Archived

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

Bert Pieke

Pilatus PC-12 or Eaglesoft Cirrus?

Recommended Posts

So I want to buy a fast one engine airplane. I have narrowed it down to the Flight1 PC-12 and the Eaglesoft Cirrus SR-22 Turbo.Can someone recommend either or? Which one is more realistic, has a good looking VC, etcThanksAlex

Share this post


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

hellofast one engine airplane is all they have in common, they have different roles.The Fight1 PC12 is a jem, I dont have the cirrus so cant comment on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the PC 12, but I do have the Cirrus and Columbia from Eaglesoft. Both are fast and fun to fly. Another one to look at is the LionHeart Epic. http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Homepage.htmlI just bought it a couple of weeks ago and really enjoy it. Top speed is about 230kts or so and the price is right. If you like fast singles, you can't miss with any of the three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both and they are both great.Not sure how you can compare a little 2+2 seater to a workhorse turboprop aircraft.. :-)If you want a fun and fast super-slick airplane, get the brand new Turbo Cirrus.If you want a versatile utility aircraft that will get you in and out of really small airports, with a load of executive travellers and all their luggage on board, get the PC12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I have narrowed>it down to the Flight1 PC-12 and the Eaglesoft Cirrus SR-22If it was me I would pick PC-12, not only more "fun" aircraft but made by Flight1, I am an absolute stickler for quality cockpit graphics, sharpness and this is one area where Flight1 is in the class of its own. Plus I always prefer turbine powered aircraft - since I can't afford them in real life.Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We concur with others here. Each of these aircraft are built for specific purposes. The PC12 is a nice product for its purpose :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>So I want to buy a fast one engine airplane. I have narrowed>it down to the Flight1 PC-12 and the Eaglesoft Cirrus SR-22>Turbo.>>Can someone recommend either or? Which one is more realistic,>has a good looking VC, etc>>Thanks>>Alex>Actually I have both :-) That's what I would do both great ones :-)http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y156/awf1/sign.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the EPIC LT from Lionheart Creations. Very nice and William produces fixes very quickly. It's not hard on the frame rate. The only thing I dislike is the ground steering. With not much in the tanks (15% full) and no extra passengers, if you look from a spot plane position, you can see that the nose wheel slips on the ground and the turning radius is quite large therefore.Siggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bias may be showing but i would say get all three , start with the SR22 ,its a great aircraft for "Hops", the rendering of the liveries in both DX9/10 is Stunning. Eaglesoft does outstanding work, there is a remarkable amount of experience among the team and i am proud to have participated on this Aircraft.Bill Ortis did an amazing job producing the Epic, his friends among the development community saw the attention to detail invested in every aspect, personally i thought Lionheart productions came of age with this model, more complex than any he has done before and glorious to see in sim this is a Passenger Aircraft , fast, versatile and powerful.The Pilatus PC12 is a top of the line workhorse and as a product has received great reviews, it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>So I want to buy a fast one engine airplane. I have narrowed>it down to the Flight1 PC-12 and the Eaglesoft Cirrus SR-22>Turbo.>>Can someone recommend either or? Which one is more realistic,>has a good looking VC, etcI have the PC-12 and for the time being it is my "go to" airplane. I had the FS9 version and they have really done a nice job of updating it for FSX.That said, I've been toying with getting the SR22 G3. I need to hear more about how smooth the Avidyne stuff is on a system like mine, so I'll wait a little while to see what the feedback is. I've also seen some folks having problems running the RealityXP "Garmin" 530W with it, so I'm also waiting to see how that turns out. Eaglesoft airplanes are typically highly integrated and thus seem to be harder to get to work with add-on avionics. At least, that's my understanding.Dave B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, as you know there have been issues in the past with RXP integrations into our products and that is why we do not recommend or support that vendors integrations.Those issues had to do with specific ways of handling flightplans/approaches in line with MSFS SDK. As far as we know those have been resolved in that vendors FSX offerings but haven't tested so you'll have to rely on user feedback.The SR22G2/G3 Turbo is a total build to the FSX SDK which means full compliance for use in FSX/SP2/DX10. With .dds textures and reduced draw calls we see improved performance in sim with our revised Avidyne package as do others like Bert. By the way, we are rebuilding our current FSX SR20 and SR22 to the same standard and that update will be at no cost to owners of those products. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>So I want to buy a fast one engine airplane. I have narrowed>it down to the Flight1 PC-12 and the Eaglesoft Cirrus SR-22>Turbo.>>Can someone recommend either or? Which one is more realistic,>has a good looking VC, etc>>Thanks>>Alex>FSD-International Navajo and Saratoga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Dave, as you know there have been issues in the past with RXP>integrations into our products and that is why we do not>recommend or support that vendors integrations.I am quite aware of that, but the lack of explicit mutual support by either vendor is why I brought this up - I need to hear what the *users* are experiencing, since the vendors involved don't want to acknowledge that there are a few of us that want to use these products together.