hangar

Absolutely, yes. In fact one of their developers has his own releases for Xplane (under his own development name) which goes alot deeper than what Carenado likes to do. Carenado chooses to work with who they want to though...and are also known for having worked many times with Bernt Stolle as an example...they have the money to do whatever they want, it's not as if they don't have access to the talent...but as a general rule of thumb they choose to fit into the market with a less expensive and more casual product as their preferred way of doing business.

that is by choice though, not because they would be unable to do it if they wanted (which they do not). I agree, but it still won't be easy getting accurate behavior without finding an aircraft owner who is also a flight model hobbyist because if you don't have this then the other way is to hire an owner/pilot for a certain amount of R & D time, which most of our developer/hobbyists don't do (but wish they would!).

I think it might have to actually, because they (Carenado) have clearly demonstrated over the decades, despite the pleas from the hardcore fan base requesting deeper systems modeling, that they prefer a business model which caters to a more casual player. Incorporating a new pricing structure to include deeper modeling costs would change their business model. Although why they just don't offer another sister company (i.e. Alabeo) that would adopt this new model as an option is a question which remains unanswered. There's also a matter of quality/accuracy to be considered in doing a business like this because when it comes to modeling a list of aircraft that none of them have flown in or have any real world experience in...well, I for one know how that typically turns out when it comes to flight dynamics. There's already lots of sim planes developed for the market by non pilots and business men who do not own the aircraft they are crafting. I like the idea behind what Blacksqaure is doing, but i feel that there's a limit to what they (or anyone else) can bring to the table as far as accurate/plausible behavior in flight models.

Whatever it is, I'd like to see something that's single pilot, but modern... and with glass this time.

oooo, it hurts so good!

@Tim-HH @ryanbatc Oops!, thanks guys 🙂

this one's pretty nice but not for BS: Bonanza Modern Blue / N62JR » Microsoft Flight Simulator

I see plenty for the default, but not for the Black Square version. Well, some I guess but not many that are modern anyway.

If you are looking for something which simulates alot of button pushing to keep you entertained (such as boeing's or airbus) then no, absolutely not the Hjet. Stick with a larger commercial type aircraft since it is more akin to what you seem to be interested in.

@tup61 This is how the real HJet is, nearly everything is automated including the engine start process. Push a button and just monitor the gauges. So, the sim version is realistic in this sense. Even all the (smart) external lights come on by themselves in automated fashion at the correct times in the real aircraft and also in the sim version. Also, the cruise speed is outstanding for a sp certified aircraft. For a single pilot jet this is all novel, and very "neato", heh.

ah, been waiting on this for so long (not using the beta to know)...I was hoping for more than just 2 or 3 settings (would have preferred a slider) but I'm experimenting with cautious optimism, nonetheless 🙂 Thanks for letting us know your thoughts about it.

A good guess might be in very close proximity to SU12 on the 24th, give or take a day?

I've had no issues with the JF installer. There are instructions they give you to follow for the install process as I think I remember the process requires you to login to your account...but other than that there's nothing much else that needs to be done. It never crashed on me. Try rebooting the computer maybe, or run it as an administrator to see if that helps.

Ryan this looks pretty reasonable to me...but again other than a couple reports I really dunno what the real numbers should be: I need to keep reminding myself to hold off, and that its the Baron Im waiting for 🙂

Not really sure myself so I started checking around for pireps...so far the best report I found was an inital of around 1,800fps down to a normal 1200fpm but I dunno what the MP settings were. I believe that was on a TAT normalized if Im not mistaken.

Well, sure...same as when you take a commercial flight on the initial climbouts which happen at more than 2000fps...your ears pop. But that 3,000fpm initial down to 1,800fpm sounds like it's going to need a bit of taming...like it might be a departure from reality 🙂

Wow, really appreciate all the points you mentioned as many of them are important things for me as well. I didn't know that plane was such a stellar climber...I mean 1800fpm? Holy cow I'd never have guessed that sort of performance from a non turbo prop.

good question, and how well does it hold a side slip in a 15kt cross wind landing, would be another good test?

right, makes sense.

hmm, a little odd but interesting. Sounds like a good thing to play with on certain sensitive aircraft where you don't need too much rudder authority...especially if you don't often fly windy approaches or have an over abundance of rudder.

@ryanbatc She's a beauty Ryan!

@El Diablito - So, the extremity deadzone doesn't shorten the throw of the axis then? I've never used it because I always assumed that it would shorten the travel to the 100% mark, thereby increasing the feeling of sensitive controls.

Actually they didn't change it in this latest patch...it was 2.1 pre-patch as well, which was too much.

Here's the numbers I've changed: changes made to the engines.cfg file: [PROPELLER] prop_reverse_available=0.010 ;was 0.025; this further reduces reverse thrust changes made to the flight_model.cfg: [FLAPS.0] lift_scalar= 1.15 ;was 1.0 drag_scalar= 1.0 ;was 2.1

@sd_flyer - technically I do not know as I have not looked into the RW engine performance, nor have I flown high enough to test for the proper cruise speeds. I know they have made some major engine changes in this new patch so I guess you're seeing some of that fallout...it's a balance...fix one thing then something else breaks a bit...you know tha game...there's always choices to be made when it comes to flight dynamics...even in the level D's from what I''ve seen (I used to attend Flight Safety out of KLGA many years ago and had oppty to fly in those). I dont't fell though that the engines are underpowered as I get the correct climb out speeds I'ver ead in a few of those articles...in fact the climb out speeds may be slightly high in the sim (but only slightly so its not worth mentioning really). They did reduce the available reverse thrust which is a good thing, in fact I've reduced it even a tiny bit further for myself as it's still a bit too powerful from what i can tell. I will come back with my numbers I'm usiing in a few more hours once im able to get to the sim.