emisary

Into PM.... RobB

Bonsoir, Je parlez a peut de Francais. Met beauceau Englais et Allegmagne. Et Pay-Bas. What copywrite? That is my va, and that livery was made for me. What is your skype name? Greetings, RobB

PM send.

Nah, if possible Swiss. Like PC12 HB-CLA With the river Reus on the nose. The rest is equal to the other image. I would really like to discus items over mail or skype with you, if possible. Thanks RobB

The Carenado. I allready have a repaint of the F1. Thanks, RobB

I am in need for a painter who wants to paint the PC12 for my virtual airline. We need more te be painted (Yet indecicive wether we take the TFDI B717 or Leonardo MD80, or ad the Carenado Saab340), but the PC12 is a good start. In a classic livery like this Flight 1 PC12. Thanks a head. RobB

@Chock, If I knew I would not ask. 😉 I doubt between the Leonardo and TFDI. Or take both. I do not consider the Carenado on the same level. They lkook good and maybe the flightmodel is ok. I read on points that hte Carenado on several occasions that the PC12 and Saab are not bad at all. I am asking opinions and getting them. Thanks. Robb

I am rethinking my lineup into: AS Twinotter Extended Majestic Q400 Leonardo MD80 OR AS Twinotter Extended Majestic Q400 TFDI B717 In both cases maybe adding the PC12. Or something else. Not sure if the B717 adds something to the MD80 or oposite. Thanks for the Saab.

A2A I know. And Milviz too. But I was looking into some specific planes for a Virtual Airline. My VA now has a a garbage like fleet. To many. Well really that list. And I am looking into a list of max 5 planes. But then 3 props an 2 jets. And the choosen planes should be pretty much realistically. I am thinking about the Twinotter Extended, Majestics Q400 and the MaddogX from Leonardo. I doubt about the TFDI B717 quality and realistic. Eventually add the Carenado PC12. And it should be Prepar3d geared. And I would like to know if my view on the planes equals the general consensus. And wether the B717 is more realistic and have better flightmodel then the QW BAE or are they somewhat equal? QW has reduced the amount of buttons to push, but it still can be realistically. Thanks so far. RobB

I am looking for the most realistic planes in FSX and Prepar3d V4. I have build my list, but I am not sure if I do have it wrong on some points. And would like to verify that. In short realistic and good quality from good to bad. Carenado is good looking, but the flightmodel and system depth are mediocre. Majestics Q400 MaddogX MD80 PMDG B737 FSLabs A320 Aerosoft Twinotter Extended TDFI B717 QW RJ/BAE series Aerosoft CRJ series Carenado C208 Carenado PC12 Carenado F50 Thanks for helping me on the ist. RobB

Thanks guys, for all your inputs. Helped me quite good. I was initially looking for a freeware replacement of the C207 we are using in the VA. And was debating myself, wether the 207 was good, as it flew different then the 206. Eventhough the 207 is a lengthened 206. But we keep the 207 as payware and add the 206 as freeware.

Thanks Bert, Maybe you are right. A different engine has different behaviour. In my mind is Carenado equal to default FSX planes, with very nice bling-bling. Maybe the Soloy is the same. If I take the Aerosoft Twinotter Extreme. Well that is nice bling-bling, good flight engine. Where default planes have flight-engine, but not so good. Maybe I am completely wrong. I have a bunch of Alabeo/Carenado bought (C177, C207/C208, C337, B200 and PC12). If I compare the Carenado PC12 to the Flight1 version, is the Carenado one the better looking, but is to my knowledge, the Flight one better in sound and flight engine. Greetings, RobB

The A2A C182 is a very nice plane. I know that. I allready know, that I am going to order the A2a C182 as my 4 seater. Yet I was more looking into a comparison between the Flightport 206 and the Carenado/Alabeo 206/207. Nevertheless, thank you for looking into my question and giving a nice suggestion. RobB

I am looking for a Cessna 206 which works in FSX and Prepar3d. Or a lookalike c206/c207. On one hand I found the Carenado 206 and the Alabeo 207. I have bought the latter. They look pretty good. Switches work. Yet I am not so sure of their realistic behaviour. On the otherhand is the freeware Flightport 206 Soloy Mk1. Which does not look shabby either. To be honest the Alabeo 207 looks a bit better. But I have the impression that the Flightport 206 flies a bit more realistic. Is it only the idea that I have that the Flightport flies better, or is it more realistic? I have searched a lot of forums. But could not find a hint in the right direction. Only message that most where happy about the plane. The fact that you really need some amount of throttle, while on approach, and a sudden drop of the nose if you take the throttle away gives me the idea that it is pretty much reallistically. The Alabeo, keeps level for a pretty long time. Thanks ahead, RobB

We have a chat function in our Acars tool. And we have teamspeak. But both are seldom used. Best used is the chat.