Deimos

The Marquise. I do not think there are too many of the other models still around. After 25hrs right seat, only 79 left, then it was sold. Still my most beloved plane ever. It might not have been much, but it feels like a race car flying it, compared to other commuters out there Yeah read the bargain part wrong at first, already deleted from my post. And yes your opinion. I respect that.

Now the 8 bucks difference gives me accusim, all the documentation that comes with it and so on. I at no point said the Moo was bad. It is just missing an integral part of its model for ME. You can disagree on many parts. However the fact that no prop rpm can be adjusted and the sounds that are playing continuously are there. I did not make it up. These are facts. Technical. The prettiness is a soft stat and in the eye of the beholder. Moving the condition lever forward or backward and not getting a response from the aircraft is not something that can be agreed or disagreed upon. It is simply not there. And I flew the thing, the real actual airplane. And hence I miss it.

I differ on that. I see your point yet I bought the A2A Comanche for example. Way more complete in the documentation department. Systems modeled as well. I payed less, albeit it was on sale. The Moo is advertised as realistic, especially regarding the engines. That is where it falls short the most. As I wrote, who is contempt with it, fine, my expectations were not met. I can lean the Comanche by ear, the engine actually drags the plane around, etc etc... same ballpark of the price, very different outcome. And its documentation is way better as well. This is not unlevelled bashing. There are comparable products that are way better, there are products that are worse. Taste is different in everyone. Flying the moo means taking care of the engines. If thats not there it might not impede someone who just wants to look around and it impacts me more. Maybe you like to sit in the back seat, at the table. I could not care less about this feature. If the plane ended at the cockpit and had no exterior model, that would be fine with me. You see what I mean? I still tried to incorporate these parts into the review, even though they are of no concern to me. So now you can weigh for yourself. Are you like me, wanting a decent simulation of the driving parts or are you someone who wants the looks? I think that review makes a clear statement about which end is catered more. All there is to it.

And yet you continue... You know what. As I said, I was not sure about crossposting. Your signature is your motto I guess. Go on doing damage. I do not care. Cya Edit: I stated facts, you bashed on me. And you still go on about it. Quite honest, that is a little bit sad. You continously attack me personally while I present a legit complaint about a bought product.

Again, you attack me for no reason. I did not know if it was feasible, since I posted it at mutleys. I did not find the rules linking different forums, as I am clearly everything NOT that you accuse me of. And now it would be nice if you in turn would stop doing what you do. I do not know you, I have no desire to get to know you, after your nice introduction and I dearly hope this forum has an ignore function. For reference, here the full review: I took the plunge and bought an addon aircraft that I have flown in real life. Since I did not find a review of it here I wanted to share my thoughts and impressions with you and go from merely consuming to contributing The FlySimWare MU2B-60 is Twin Turbo Prop with a geared Turbine, that can cruise up to 30000 ft and up to 300kts TAS. It was produced from 1963 to 1986 in various models for a total of around 700 aircraft. One of its main features was the lack of conventional ailerons. Roll control is achieved by spoilers extending upward from the wings surfaces in order to reduce lift on the appropriate wing, thus initiating a roll. That left room for almost all wing double flaps. That in turn meant that the wing surface itself could be kept small for high speed cruise while enough surface area was available for landings at around 100kts IAS. In its flight characteristics it is more akin to a jet then to any other turbo pro that I know of, mainly because of its high wing load and the need to fly it procedurally "by the book". This necessity was somewhat neglected in the aircrafts early days and it led to a number of accidents and an FAA investigation into the MU2. It was found to be perfectly safe if operated within its specifications. So what do you get with the package? The version offered by Flysimware is a MU2B-60 or Marquise, one of the later stage long body versions of the MU with the Garret TPE331-10 turbine. This is the most powerful engine fitted onto the MU2 in its lifespan, giving it around 720hp per engine. It comes with three liveries for two different configurations. Three with a panel with somewhat standard GNS and the same three with a 3D implementation of Flight1's GTN 750 and an optional weather radar for different publishers, including CaptainSim, RealityXP and the freeware weather radar available for ASN. As I have none of the weather radars but a GTN 750 I used the latter version for this review. Included in the product are checklists, custom sounds and full lighting, VC shadows, custom 3D switches and 3D gauges. Also included is a hangar view that gives you a brief overview over the state of the airplane (fuel, some options regarding the pilot appearance, wheel chocks, start locks and luggage) From here you can also access your ground power unit, that allows the aircraft to operate without its avionics draining on the battery, for example while flight planning in the gtn and waiting for a startup clearance. This works well and is a nice addition to the plane. The APU that came with the Marquise is not modelled. On a second popup you get the option for a cold and dark mode or ready to fly mode, as well as the ability to switch lighting. This works nicely and caters to your wanted degree of realism. The model This thing is drop dead gorgeous. Inside and out with attention to every little detail. Be it sun shades or the actual friction lever that counters power lever creep in the real airplane. All is there and modeled, clickable and movable. The flight instrumentation is and all knobs and dials are completely in 3D. All dials and gauges are easily readable from the VC mode. All in all, a spot on job. The test switches in the cockpit illuminate their appropriate panels (and the moo has a ton of test switches). This continues on to the cabin, the folding table, movable doors, everything is done with a great attention to detail and makes this a plane, that is top notch in terms of modelling. The landing lights are animated, they retract and extend, the exterior lighting, that goes along with it looks really nice. The spoiler and flaps are modeled nicely as well, the props look great and it has some nice reflections. This is all complimented by some rather nice exterior textures. The interior quality is ranging from okayish to superb in different places, but still a solid good work overall. The panel lighting, though not dimable like in the real aircraft is nice as well, the cabin and cockpit lights look good. One more thing to add, the aircraft comes with a custom rain animation on the windshield. It looks awesome. 8/10 The sound Everything has its own sound, all the click switches, the loud whining turbines, even the obnoxius beacon underneath the cockpit can be heard. That would be all good if it were not for a little something, that really gets to me, but might not be an issue for you at all. If you retract your landing lights for example and you have the switch in the off position (switches are mostly operated by left clicking for one and right clicking for the opposite direction) and right click it again, you will hear the retraction sound again. Same goes if it is back in the off position and you move it to retract, eventhough nothing extended the sound will play regardless. Also happening with the flap switch if you hit one end or the other (fully up or extended) the sound will continue to play, even if you hit the last possible postion for extension/ retraction that is possible. As I have no track IR or Oculus this is a major kicker for me. I rely on audible feedback, especially on TO and landing because I have no easy way to visually check the switch. A flip switch, that can not be operated by the mouse wheel will also play its sound, leaving you to believe it was modified, even if it wasn't. At stressful situations this can be very detrimental. So as I said, might not be an issue for you, for me it is, bringing down the otherwise nice experience considerably. 6/10 The avionics and systems. Everything is in its place and looks nice. All the systems work, VOR/DME, the radio panel and the GTN 750 integrates quite nicely into the cockpit. I cannot say anything about the weather radar. Nothing to add here. Just great work. Also included is the cabin pressurization system, while not having any real effect, I just love that it is there. You can adjust every aspect of it and it really adds to the level of immersion in my opinion. There is a custom wind meter installed, that shows you the wind vector and speed as well as the side wind component. A nifty tool and nicely implemented. Virtually any switch can be clicked, there is a full deicing system, windshield wipers to go along with the aforementioned custom rain effects on the windshield, great. The fuel system seems to be implemented correctly, the pressurization of the outer tanks is simulated that forces the fuel into the main body tank, from where the engines are fed. As also mentioned before, everything is crisp and clear, the gauges are easily readable, making flying in the vc a joy. 9/10 The autopilot The Moo comes equipped with a Sperry autopilot with a multitude of modes, HDG and NAV hold, APR and BC, VOR/APR, Altitude hold, Altitude select, vertical speed and indicated airspeed hold that go along with the altitude select. While looking the part, here some functionality quirks have crept in. The IAS hold is a little bit hit or miss, it struggles a little bit with holding the airspeed and this can result in a wildly varying climb speed without touching the controls, when the autopilot struggles to get back to climbing. Also I think that the IAS hold normally would engage the currently flown airspeed, not the trimmed one when entered and trim for the hold speed by itself. I might be wrong on this one though. So currently you have to trim the aircraft to a certain speed, have it reach it and then engage IAS hold to alleviate some of the problems it has. It is also not possible to disengage the IAS hold by itself, whenever altitude select is armed. This leads to some wild trimming attempts The Altitude hold mode is plagued by the same problem. It can work but sometimes it starts to wobble inconsistently. I also had that happen to me on an approach which can lead to questions from the controller on vatsim The altitude hold is also influenced by the pitch select wheel in the model. I am not quite sure, but I think that was not the case in the real thing. I was in contact with the author about these things and he already works on some changes, so that might be fixed in the near future. Nevertheless in its current state the AP only will get a 6/10 The flight model Here the plane starts to shine again. It feels almost like the real deal. In certain situations the aircraft is unforgiving. Slowing down needs to be planned well in advance and that is quite correct. There is no speedbrakes and this thing is built for high speed cruise. Trying to slow down from 200kts on short final will not be possible. Flown correctly however, this is a real joy. The performance seems to be in the right ballpark, albeit it seems to me that it is a little bit too easy to climb well above 33000ft. But my experience here is limited as normal operation would be between 25 and 29000 ft. Other than that it is a joy to fly this thing by hand at low alt as well as up with the jets, going 300kts TAS and with its seemingly accurate range is quite nice: 8/10 The engine To get it out of the way, sadly this is where this simulation falls short. While engine startup and shutdown as well as the start locks are simulated well, there are some major issues. In the Moo, you will find no prop pitch lever. But this thing is not a constant prop speed model either. Pitch is controlled by a governor and pre selected via the condition lever. There is also no RPM readout in numbers, just a percentage. On the ground you would put the condition lever to the taxi detent and the governor would establish 76% prop speed. Although there is no detent simulated (might be a shortcoming of P3D), the lever in the taxi position also gives you that rate in the simulation. So far so good. Now when you advance the condition lever past the min cruise detent up to full, the prop percentage would go up smoothly to 100% for take off. then you had the space between full and the min detent where the governor would give you anything between 100% and 96% prop speed. This however does not happen in the simulation. The prop speed jumps up from the 76% taxi to the 100% and it stays there, regardless of take of or min cruise setting. It will only come down again at the taxi setting and will immediatly jump back to the 76% then. There is no way to control the pitch in flight, which is a integral part of fuel and speed management in the Moo. High speed cruise would be 100% torque, 98% prop, min cruise 96%. Not doable here. There is also a prop phase sync selector, but regardless of the setting, I have found no influence in the flight model by adjusting it. The engine deice has an adversarial effect on the torque, which is nicely modeled. However if you can really trip the IAS hold with engaging disengaging it (see the autopilot section for this) Next thing is the EGT. I understand there is an engine fire system in place, at least the handles are there. But to the best of my efforts I could not get the exhaust gas temperature reach its peak. In warm and moist condition the Moo would get EGT and not power locked. Especially in climbs. It simpy does not happen, taking away some depth. The Moo requires attention to its engines, but not with this model. 4/10 Documentation and checklists For an aircraft that requires training to meet the FAA regulations, the checklist and documentation is sparse at best. There are only rudimentary checklists supplied, albeit there is a training video. For an aircraft in this price range, I was somewhat suprised and had wished for a better overall experience in this regard. Especially all the first flight and regular checks should have been there, but they are not. This leaves you with a rudimentary checklist, that basically only consists of turn the engine on and fly. 2/10 Conclusion So is the product its $42/ 40€ price tag. Well, let me say it depends. If you want a nice to fly model that looks good, go ahead. For me, in its current state? Not so much. Especially the engine part leaves me a bit disappointed as well as the lack of documentation and the sound issue. For such a premium price I expected more. And seeing that there is a no refund policy instated by the author of the plane, there is no try, only do That being said, this is developed by one person. I was in contact with him and he is really enthusiastic about his project and doing continous updates. So it might improve in the future, it might not. Overall I would rate this plane 7/10 DISCLAIMER: this is a personal opinion, yours may differ, I might have stuff gotten wrong. If you want the plane, go ahead by all means, support the developer and buy it. Edit: got the order of review items wrong. Corrected and if you want to look up if that is what is written there: http://forum.mutleyshangar.com/index.php/topic/19191-my-flysimware-mu2b-60-review/ here is the link. And now just get of my back. You are annyoing with your fanboi glasses