>Those issues had to do with specific ways of handling>flightplans/approaches in line with MSFS SDK. >As far as we know those have been resolved in that vendors FSX>offerings but haven't tested so you'll have to rely on user>feedback.The RXP 4/530W products can export a .pln file that can then be imported into FSX's flight planner - it's not ideal (I'd prefer more automation) but it does work.cheers,Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The exported plan has to be Loaded by the sim in any case, otherwise the sim won't be aware of it... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"I am quite aware of that, but the lack of explicit mutual support by either vendor is why I brought this up - I need to hear what the *users* are experiencing, since the vendors involved don't want to acknowledge that there are a few of us that want to use these products together."Dave, I know you are aware of the issues involved and that is why I also mentioned you will need to rely on user feedback.Bert appears to be one user who "can live with" the limitations inherent in this type of integration.>"The RXP 4/530W products can export a .pln file that can then be imported into FSX's flight planner..." Of course it can. But it is the data/data structure in the exported .pln that was/is in question with regard to FS SDK and other 3PD Products. Users should be prepared to "live with it" as Bert has done .It is RXP reponsibility to provide its own support and is precisely why we refuse to support that vendors integrations into our products.:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>It is RXP reponsibility to provide its own support and is>precisely why we refuse to support that vendors integrations>into our products.:-)Uh, OK. ??Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>It is RXP reponsibility to provide its own support and is>>precisely why we refuse to support that vendors integrations>>into our products.:-)>>Uh, OK. ??>>>Dave.>We tend to get a lot of requests to help make the RXP gauges work with our products. I hope you understand that providing technical support for another company's product simply isn't a realistic expectation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,I can understand that you do not want to be expected to fix incorrect behavior in other manufacturers' products.Having said that, it would good for all concerned if, as has happened in the past, airplane manufacturers would accept that certain add-on gauges are a valid enhancement, and make allowances for users who wish to install them. In the real world, aircraft owners upgrade avionics when new and better gauges come out.. I wonder if Garmin and Cirrus talk to one another to resolve installation issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bert, we've always accepted the fact that users may prefer another vendors integrations into our products and have absolutely no problem with that.:-)The crux of the matter for us is that we have tight schedules and our own support workload to manage. This means that we will allot no time to support of other vendors integrations.That is why we always say it is other vendors responsibility to support his own products..very simple really.:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ed,>>I can understand that you do not want to be expected to fix>incorrect behavior in other manufacturers' products.>>Having said that, it would good for all concerned if, as has>happened in the past, airplane manufacturers would accept that>certain add-on gauges are a valid enhancement, and make>allowances for users who wish to install them. >>In the real world, aircraft owners upgrade avionics when new>and better gauges come out.. I wonder if Garmin and Cirrus>talk to one another to resolve installation issues? >>In the real world if you installed a Garmin autopilot and every single time you attempted to set a VS climb of 500fpm it would command a VS descent at 500fpm... you wouldn't contact Cirrus. ;)As for "talk to one another"... I'm certain that Garmin and Cirrus do... it's in their best interest. In the FS world, I'll simply point out that pretty much every single add-on aircraft that supports an external navigation database uses their own "proprietary" file system... none of them "talk to one another". :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"I wonder if Garmin and Cirrus talk to one another to resolve installation issues?" Bert, JL and I have had face to face personal contact and a number of email exchanges over quite a few subjects. At the end of the day, it remains that Eaglesoft has specfic responsibilities and so does RXP.Eaglesoft cannot support his products for him anymore than he can support Eaglesoft products for us..In real world Garmin does not support Avidyne products anymore than Avidyne supports Garmin products as they are independent entities.:-)You and others who integrate must be able to as you say "live with the limitations" :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Got the EPIC LT from Lionheart Creations. Very nice and>William produces fixes very quickly. It's not hard on the>frame rate. The only thing I dislike is the ground steering.>With not much in the tanks (15% full) and no extra passengers,>if you look from a spot plane position, you can see that the>nose wheel slips on the ground and the turning radius is quite>large therefore.>>SiggyThe Epic by Bill at Lionheart is a fantastic aircraft with so much detail in the cockpit its not funny..Plus Sean Doran has done likr 20 paints for it already..Its by far one of the best flying and most realistic landing aircraft of all time......Its worth so much more than 25 bucks.......http://www.lionheartcreations.com/Epic_LT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron / Ed,Thanks for the replies.I guess I do indeed understand, and, like in the real world, the end-user is ultimately responsible for the final integration of multi-vendor products. :-)That said, I love the Cirrus and am delighted to have a new aircraft to take on VFR and IFR flights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ron / Ed,>>Thanks for the replies.>>I guess I do indeed understand, and, like in the real world,>the end-user is ultimately responsible for the final>integration of multi-vendor products. :-)>>That said, I love the Cirrus and am delighted to have a new>aircraft to take on VFR and IFR flights. >>Thank you Bert! Glad you and others are enjoying her with or without integrations :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites