

Edited April 26 by STK

[The Flight Level 2,116]

@andy1252 A real C5 landing in the meantime! Landing at LAX yesterday (April 25/24).

 

Edited April 26 by The Flight Level