Yes in my review I clearly stated how nice the exterior looks, how good the textures on the outside look etc, etc. I even put a line on the bottom, where I said, buy the thing, if you want to support the dev... But you go on attacking me for no reason at all. And even in the post above me I said, its up to everybodies expectations. If the first answerers were met, awesome for him, mine were not. geez.

I will most surely not spend more money. And it says nowhere on their page or anywhere else that the engine is not modeled correctly. Actually its even the other way around. In the walkaround video it is clearly stated how accurate it is. And these are not inaccuraccies. You cannot even enter proper cruise mode in the plane.

No, why would you attack me? I made an account with avsim, because in the vid about the MU2B (the lessons one) it said to come here to post? And it is not "blasting" something to point out errors. And even less so over such a fundamental one as this. I am sorry that you feel so offended, that you see reason to try and discredit me, but what shall I do? Sing its praise, when I know it is not working?

Hmm i don't know. Good for you and I will not argue with you on that. Some may have different expectations than others. I play a simulator for the sim part. I do not want a real looking plane with fantasy parameters. And the engine part is not off by a slight margin, it is simply not even close. That is no shortcoming to me. Apart from that. Raise flap sounds continuing to play, even though your flaps are up when you push the button, the master caution light not coming back on after you disengaged it, turned of the battery and turned it back on, an ALT hold switch, that reacts to pitch control, that all would be maybe okay on a $20 plane. Not on a $40 one. I am sorry, but to me not worth.

Hi, an excerpt out of a review I wrote. "To get it out of the way, sadly this is where this simulation falls short. While engine startup and shutdown as well as the start locks are simulated well, there are some major issues. In the Moo, you will find no prop pitch lever. But this thing is not a constant prop speed model either. Pitch is controlled by a governor and pre selected via the condition lever. There is also no RPM readout in numbers, just a percentage. On the ground you would put the condition lever to the taxi detent and the governor would establish 76% prop speed. Although there is no detent simulated (might be a shortcoming of P3D), the lever in the taxi position also gives you that rate in the simulation. So far so good. Now when you advance the condition lever past the min cruise detent up to full, the prop percentage would go up smoothly to 100% for take off. then you had the space between full and the min detent where the governor would give you anything between 100% and 96% prop speed. This however does not happen in the simulation. The prop speed jumps up from the 76% taxi to the 100% and it stays there, regardless of take of or min cruise setting. It will only come down again at the taxi setting and will immediatly jump back to the 76% then. There is no way to control the pitch in flight, which is a integral part of fuel and speed management in the Moo. High speed cruise would be 100% torque, 98% prop, min cruise 96%. Not doable here. There is also a prop phase sync selector, but regardless of the setting, I have found no influence in the flight model by adjusting it. The engine deice has an adversarial effect on the torque, which is nicely modeled. However if you can really trip the IAS hold with engaging disengaging it (see the autopilot section for this) Next thing is the EGT. I understand there is an engine fire system in place, at least the handles are there. But to the best of my efforts I could not get the exhaust gas temperature reach its peak. In warm and moist condition the Moo would get EGT and not power locked. Especially in climbs. It simpy does not happen, taking away some depth. The Moo requires attention to its engines, but not with this model." Just to put it out there. It has been a long time since I ever regretted a purchase as I did this one. This looks pretty but is off by a fair margin on its engine characteristics. Maybe and FSX/p3d limitation, maybe not. Having flown the real deal, this saddens me greatly. Also not even mentioned there the reverser trq should go up to well over 90% as well. IIRC it was part of the pre flight check list. So sadly more eye candy than simulation.