>one more thing, Mooneys are very tricky to slow down, with>the Caredano model, pulling the power results in a high rate>of airspeed decay, which is not like the real thing.... IRL,>set MP to 15" or so and level off, and wait and wait and wait>:) until the airspeed starts to bleed off...>Just wanted to give you my perspective from a Mooney>owner....>Johm--------------------------Thanks Johm. I did read your post on the FS9 forum when the model became available and you decided to buy it.I adopted your methodology from that moment on. I am having a ball flying it in FSX!I'm hoping to also port over Aeroworx's B200. If anybody already has...was it totally successful?Mitch

>- Poor P-Factor model: IRL, I almost need full right rudder>when applying full power in order to keep the nose aligned>with the runwayIMO, I don't believe that any FS9/FSX models, simulate P-factor/slip stream/torque as well as Microsoft's Combat simulator did. At least CFS 1 & 2, as I didn't like "3". Seems like FS2000 or perhaps it was FS2002 did better than todays sims too. It's usually one of the first items I check concerning new simulated airplanes. Even my RealAir SF260 isn't as good on the takeofff roll, as with FS2002, but the Spitfire does a pretty decent pull.........to the right (engine turns opposite.)Since I kept up with all the Duke Fox (R/C engine manufacturer) "slip stream" experiments when I was a kid, I'm more inclined to go with propeller "slip stream" as the main factor in left drift, rather than P-factor, especially when the airplane is on the (level)takeoff roll. Mr. Fox would place the vertical stab and rudder below the thrust line to see if the airplane would pull to the right, instead of left. And it did!L.Adamson

>Just wanted to give an update. The FS9 Mooney 'port' is>great. I have the VC cabin, with no hits to the frames. Thank>you to the original poster. I had tried to 'port' over a>couple of stand-alone FS9 rigs, but didn't have luck for one>thing or another. I do have some, but this is the first one,>other than the Connie that was made to port by the issuer to>really be considered a full success.>Keep in mind, that some airplanes don't port well, concerning flight dynamics. And you won't get improvements like bump-mapping either.L.Adamson

Correct, and as as I said earlier, some functions did not work in the VC with the ported version. All those items works as expected as well.For me, a FSX user only, I think it is important to support the FSX releases regardless. I didn't have to purchase the FS9 version, but made a decision to do so, with every intention of buying the FSX version when released.

Very nice plane, indeed !Great to fly from the VC, with excellent, crisp textures in the cockpit and very smooth gauges.. just great, all around !

As a real world Mooney flier, could you have a look at the elevator trim indicator in the virtual cockpit? It appears to be either labeled backwards, or the indicator moves backwards.. which one is it?

Answering my own question: it looks like the indicator is moving backwards.. comparison with FSX default Mooney, trim all the way down..Carenado support is not accepting this as a "bug"..http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/186223.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/186224.jpg

The problem with Carenado model is that the left turn tendency is inexistant. The best example is to take the default C182 and apply full power on the runway, even though it might not be totally realizic, at least we have something. Try this with this mooney and it will act like a twin.... John