AkulaR32

The name labels are really unfortunate for trying to take screenshots in MP, especially if you're in formation. It really a lot more fun when people are flying into and out of the same airport and coordinating approaches. I've had this happen a few times, most likely to happen at Hilo.

Note I can only keep a good framerate on all medium settings so it's not at it's absolute best. Doing a walk around photo-op: Startup by the book, though now I see that blaring 'TURN ALL AVIONICS OFF BEFORE STARTING ENGINE' Quick fill-up, left the tanks low last go around. Holding for some traffic on the runway, just because there's no ATC yet doesn't mean it always has to be the Wild West :-P Hard to maintain an even climb and set the camera up for a picture. Picked this departure heading for the background visuals. Taking in the sights on this pretty level terrain flight: Outside view, Hawaii is gorgeous, even where it's relatively flat: Love looking out the Maule's windows: Bringing her back in later that night:

Fun with MS Flight, medium settings: Hard to capture how much fun this is:

Indeed, get it back over quick and fire her back up! Part of the thrill. Two of my photos on the subject: (Running medium settings so forgive the less than perfect graphics.)

52 negative g's, haha. That's quite a resilient airframe not to be a fine layer of dust.

How do you play: More sim, less messing around, or more casually? How happy are you with it? As you can see from my stats thread, right now I play a little more casually, with a 360 controller. I don't come from FSX, but I have a lot of seat time in more serious auto racing sims. I found Flight because I have a TrackIR and wanted to try it out elsewhere. I'm not willing to put up with all the fuss of setting up FSX properly. I do have an interest in planes and flying, however, more seriously learning how to pay attention to instruments, checklists, and VOR/ILS basics are interesting to me. And I'd like to be able to use a controller that doesn't so easily cause such dramatic inputs (passengers are sick with one misplaced thumb.) I know, for my personal happiness, I would need a joystick and pedals, but I'm especially curious how many of you play flight with yokes in the appropriate (or all) planes and how much they enhance the gameplay for you. The real thing that kills me is that the Cessna 172 has a yoke, and it tends to be the go to trainer plane in real life, so that may leave me wanting for a yoke.

Overall flight time is 26 hours...somehow I think this includes paused/crashed and waiting to rejoin time, which would be pretty substantial for me. Distance traveled 3092 nm (One trip from Hawaii to Alaska!...my average speed is a little lackluster, ha!) Hours backwards : 5 minutes 2 seconds. Consecutive spins : 10, haven't really tried going for this yet, looks fun. Crashes: 250... :( Flying outside planes, and gold rush is really a killer for this, it's hard to get reference points to the ground. Also when I discovered spot landing on buildings, dragging a wing on one wheel, waterskiing, and especially waterskiing on one wheel while dragging a wingtip, this number skyrocketed. (Waterskiing off a puddle on Hubbard Glacier and diving down over the edge probably accounts for 10% of my crashes, I need to get a picture of this spot.) Fastest reverse speed: 55kts Fastest forward: 587, not really proud of this since it was in a dive with the free P51. Managed to pull out of this dive though. Hoping for a damage system to keep this under control. Highest altitude: 32914, again with the P51, but manually controling prop pitch and fuel mix with the keyboard, this was really a challenge. G Forces: +18.5/-14.6 ...so so ugly. I hate to think when those happened. Again, hoping for a damage system that keeps these under control.

That's not only possible in the Cub, it's required for a couple of the landing challenges in it. My only attempt in the Stearman thus far has resulted in a prompt flip into the water, but my descent was a little too rapid. I'm not sure the game really even sees the wheels of the other planes as able to interact with water at all.

Kudos to the lone brave Maule pilot on that rig. Interesting to see the scale of that plane next to the Cub.

Very short-term and obvious: expanding Alaska with missions and aerocaches. I'd expect to see a few more planes and perhaps some visual optimization before more scenery. There was a model of a truck with a camper in one of the landing missions, they may indicate that they're looking into making the ground look more alive. It's also fairly obvious that helos are coming, as one of the loading screen tips say "Reaching some aerocaches may require a seaplane or helicopter". Less obvious: the framework for ATC and autopilot is in place (look at the currently underutilized VOR and frequency identifications and the detail of the checklists). With that I'd expect to see more options for people who wish to fly IFR- look at the inclusion of a VOR waypoint and an ILS landing mission right away in Alaska. That will provide support for larger planes.

The game needs something substantially different. I don't think that most of the small single prop planes being mentioned are a very smart choice for Microsoft to move to in the short run. Not enough variety. Significantly higher speed and greater cargo capacity would really round out the game and attract more people. I don't think Microsoft is ready to unleash the Alaska -> Hawaii non-stop so a truly huge plane isn't necessary. yet. The DC-3 and the Goose are both very different vehicles from the ones currently on offer. Lots of people will clamor for the DC-3, but I think the Goose is the most usable aircraft right now, and the best move for the game.

The Maule is STOL, correct? Of all the (deluxe) planes does the Stearman or the RV require more runway to get to a stop? I would place my bet on the RV, but it does have flaps, and the brakes on the Stearman are a little lackluster.