beoxx

Never tried Condor so I can't compare. What I find impressing with Aerofly in comparison to FSX and X10 is that you really have the feeling that you fly through air. And wind...feels like, well, wind. You really have to fight against it sometimes. Also if you fly near or low over a mountain you can feel updrafts and downdrafts. Quite nice. Plus a stunning view out of the window. I didn't know about Condor, guess I will check that out, too.

Check out Aerofly FS. Decent fotorealistic graphics and the best flight dynamics I have ever seen in a simulation. The software is limited if you fly classic GA (not much system depth, no real navigation, very basic autopilot and planes don't use fuel and so on). But for gliding with a realistic feeling it is just awesome I think. There are already some gliders as standard planes but also some payware addons meanwhile.

Hi, don't worry the FSE flight planner has been there for years and there was never an incident. A few hundred guys are using it. I would also say this is a "must have" if you want to fly bigger planes efficiently and it is so much more comfortable. Once you have used it you don't want to miss it anymore.... Also, the software is free now. All you have to do is to join the flight group "FSE flight planner". This is also free with no strings attached. Cheers

I think both are worth having but if I had to choose one I would keep the Kingair. The Kingair feels newer both with systems and overall (as an addon). But the J41 is still decent. Both planes have some buttons to push and system depth. The J41 is hard on the frames, the Kingair is a bit better here. It was a factor with my old oc'ed core2 duo but they both run well on an i5. FDE are good on both addons. Subjectively maybe even a bit better on the J41. For FSE: The J41 is the better cash maker of course but it is also more work to fill up all the seats (FSE Flight planner helps, but still...).The 200 is a nice plane to just do a quick relaxing 8 to 13 pax run back and forth without much searching for a good route. I had a J41 for a while in FSE but sold it. But this is a matter of personal preference of course. In my case, if I want money I fly a BAE146, Electra, CRJ, Embraer or something. But most of my FSE time I prefer flying something between a Cherokee and a Kingair. I must also say the F1 200 looks awesome imho But it is not an easy choice. From time to time I rent a J41 to fly it again and it is always fun for a while. I just couldn't do it without my Kingair for too long (which is already not a bad plane to haul in some cash).

That's an option of course. I played around with this a bit. You get the report and see what has to be repaired or will have to be repaired soon. Once it is done you have to wait a long time to see the effect of the wear and tear again. Or you would have to use the used button every couple of flights but you would have a different plane every time and I would like to see how "my" plane holds up and reacts to my way of flying it. Also a wrong fuel consumption when using TC is a factor when you use Airhauler or fseconomy. It is my only complaint about an otherwise decent addon. I was hoping that this would work with TC one day but after reading some posts in the forum about it, I doubt it.

That's what I also don't like aboubt the a2a 172 that the fuel burn and all the wear an tear counts in real time only. We have a decent plane with all those simulated stuff that can break or wear out and we won't see much of it as long as we fly her by the book. I would love to see some hours on the hobbs meter to see what happens without having to spend so much real life time for it. I fly in fseconomy and usually use some 4x to 16x in the middle of the flight. I made a tour around the world in a PC-12 (Flight1) and it took something like 120 flight hours and around 30 real life hours. I am not sure if I had as much fun if I really had to fly all of it in real time. But that is just me of course . I hope you have fun with your tour. It is much more challenging in a 172 to do this I guess. A PC-12 is a very comfortable plane to do this in comparison

What he said....

This is probably the nature of things. What do we expect? If we say Dude...35 bucks for some mediocre graphics...are you crazy? The developer will probably not answer something like: Of course this is way too much but I know that you are all addicts and are stupid enough to pay this, HA! It will be more like a story about his starving kids and how it is all harder than it looks and all that. The answer is somewhere in the middle. I think there is something like common sense. That may give some people the feeling that they often pay too much here. And when they still buy it (addicts.... :lol: ) it leaves them with a bitter taste. One might feel like a walking wallet. I think good payment for good work is in order. But I think there is also a line where this becomes indecent, when someone things that he deserves a few hundred dollar for every virtual brush stroke of the "master" or something.

The economical aspects are fun for me, too. I generate a lot of internet traffic for https://www.conklindd.com/Page.aspx?cid=1119 I think. Have you tried Fseconomy? Prices for planes and fuel are cheaper than in the realworld but once you get used to that there are lots of numbers to throw around and economical decissions to make. Oh..., and lots of flying, too.

The Avanti is cool, no question and I am also more of a piston/turbine guy. But... Milviz has a lot of nice planes in the pipeline...but judging on past experiences...it might take a while..... Nevertheless I am hoping for some decent business jet. Preferably at least something like a Phenom 300 or bigger. But if it is going to be just a Phenom 100...well I would also take that with nothing else on the horizon. At least it will look pretty.

The TBM 850 is my favorite by far. If I think about it there is not much left from my big carenado fleet that I use. Sometimes the Bonanza F33a and the (old) 208 but very very seldom. I am interested in the upcoming Phenom but only because there are not many half way decent business jets availabe and my Feelthere Phenom has such an ugly VC... .

I think I have never seen such little interest in a Carenado release. Maybe it is because many other more famous planes have been released in the last weeks or even the same week. Duke 2.0, A2a 172, PMDG 777 for example. I was interested but bought too much flightsim stuff in the last time and did not feel like paying another $40 at the moment. Also maybe some guys feel like this plane is too much recycled. A recycled 208 and a like 5 times recycled and still very lite Carenado G1000 and no discount for owners of the old 208. This all might have played a role. I also decided that if at all I would only buy this on a sale some day. But still I am also interested in a little review or maybe a youtube-video.....

Prices are not made anymore like: Production/development cost + reasonable profit to keep the doors open = price. It is only about "how much can I make them pay?". In classic marketing this is defined as a "need" and how much a person is willing to pay to end this need. If a developer finds out that number and takes into consideration how expensive comparable products are on the market he can set his price and then check if it is profitable. I am pretty sure those profits are not bad in the flightsim industry. If enough people buy for that price, the next product will be priced similar or even higher. In my personal opinion the amount of money us simmers are willing to pay here is surprisingly high in comparison to other markets. That there is not that much competition on the market may also play a role here. I see why something from PMDG has a higher price and yet I think in another market and with another customer base they could be considerably cheaper and they would still make a good profit. Reasons for that: See above. But sometimes I really wonder how expensive some products are. Especially if one takes into account how fast 3 D objects can be made with todays software. Reasons for that: Again, see above. And yes it is a relatively small market. But I think it is not THAT small. A lot of companies are making good money with it. Out of interest I checked out the balance sheets of 2 developers/distributors from my country today, and they are doing well and have grown a lot in the last years. (Note: Limiteds have to publish their balance sheets in my country.) In the end: It may all not be fair. Maybe we all pay too much for some products. We don't have to buy them. And if enough people not buy, prices may fall again....but only if we can resist those cruel and nasty needs....long enough :rolleyes: I think there are still enough products out there that are worth every penny. On the other hand..........................

I just downloaded it from Carenado a few hours ago. > Carenado.com > my account > my products > 182 T at the right end behind you serial number "update" Note: There is only this one update left, SP1 and SP2 are no longer there.

Quick test over ORBX PNW, some HD rex clouds, FPS unlimited, on a Haswell 4670k /GTX560ti, no oc: Before Patch: 46 FPS After Patch: 57 FPS Performance is now like the TBM 850.

The strange thing here is how many developers demonstrate or even explicitly say that they don't care about their customers. The freaky thing is that they seem to be proud of it, too. The good thing is that there are enough decent developers out there, too. Also I don't think that the "only 0.5% of the customers criticise in forums and the rest is happy" argument is valid. A lot of customers never ever write in a forum.A lot of people don't say anything because they don't want to waste more time and energy in a matter because they realize that it is pointless anyway...or want to avoid a conflict.... or in some extreme cases don't want ot be thrown out of a forum because criticism is not wanted or accepted.

From what I have seen so far I am also not impressed. Looking at the price tag I just cannot help myself.... I don't see a reasonable value for money here (and that is a VERY diplomatic way describing it...) Outside the ORBX North-America-World I use the exchange textures from Aime Leclercq. It is freeware and a big improvement over standard fsx.

After the patches I prefer the TBM. The Jetprop overall runs a bit better and all but the TBM ist just a damn pretty plane..and very fast. I like the modern feeling in the cockpit, too.

Considering how expensive addons have become criticism should be allowed. For some reason I have often seen forum users on each others throat when it comes to a quality and/or price discussion. One strange attitude (from my perspective) is that some people say that we, the customers, have to keep the developers happy. Paying high prices and being grateful for what we get and so on. I may be old fashioned and conservative in this regard but I think that it should be the other way around. No addon will ever be perfect, but if you, lets say pay $ 60 for an addon, you should be allowed to expect something. As long as criticism stays reasonable and constructive it should be allowed in my opinion. And I have often seen that this leads to fixes/patches and a better product...

When I said the turbine is better in every aspect I was not only referring to performance (speed, required runway) but also to the optics and system depth of the addon. When I switch from the turbine to the piston I miss the dirt in the cockpit. The piston looks so steril in direct comparison. Also that you can kill the engines without proper handling. It is more like the whole package, all those little details make the T-Duke more realistic and to my preferred version. Speed alone would not be a reason to prefer one version for me (as I said the T-Duke makes everything almost too easy... :rolleyes: ). What I like about the piston is the more direct and precise handling.´Still, both planes are awesome.

I had the piston Duke first and it was my favorite airplane for a very long time. But after the turbine came out I have not really flown her. I took her out of the hangar and started a flight sometimes but never finished because I always realized that the turbine is just better in every aspect and feels just more realistic because of many small details somehow. Planes I found again in the back of my hangar: The DA Cheyenne. Just an awesome plane. Looks outdated, but it is just one of this planes that has that "certain feel". To be honest, it feels way more like a turbine than the T-Duke to me. It is way harder to fly for what I do because it needs lots of runway (small airstrips in the ORBX areas). I think about the Cheyenne as a clumsy turbine but I think about the T-Duke as the "Beast" (making everything almost too easy, but still one of my most flown aircrafts). Aerosoft Catalina. Well done addon. No other plane gives me that feeling of adventures ahead like this one. Start in a major city...next stop some lake near the amazonas to meet up with Indiana Jones. And...that engine sound alone is just worth buying it ... ^_^

The Milviz B55 and the Carenado 182T are both planes that give me a bad FPS performance in the VC. In the 182 it is clearly related to the G1000 map (there will come a patch someday according to Carendao). In the Milviz B55 it is clearly related to the GPS. When I turn off the upper GPS I get a HUGE boost in FPS. Performance is like the RA Duke then (in the Duke and more or less all my other planes there is only maybe 1 FPS difference between GPS on and off). Shortly after release there was a discussion about this FPS issue in the Milviz support forum here.. Some have that problem, some not. Just strange.

So I bought the TBM and did some testing. I was too curious in the end. Some quick thoughts on both planes: As I wrote in another thread after a closer look and some testing the TBM performs worse than the Malibu and even the 182T from Carenado when it comes to FPS. There are many little bugs, MFD and PFD are hard to read, speed is way to slow. The TBM gives me a huge hit on the FPS when I use the map on the MFD. The carenado 182 T also gives me that strange performance loss. None of my other G1000 planes gives me such a hit (for using the map....). Also as comparison I can turn on all screens in the Malibu (g500 PFD, MFD with map, both gps, weather radar) and I loose between 2 and 3 frames only, so she gives me overall a pretty good performance on my PC. Clear point for the Malibu. Considering all bugs, performance and stuff I should probably suggest the Malibu if someone would ask me. BUT: If I would choose with the heart I would go for the TBM. After some tweaking of the .cfg to get the correct speeds and not using the map for better performance and ignoring all the little bugs it is a cool plane. A fast modern single turboprop with a fancy G1000 (limited functions and all..but hey, it looks good :lol: ). A nice plane that I would love to have in a less rushed, flawed and incomplete version as Carenado offers right now. Seeing them right beside each other I find the TBM more appealing and I was surprised how much bigger she is. A bit closer to the PC 12 which is one of my favourite planes. And btw the view out of the cockpit is indeed a bit better (for us sunset lovers). :rolleyes: Guess I have to hope for some service packs.

Yes I use that cushion quite regularly in most planes...especially on approach. It's just that the instrument panel is very high and the windows are very small in the Malibu (in the TBM, too). This feels a bit like sitting in an armored vehicle and looking through a crenel. And I almost forgot about the speed limitations of the Malibu in low altitude. As long as you don't want to fly high all the time most piston twins will outperform the Malibu. Another point for the TBM.

I am asking myself the same question right now. After the first excitement all my Carenados end up collecting dust in the hangar after a few flights for some reason I cannot even explain a 100%. I was waiting for "something like a PC 12 with glass" for a very long time so I bought the Malibu because it was the closest thing after severall years of waiting. The TBM appears to be even more close but I fear that it will end up in the hangar like almost all other Carenados in my collection.. And yet there is that voice..."this time it is different..this is what you want"..... That voice is always there when Carenado pumps out a new plane. But I learned to resist. I passed on the KingAirs and the SR22. HA! FPS seem to be comparable to the Malibu. Not too bad for all the glass. It is faster and gives the G1000 feeling...but not that much G1000 functionality.... So it is speed and the looks..... $ 40 bucks is not cheap for what you get in my personal opinion. If I can resist for the the next days I will probably wait untill I get it on sale one day... What bothered me with the Malibu is the very limited view out of the cockpit. Both planes look very much alike and yet I have the impression from Screenshots and first videos that the view in the TBM is a bit better. This is hard to judge from screenshots /videos without having the freedom to play around with the camera yourself. Can anyone compare the view and has opinion for that?