tttocs

IRL, sure you're not wrong. GPS and modern glass improve situational awareness and make flying safer. Period. But in the sim, flying a DC-6? Yep, I'd want to do it "old school" in the old school plane. One good anachronism deserves another after all. "Sherman, set the wayback machine to the 1950's!" IYKYK Scott

I don't have issues with light crosswinds, but there's no doubt that this plane is a handful after touchdown when they're strong. And yes, I see this even when I appropriately de-crab and I'm absolutely tracking straight down the runway. I've heard others complain about this as well, but I'm not seeing it. I typically set the both cabin and cockpit to about 68f, which usually nets me about 72f when the dust has settled. That's with fans set to medium to cool things initially and low once temps stabilize. I do find it odd that it only seems to come within a few degrees of setting, but it's not extreme for me and I have no problems keeping things in a comfortable range. I like having to manage things like environmentals to keep myself and my passengers comfortable but, to be blunt, this passenger system as implemented is not for me either. I wouldn't mind gripes about things the pilot can control, like the temps as above or pressurization issues or rapid descents, as they're things that are my responsibility. But passengers dinging me for stuff I wouldn't deal with as the pilot flying like snacks and coffee? Nonsense. And yes, too many of the passengers are just ridiculously picky. I had one VIP's rating drop all the way to 1% on a perfectly normal flight with no issues and a solid landing rating. At that point, the whole system becomes pretty pointless. Fortunately, the solution is simple. I put passengers in the plane and then never look at that page in the EFB. Scott

OK, I'll bite. Who gets to decide what constitutes the perfect balance? See the problem? You have your balance, I have mine and others have still different ones. There is no objectively perfect balance here, only subjective and highly personal ones. I'm still struggling to understand your concerns. Why, for example, would you care if someone does model a toilet flush (and BTW, it's already been done)? How does this harm you? Bottom line? The marketplace (small m, not the MS one) is the ultimate decider. No, it ain't perfect and it'll never make everyone happy. But nothing will, so... don't sweat the little stuff. See (or hear 😆 ) something you personally view as silly? Laugh, shrug your shoulders, move on and remember that we don't all like the same things in the same way (and thank goodness for that). Easy peasey. Scott

But to what end? I've got airports with interiors. I've got airports without them. Interiors, in and of themselves, don't make any discernible performance impact for me on my ancient, creaking, used to be state of the art years ago, system. In fact, my most performance intensive payware airport has NO interiors. What difference does it make? Seriously? Would any answer I give either validate or invalidate my preferences? Of course not. I like what I like and consider myself a pretty serious flight simmer. RW pilot and former aircraft owner, no longer able to actively fly, doing it as close to what I used to as the sim allows. Cold'n'dark, full checklists, by the book, seriously peeved with myself when I mess something up and all that cool "serious simmer" stuff. And that's the point. No matter how serious, most of us still like a certain level of detail. The only difference tends to be which details. One guy says he likes clutter around the airport but considers interiors a waste. Another likes interiors, but hates that the developer "wasted time" on a fast food place near the approach path. And so on. I personally like detailed airports that feel alive and real when I land at them. Interiors can be a part of that for me but more to the point - if they're NOT so what? Worried about performance? Not an issue I've seen. Really just bugged that the developer wasted time on things they don't need? Seems kinda pointless to me, but OK I guess. Wishing that the developer spent time getting the "aviation stuff" correct? Not a binary I've encountered, but for places where it's happened I seriously doubt the dev would've gotten the aviation stuff right if only they hadn't done an interior. Scott

And yet... So is Christopher. And so am I - another simmer who also kinda likes some interiors, or at worst isn't bothered by them in the least. So, yeah... Scott

Thanks Mark! Your help is greatly appreciated. Sent you a PM. Scott

Still not used to stealth updates on marketplace planes when streamed, but knew things had changed on today's flight when I changed frequencies and got the swap sound. For those bugged by the legacy switch issues note that the KNOBS have been fixed (and two position switches have always worked OK), but three position switches are still borked and for now it is what it is, based on comments on Discord. Today's landing had only a little crosswind component so really didn't get much opportunity to test the changes made to front wheel steering friction. Seems fine, but then it always has for me if there weren't significant crosswinds. Still very much enjoying this plane and, yes it's silly, but I was happier than I expected to be having the Freq Swap sound enabled. It's the little things... Scott

Short field capability was one of the reasons I was attracted to this plane as my first single-pilot capable jet as I love smaller local airports. But yep - I'm still getting used to things and so far have limited my destination airports to >5,000' of runway while I get my landings more refined. I made some changes to my pedals, lengthening the pedal adjustment to give the feel of longer travel on the brake axes and tweaking curves a bit. So far I like the changes as it felt like I had more control. But I'd still like to have "force feedback toe-brakes" 😆 Landed last night at KGRB on rwy 18 (8,700') but used only about 1/3 of the runway with only moderate braking, so progress! Which leads me to... This! I strongly, strongly agree with this assessment. I'm a RW pilot and have decades of simming experience and I like to try to fly in as realistic a manner as possible. A week into owning this one and I feel like I'm JUST beginning to get a decent feel for it. Sure I had reactions from my first flights (I was especially surprised with the ease of hand-flying from the get-go) but I knew I needed time to really get a feel for the model and that "feel" is still a work in progress. I'm not a jet guy IRL or the sim so of course that plays into things, but I find this true to at least some extent with every well-done plane in the sim, even those I'm familiar with IRL. Scott

But have you spent much time on their Discord? There are some less than kind folks there too. Just because a developer does things like snack service doesn't mean the other stuff has been neglected. Hard to know how to respond when you aren't more specific than that the flight model failed for you "on a lot of things". I've seen plenty of critiques here, mostly revolving around ground handling. In the air, I think the plane is an absolute gem. As for the ground stuff, I've not had a bit of the troubles on takeoff roll that some have reported, and on the landing side all has been mostly well for me other than a braking issue which may well have been on my side with some overly aggressive braking techniques. I did finally have a landing this afternoon with a significant crosswind component and do see what some have been talking about there. But there is a fix coming, and what I experienced wasn't egregious - it could just use some tweaking which is being done. Overall, I still think it's an excellent plane - an opinion which has nothing to do with all of the passenger stuff OR the FBO. There are many who really enjoy those things and they certainly don't hurt me in any way, so... Scott

"Hi JWY, it's lovely to meet you. And thank you for the interesting cocktail! Is there anything else I can help you w..... Ooo!" Scott

According to a discussion I just found on FSReborn's Discord, it appears that the manual is incorrect and the implementation is right. The two positions available are "CLOSED" which apparently means Armed/Automatic. In this position, the spoilers should deploy automatically after touchdown. And, of course, "OPEN" which means manually deployed. Don't know how to verify this from the cockpit however - perhaps there's a notification on the MFD or PFD that I haven't noticed - but I'll trust it's happening. Haven't had the chance to tackle significant crosswinds yet. En-route on yesterday's flight it looked like I might have my first opportunity, but by the time I arrived winds were down to 4kts variable. Rollout under those conditions was pretty standard. Scott

One other interesting thing on this plane and then I'll shut up and fly for a while. In 2020, my older system was pretty balanced, with CPU and GPU usage being pretty even. When I moved to 2024, there was clearly more work going on in the GPU, and/or threads were better managed on the CPU, leaving my aging GPU as the limiting factor when flying my typical fleet of Black Square planes with TDS GPNxi. The Phenom has completely flipped the script. This plane and its systems REALLY stress my CPU. I'll often see frames starting to drop even though the GPU is loafing along at 60-70% due to the CPU being saturated. Pls note that I'm not a frame obsessed simmer, but because I use the (most excellent) MSFS Auto FPS utility, I noticed the graphics changes when Auto FPS started to reduce LODs more than I'm used to and started to investigate. The other thing which surprised me was behavior in the higher flight levels. I've never flown higher than about FL250 before with my TBM 850 and Dukes and I always assumed less performance would be required the higher I went. I was pretty surprised to see what happened on my last flight at FL410. I know there's more surface to render at those altitudes, but I guess I assumed the reduced need to render fine details would negate that. Not so. Those of you who've been flying jets in the sim for years are probably laughing right now. Scott

Yes on the rudder pedals and axes for toe brakes. I could well have been a bit ham-footed as one of the things I dislike about most rudder pedal brake axes, including mine, is that there's no progressive "feel" to them, making it hard to be gauge braking force. Keeping partial braking even is also tricky. I'm going to have to try a bit more finesse I guess. The maintenance page doesn't really reference fade, only wear over time as reflected in pad condition with wear increased by hard braking. Mine remain at 100%. That doesn't mean fading isn't modeled - in fact I suspect it is and that's what I experienced - but nothing on the maintenance section seems amiss. No float in my case as I managed to nail the landing (this time) which is why the braking issue was so frustrating. I also need to figure out the speed brakes/spoilers. The manual says the switch has 3 positions - closed, armed and open - so you should select "arm" for auto deployment on landing. Problem is, the switch only has 2 positions - closed and open, clearly visible in the accompanying pic - and selecting open deploys them immediately - don't ask me how I know. To confuse things even further, the Events and Variables reference section in the manual indicates only two positions - off and armed. But near as I can tell, there is no armed in this model. This means to deploy I have to look down on touchdown and deploy manually. And, of course, this switch works differently from most of the switches which are also wonky in their own way, an issue I hope Raul sorts out eventually. In any case, if I do that I'll look up and notice I'm headed into the weeds. This morning, I mapped the function to a physical switch so I can more easily deploy without issues. I'll see if that helps. Scott

No. Wx in Lewiston was severe clear. I've noted some minor braking issues before but didn't think much about them. Previously when I let my taxi speed get a bit high when I was first getting used to the plane it seemed like the brakes disappeared for a bit. Almost like somewhere between around 20 and 50 they go away. Or something. Really not sure what's going on here but will continue to experiment. If it's really just me then I'm not sure what to make of it. Scott

Here I'm gonna have to just say - to each their own. I've purchased 3 A2A planes, all planes I've flown IRL, and for me they nailed one of them - and unfortunately it's not a plane they've brought over or are apparently going to bring over to MSFS. The other 2 were kinda... OK, and I ended up almost never flying them. No need for details here as, well, see below. I've got a bunch of Black Square planes and I haven't hit one I don't like yet or that isn't in my regular rotation. For the most part, and as far as I remember, all of these planes have performed well in terms of book values. But before some of you bring out the torches and pitchforks, please remember what I said earlier about "best" arguments. I recognize and agree that A2A sit at or near the top of the quality scale for GA. What I think you have to recognize, though, is what goes on when each individual takes to the virtual skies in this or any other sim. There are just so many physical variables and so many different sets of expectations and, yes, preconceptions that, to a certain extent, what each of us sees is at least a little bit unique. Yes, I think for most of us here there's a baseline which has be met - but beyond that, the special sauce we look for is at least partly a function of what we bring to the table ourselves, combined with how the developer matches our biases, expectations and preferences. For my tastes, and with my gear, I'm just more of a Black Square guy and I don't find their models boring or unrealistically predictable in the least. But I completely respect those who feel differently, especially with regards to devs like A2A. Scott