Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Geofa

Dreamfleet Dakota Feedback if you dont mind

Recommended Posts

Hi,I could not find a "Wow" or "Gotta have this one". So I was just curious if someone (maybe more than one) can provide some feedback on this models performance (FSX performance). I am interested to know how frame rate/smooth this model is. It would also help to know what your detail/slider settings are also.RegardsBG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Well for me I love it:A) because I have a nice Piper I can fly with a working (and quite realistic) Garmin GNS430. :( I've flown Cherokee's in real life, and I enjoy flying FSX planes I've flown for realC) It fills that niche between the C172 (slow) and twin BaronI use FSX with DX9 and SP2 (Acceleration), and I don't have any issues with it. The external model is equal to the default ones in terms of frame rate. The VC is a little heavier on the ole PC but that is expected, perhaps a 15% drop in FPS compared to say the C172.And there is a 30-day money back return policy if it doesn't work on your system. You can't go wrong :) Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A must have for GA enthusiasts. Dreamfleets best yet IMO, and a very good performer in FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Thanks AllAppreciate the quick feedback. Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The VC is a little>heavier on the ole PC but that is expected, perhaps a 15% drop>in FPS compared to say the C172.Thanks Ryan, was wondering as well about performance and this was what I was looking for.Regards, MichaelKDFW

Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would've liked it if it didn't CTD every time I flew it...If you have Vista 32 bit, I'd avoid it until they get a patch out.Despite its quality, the 2D virtual cockpit panel is starting to show its age. It would have been nice to have 3-D gauges. It is very good on framerate though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im heading already for the online shop!Currently I am flying the eastcoast visiting the US in Aerosoft's Twotter. As a becoming Piper Dakota owner I was hoping to pick it up at the "factory". Does anyone here know where that might be? Piper's administration is on Florida, I guess. But if you're a millionaire and actually bought a new one, where and what airfield would you be flying out of?best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine also CTDs too. Vista 32 as well. Haven't flown it since I bought it. I will ask for a refund and not re-buy it until they fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my default aircraft and I fly it about 80% of my time on FS. In my opinion it sets the bar for GA aircraft of it's category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I would've liked it if it didn't CTD every time I flew it...>>If you have Vista 32 bit, I'd avoid it until they get a patch>out.>>Despite its quality, the 2D virtual cockpit panel is starting>to show its age. It would have been nice to have 3-D gauges. >It is very good on framerate though.Pretty much agree with everything here. CTDs w/vista. I only fly in VC, and text on panel is blurry as well as everything looks flat. I hate to compare it to a default AC, but the FSX Lear has a much better looking VC. 2D panel looks nice and has different configs for widescreen moniters, no more oval gauges in 2D. Good FPS.Willy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice model, Don't like the panel (looks too home built with odd gauges and switches added). Would be nice to have the option of period panel to get the feel of the real thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume not with the Reality XP guages, but is it compatible with shared cockpit?Best Regards, Donald T.:-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely the best produced by Dreamfleet so far! Also works great with DX10 Preview enabled. Everytime I load this aircraft I feel overwhelmed.Best regards,Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is not good. Since I fly from the VC, it looks like the concensus leans towards average at best. That's really too bad, because I owned a couple of Lou's models in the past and I was very happy with them. I guess the new FSX SDK is a little more time consuming to produce a high quality product. The only default plane I fly is the Maule. I am still very impressed with this model. It is great on frames, and, has a great VC in my opinion. I am curious as to how much time MS spent on this model compared to others. I also have Carenados Mooney (the latest) for FSX and although it is a little heavier on frames than the defaults (non-glass cockpit) it is all around a very good offering. The RealAir offerings, well, what can you say except it's a RealAir. I guess we just begin to compare new offerings to the ones which we enjoy the most. So, I guess I will wait.RegardsBob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only fly from the VC as well, have for quite a few years now, and I think the Dakota is one of the best via the VC in my hanger (Eaglesoft, Careando, RealAir, etc). Not sure what consensus you are seeing that makes it 'average'. It is far from 'average' IMO.Perhaps some of the above posters should make sure their global texture is set to 'high quality', as I think the VC is pretty darn sharp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 to what Bert said, the VC is the best part! I don't even use the 2D panel hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have all sliders full right except traffic, auto gen and water. Also disabled ac cast shadows on itself and lens flare disabled. Running 1920x1200 res w/high res 3-d VC checked. Am I missing anything that might things look a little sharper?Willy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Am I missing anything that might things look a little sharper?"What looks sharp in my eyes may not be sharp in your eyes so you're not missing anything. Running your sliders full right does not make sharp textures. The scenery sliders were never mean't to be placed at full right. Maybe in other games but not in FSX. They are there for individuals to tweak based on their individual computer systems. In fact, my textures are much sharper when most of the sliders are reduced. I let all my video cards and CPU's handle the action and scenery. But I have a high powered system with a 32 inch monitor so perhaps that's why my Dakota is extremely well detailed and runs smoothly in VC and 2D mode? I don't think so because I believe many with lesser systems than mine are having no issues with the Dakota and are getting crisp and clear textures. I really don't know how the Dreamfleet Team can make a better product with today's technology. Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great gauges and GPS, I thought it was pretty clear, but the panel was a disappointment. The gauges, switches and knobs are flat 2D images on a flat panel. Also, if you run SP1, there are texture problems on the exterior which might require you to download a new texture patch. Trouble is this does away with bump mapping so you end up with a shinny smooth airplane that looks more like freeware than what I expected.Overall, I think it flys well and the GPS is fabulous, but visually it needs work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just shows we all have different ideas of reality and what we want. I never noticed the lack of 3d switches and knobs in the 3d view and frankly they look a little "hasbro" to me doing the opposite for me-decreasing reality lol.I do notice instruments that not only look exactly like their real world counterparts, and that work exactly like their real world counterparts; but that have ultimate smoothness-which is what is really required to simulate flight imho.. especially ifr.I am running sp2 and I only fly in 3d mode with tracker ir.http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience this is what a typical Ga plane looks like-and since it is total recreation of Lou's own plane it is certainly what it looks like. 30-40 year old planes have many transformations, and many period instruments from different periods!By the way nothing homebuilt there-the faa won't allow it.Anyone ever seen this little doodad to the left of the stormscope in my plane-you hardly every see these? (I don't like it much-and it is a period instrument-but it works fine....hint made by Terra). http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/188613.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting a hard crash with the Dakota. (blue screen). This is on a fresh reinstall of FSX with Vista 32. I do get an event viewer SidebySide error on the rxpdrop.dll. It does seem "unnatural" to shoe horn the 16 bit Garmin Trainer into a 32 bit multi core system. :) I'm wondering if those Vista users flying the Dakota without crashes are running dual or quad cores?Bob..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites