SU-26 is out!!

[skyhawka4m]

Going for mine now!!!

http://www.alabeo.com/index.php?accion=product&correl=76

[ryanbatc]

I'll pass - I bought their Pitts and hardly ever fly it.... anyway I wonder if you can snap roll this thing? Spins?

[Sundog]

Thanks for the heads up. I know what I'll be adding to the hanger this weekend. :)

[strykerpsg]

Looks kinda cool, though not my cup of tea, aerobatic types. That would mean I might actually have to learn to fly actual manuevers instead of yanking and banking in my current stables. Good find though. Out of curiosity, is Alabeo strictly aerobatic types?

Matt

[skyhawka4m]

Ok...so....I bought it.....flew it...here are my first thoughts:

Sound....definetly not that of an SU-26.......hopiing we can count on someone to do a sound file for it.
the plane model....superb
textures....superb
flight model.......ok..not bieng an aerobatic pilot or any real world pilot for that matter...but I must say....the flight envelope seems a bit odd. I don't know if this is modeled correctly or not.....but...that said...I can spin, I can hammerhead...knife edge....haven't been able to do it yet......when applying rudder it wants to decend on its side


Again...I am in this for the fun of it....for $21.95 I have always wanted an SU-26 in FSX or for that matter a good one for FS9 days....now I have one......now I'm hoping for some slick mods to help her out.


For $21.95.....I'll five it a 7 out of 10

[Barnes]

Thanks for the appraisal Skyhawka

Im trying to purchase now but 2 of my credit cards dont work on their system for some reason.

Now able to download and would give 8 out of 10 after a few flights.

[Barnes]

Woops - the canopy jetterson lever does work!

http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq119/GAJIT/Untitled-1copy-17.jpg

[SeanTK]

Hmm....certainly looks good, but I'll wait until someone posts a video showcasing the soundset and how it flies.
I'd use it as a VFR tourer (not really into Aerobatics), and it's certainly an interesting aircraft, but if all it is is a looker with no substance...then...

EDIT: Aw...will probably get it anyway this weekend. Ha!

[heywooood]

I'd buy it right now if I hadn't just splurged on the AeroflyFS....

seriously - NO ONE does smoother compound curves on their 3D models than Alabeo...absolutely perfectly smooth without vertices - their Pitts is amazing in form.

Could the flight modeling be better? when couldn't it - but for sheer beauty the Alabeo and latest Carenado offerings are the pinnacle IMO:kilroy: FWIW

AND they achieve it without dropping frame rates

[Barnes]

Yep - im loving it. Sure have to sideslip it to loose speed to land which helps to see the runway.

[skyhawka4m]

SeanTK...as I said...the soundset is not what I would have hoped for...definetly not the SU-26 ounds I've heard many times. Like I said...hoping for a payware sound set to come out. I'm hunting now for a stand in.....for the time being.

[SeanTK]

SeanTK...as I said...the soundset is not what I would have hoped for...definetly not the SU-26 ounds I've heard many times. Like I said...hoping for a payware sound set to come out. I'm hunting now for a stand in.....for the time being.

Try plugging in the soundset included with this one and let me know how it compares.
http://avsimrus.com/f/fs2004-aircrafts-40/su-26m-4566.html
(http://avsimrus.com/f/fs2004-aircrafts-40/su-26m-4566.html)
EDIT: or this one...seems to be a mix of Sukhoi and default Extra sounds...
http://avsimrus.com/f/fsx-aircrafts-79/su-26m-v2b-17921.html?action=download&hl=su-26

[strykerpsg]

Woops - the canopy jetterson lever does work!

http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq119/GAJIT/Untitled-1copy-17.jpg

Being a noob here, but what are the wingtip aerial looking devices for? Be nice, I know what makes an airplane fly and basic aerodynamics, but this looks bizarre and really curious. Thanks

Matt

[skyhawka4m]

those sounds werent much better.....I'm looking forward to some FDE mods.....any takers? She likes to side slip....alot!


59694

[Barnes]

Being a noob here, but what are the wingtip aerial looking devices for? Be nice, I know what makes an airplane fly and basic aerodynamics, but this looks bizarre and really curious. Thanks

Matt

Hi Matt

Its a good question. I cant remember what they are called - might be angle meters - they help the pilot in display flying judge more acurately what angle he is flying to the horizon by looking along the wing to them.

[zlin]

Ok...so....I bought it.....flew it...here are my first thoughts:
Sound....definetly not that of an SU-26.......hopiing we can count on someone to do a sound file for it.


Could you made a short movie about it's sound please? I'm very curious...
The real M-14P engines have a very special sound, and I think, it is very important thing in Alabeo's Su-26 too...

[zlin]

Being a noob here, but what are the wingtip aerial looking devices for? Be nice, I know what makes an airplane fly and basic aerodynamics, but this looks bizarre and really curious. Thanks

Matt

This device useable for help find easier the correct angles of aerobatic maneouvers (45 - 90 degrees)...

[warchild]

In aerobatics, many maneuvers cause the AOA to change so rapidly that watching the ADI or AOA indicator becomes futile. When that happens, pilots rely on their orientation to the horizon and use the devices on the wingtips to help them figure out which way the plane is pointing.
Even in the SU-37, i'm looking out the side window more than anywhere else, and i'm not an aerobatics pilot. Its just a natural thing to do..
Pam

[warchild]

What i'm really curious about is: "Can it do a nose over tumble?"
Pam

[skyhawka4m]

What i'm really curious about is: "Can it do a nose over tumble?"
Pam


no it can not.....I think the FDE needs work.

[skyhawka4m]

Could you made a short movie about it's sound please? I'm very curious...
The real M-14P engines have a very special sound, and I think, it is very important thing in Alabeo's Su-26 too...


ZLIN....I refer to my earlier statemnet.....TRUST ME...when I say the sound is not that of an SU-26....as a matter of fact it has no "big radial" sound to it.

[zlin]

ZLIN....I refer to my earlier statemnet.....TRUST ME...when I say the sound is not that of an SU-26....as a matter of fact it has no "big radial" sound to it.

I trust in you for sure! :) I'm just curious about the rate of the unrealism... :)
Because the Alabeo's Pitts have a good enough sound samples so I hope in a good SU-26 sound too... :(

[warchild]

no it can not.....I think the FDE needs work.

nooo, its not the FDE. I dont know exactly all the forces that go into that tumble but flight simulator has an extreme alergy when it comes to doing anytyhing that is non conventional flight. I wouldnt expect a model in FS to be able to do that or some other just as extreme maneuvers. I was just hoping is all.
Most conventional aircraft, you can pretty much get away with just telling FS its length wingspan weight and a few other basic measurments, but with aerobatic and other non conventional aircraft, the FDE becomes a mind numbing labyrinth of balances that have to be exactly maintained. We're talking in measurments of a thousandth of an inch or pound or degree here.
Still, if you manipulated the torque just right, along with the torque effects on pitch, I bet you could do some really interesting stuff..
Pam

[strykerpsg]

This device useable for help find easier the correct angles of aerobatic maneouvers (45 - 90 degrees)...

Thanks Zlin.

[jetstreamsky]

So nothing like this then http://youtu.be/vop72nyLAlQ

[zlin]

Finally, I decided to buy this bird. What a mistake!!! :(

3D model: 5*
Sound: -1000
FDE: -1000

Need a serious update!!! This aircraft almost unflyable, it's just an eye-candy now. :((((((((((((((((

[warchild]

I dont have this aircraft, but, you should be able to that with ease. Its not pushing the boundary at all in that manuver.
Its only when you push the boundary that FSX screams. What i mean is, It's only when you perform maneuvers that go outside the general function of an aircraft, such as with the F-4 Phantoms and Su-37s backflips, The SU-26s tumble, The F-22s tailslide. Those aint normal, and FSX screams real loud when you try to do them. Of course i've managed to find a way to do it, but thats me ( i'm nuttier than a fruitcake at times ) and it isnt something i would enjoy doing more than once in a flight model. In FSX, you can do anything in the latitudinal plane. But if ypou notice, all those maneuvers listed above are in the longitudinal plane. Longitudinal is almost impossible to deal with. If the tumble is the only thing you cant do in this plane, youve got a great plane for fsx....

[warchild]

Finally, I decided to buy this bird. What a mistake!!! :(

3D model: 5*
Sound: -1000
FDE: -1000

Need a serious update!!! This aircraft almost unflyable, it's just an eye-candy now. :((((((((((((((((

I'm sorry to hear that Zlin. I personally had some hopes for this bird..

[DennyA]

Has any sim modeled aerobatics well since Flight Unlimited back in the 90s?

[skyhawka4m]

Has any sim modeled aerobatics well since Flight Unlimited back in the 90s?


NONE! This is what amazes me about this every time a plane comes out that in the RW is an aerobatic champion. I get beat up for it every time...but I'm sorry...its not going to happen in FSX or any sim that is out now...and frankly I doubt that any windows generated program will be able to handle the true flight dynamics of an aerbatic type.

While I agreee that this plane need some work....I'm having alot of fun with it......I have no doubts that there will be fixes put out from one person or another for it.

[JAllen]

Zlin...you are not going to get what you are looking for. So, until a sim module is built to add something to FSX please don't trash people's hard work. Just asking nicely, ok.

Maybe you could fine tune an FDE and show us all how it is supposed to fly. Could you try that approach instead?

Jim

[skyhawka4m]

Zlin...you are not going to get what you are looking for. So, until a sim module is built to add something to FSX please don't trash people's hard work. Just asking nicely, ok.

Maybe you could fine tune an FDE and show us all how it is supposed to fly. Could you try that approach instead?

Jim


+1...total agreement. If I had any idea of how to do it...I'd be on it now.

[gtirob01]

Im not buying this because of its aerobatic "realism". I'm buying it because it is an awesome looking aircraft! The pics of it are stunning and I know I can have fun in this thing.

One question.... Does the download require any type of online activation? Or do you just download and fly it once purchased? Reason I ask is because I do not currently have internet at home.

[JAllen]

I entered the key provided and do not know or had any indication of an online process after that. Perhaps best asked of Alabeo.

Looks really sweet. Surprised at how short the takeoff was. In the air it has very sensitive control response to the way my stick is calibrated. View from the cockpit is unusual in that you sit very low. Kept trying to "sit up" more but found the canopy right there. Looks right by a video I saw.

Enjoyed stalling it out and hearing the stall warning go off. Instantly twists and turns on a dime. More so than the Pitts it seemed. Had the feeling it would do anything. In fact, I just jerked the stick and rudder around violently to see what happened...I just got dizzy. The aircraft was still with me.

Tomorrow I'll see if I can land it. :mixedsmi:

Jim

[skyhawka4m]

Landings are fun also....I side slip all the way in until just before touch down.....very interesting.

[snowbird552]

Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

Features:
Blank textures for creating your own designs.
Custom smoke effect
REAL Flight Model
High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.

[Barnes]

Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

Features:
Blank textures for creating your own designs.
Custom smoke effect
REAL Flight Model
High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.




Wow - in that case you can probably find a way of accusing every dev of unwittingly making misleading promises !!

[gtirob01]

Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

Features:
Blank textures for creating your own designs.
Custom smoke effect
REAL Flight Model
High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.




Misleading? How so? I have never actually flown a real SU-26, so I wouldnt know the difference either way. I just want to have some fun with a great looking aircraft. Im sure a majority of buyers feel the same. If you want a real, 100% authentic, no holds barred flight model.... go to Russia, and get yourself into the real deal and tell us all how it compared.

[snowbird552]

Wow - in that case you can probably find a way of accusing every dev of unwittingly making misleading promises !!

Unwittingly? Seems pretty direct and straight forward to me, not sure how someone would post that without being aware of how it would be interpreted lol. Maybe I should release an F-18 sound pack with "Real F-18 sounds" but use recordings from a 737, it's a jet and should be good enough, right? Think anyone would be angry if it was payware? I rarely make negative comments, infact I think this is probably only the 2nd time I have done so (1st being the Alphasim C-17 VC fiasco). If Alabeo wasn't able to reproduce a real flight model due to FSX limitations that is completely understandable. All they had to do was leave that line out or modify it to be accurate.

[napamule]

Quote: '...unwittingly making misleading promises..'

I don't know about 'unwittingly' but the modeler is in it to make money, not please a fan base. And there is no MORAL dilema involved. He doesn't even KNOW how to fly it? He could care less if it CAN fly. He wants your money, and will haggle with you later about refund, if necessary. There is nobody that will RATE it prior to release. No fact sheet. No spec sheet. You are buying a picture/model that you can fly in FSX. That's IT. Nothing says it will perform like the real AC (or any AC, fictional or imagined). You get: Good, Bad, or Ugly. Case closed.
Chuck B
Napamule

[snowbird552]

Misleading? How so? I have never actually flown a real SU-26, so I wouldnt know the difference either way. I just want to have some fun with a great looking aircraft. Im sure a majority of buyers feel the same. If you want a real, 100% authentic, no holds barred flight model.... go to Russia, and get yourself into the real deal and tell us all how it compared.

Yeah, i'll get right on that Russia trip... I'm not critising them for not being able to make it accurate, just for advertising that it is accurate. If you bought a toaster that looked nice, but didn't actually toast anything, I imagine you would find the fact that they called it a toaster a bit misleading, right? Would you write a review about how nice the toaster looked or ask for a refund? I'm failing to understand how people are confused by this simple concept and how it is misleading.

[gtirob01]

It would be misleading to me if I were a real world SU-26 pilot, and I found that this model for FSX is not the same, or even close. Then, and only then may you have a point. But really, how many people on here have actually flown a real SU-26? How many people can truly say if it is accurate or not? At the end of the day, this is a sim, and a sim to have a little fun.

Your toaster argument is like apples to oranges. Everybody has a toaster and knows what they should do, and how they should do it. If I got a bad toaster, I bring it back to the store I bought it from and get a replacement.

[snowbird552]

[QUOTE=gtirob01;686095]It would be misleading to me if I were a real world SU-26 pilot, and I found that this model for FSX is not the same, or even close. Then, and only then may you have a point. But really, how many people on here have actually flown a real SU-26? How many people can truly say if it is accurate or not? At the end of the day, this is a sim, and a sim to have a little fun. QUOTE]

Actually a SIMULATOR is to SIMULATE and have a little fun. I am a real world pilot and have seen the SU-26 (based at my home airport) perform at airshows in southern Alberta, Canada. Real world can knife edge for a short period of time and maintain altitude, sim su-26 drops out of the sky and I know for a fact that this is not a sim limitation as ive done it with many other sim aircraft. Again, the issue i'm at is over the marketing of the aircraft, that is all. No reason this has to turn into a 'how dare you insult a dev!' thread... Carenado (who I believe is either the same company or related) has produced many outstanding aircraft (I own around 10 of them I think) and I have always been overwhelmingly pleased.

[Roger]

Snowbird is it really that bad? This is yet another thread dumping on someone's hard work and let's face it just to get the model to look that good must have taken considerable effort! Did you contact the developer first to see if any issues had been reported or to make a report yourself?

Frankly with these stickies of new releases being blasted from a great height it seems it would be better to simply have an announcements page!

If our FsX developers are so poor, deserving so many damning posts of late, then perhaps MS Flight would suit better because the guys who make the sim and all the add-ons are all under the same roof so complaining is easier.

[SeanTK]

Come on, people....a few observations. Some of these points essentially repeat:

1. Developers can and do make mistakes and/or release things when they feel they are "close enough". This can be proven through such things as the issuance of patches, whether initiated through the developer, or though a wide amount of constructive criticism.

2. I'm sure we all appreciate new aircraft releases, whether or not they're payware or freeware. On that note, I don't care if something is freeware, payware, or if the dev has an "outstanding" reputation either way. If something is wrong, they should be told about it, and the developer (and their supporters) should not act indignant when the facts are presented. This also relates to this strange mindset on various forums that "freeware (and some payware) developers can do no wrong or do not make mistakes!". (I have actually heard the argument used in one case that developer XYZ does not make mistakes in their addons..when a realism issue popped up.)

3. Let those who know, help those who don't. Sometimes, those who know didn't make the aircraft, or have the opportunity to test for those who don't. As people have said, we are here to help each other, and developers of aircraft should be open to that help if a flaw is pointed out!

The following is really what I have issue with lately:

4. Related to the quality of work of any/all addons: We absolutely must not rest on our laurels! I've seen posters here and elsewhere say, when confronted with criticism, that the end-user should simply be happy that the product was made, and that because someone put effort into it, that's all that counts. If we didn't continue to push ourselves for ever higher standards of excellence, we would still be using a sim and addons with the capabilities of a decade ago, if not more so. Yes, there is a line of critique that may not be appropriate for the time...this includes rivet counting in the *literal* sense.

However, if some are pushing for accurate systems, sounds, or a flight model, which should be well within the capabilities of a developer willing to put in effort (unless the info is classified or something) why is that an argument to be rejected? Every addon maker out there...freeware/payware...whatever is capable of producing products to the highest standards of today's "known companies with high standards", such as one that recently created a 737.

5. Criticism must be tactful. Unfortunately, some seem to think that any criticism is uncalled for.
What I look for if I voice a complaint is the following: 1. What the problem is. 2. What the real world aircraft/scenery location/whatever is like in reality, with examples to support that. 3. Advice on how to accomplish this goal, or compromise to get closer to that goal of realism or a fix in general.

6. Developers should do their best to push themselves to make the most realistic adaptations of aircraft/scenery possible! If something comes up leading to the lack of implementation of a feature, especially if it is wanted or expected, then maybe a note saying "this is what we aimed for and accomplished, this is what could not be accomplished for x, y, z reasons. Maybe someone can help?"



Regarding this Sukhoi specifically, I have yet to purchase due to the facts presented. These are:
1. It apparently does not sound accurate at all. (Allegedly not even a radial engine sound)
2. The flight model is not nearly close enough. Now, we know that the FS engine can't do much with aerobatic physics anyway, but this issue sounds like it goes beyond that.
3. It *does* look good. Exterior modelling seems to be fine.
4. Summary...nice picture with no substance.

Issue 1 can be fixed with proper research and implementation.
Issue 2 can be addressed to a closer extent. We all know it can't be perfect due to the aerobatic nature, but it sounds like it can closer.
Non-issue 3...haven't heard a bad thing about the looks!



All in all....

Criticism of any product, freeware or payware, should be allowed. The key here is presenting it with evidence, and not simply saying, "X aspect of this addon sucks!". Instead "X aspect is inaccurate and could be better...here's why".

No developer is so good that they are beyond needing help, making mistakes, etc.

No end-user is entitled to get everything that they ask for in an addon, BUT, the developer should be willing to push themselves to the best of their abilities, rather than relying on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" development mentality. If it can't be done/implemented, it can't...but bringing up a neat aspect that *may* be able to be isn't a bad thing.

Yes, expectations are high, but developers should be willing to work with that and raise the bar. "OK, we can't put in dynamically moving fuzzy-dice, but we'll put in X for you instead, how about that?"

I don't think anyone here is expecting an aircraft to be the end-all, be-all of simulator addons. We're looking for realism that's practical and able to be implemented, not the ability to run our virtual fingers across individual modeled fibers in a cloth seat or something.


Developers: It's not what you can do, it's what you could do. Push yourselves to try new things. Lead the pack with the quality of your addons. Put realism at the forefront!
End-Users: Be tactful when addressing issues. Push, but don't bully developers into excelling further and outputting their very best!

[Felixthreeone]

I really, seriously cannot believe that we are seeing yet another 'It doesn't fly like the real thing and can't do everything the real plane can' threads come out of this!!!

...Listen, people...this is an aerobatic plane designed for FLIGHT SIMULATION. FLIGHT SIMULATION!!!!!

There never has been, nor will there ever be, any addon aircraft that can come even close to what a real aerobat can do in the real world, on a PC!!!! Get used to it! They make addons that can come sorta-kinda-maybe-possibly close, as far as relatively TAME aerobatics are concerned...but that is it!!!! By Alabeo saying 'Real' anything, is simply them saying 'hey, we tried to get some of the performance characteristics as close as we could'. This is an extremely annoying thing to see in each and every topic that is started on every single freaking new plane!!! I have been flying for years and still have yet to see anything that comes even relatively close to the real thing!!!! It is a PC simulation! It has limitations! Get over it!!!!!

[Bomber_12th]

So let me get this straight...because the aircraft cannot accurately perform a couple of maneuvers, it is being labeled as "unflyable"? Because it cannot perform some advanced maneuvers, does that mean it cannot take-off, it cannot be handled in-flight, it cannot be rolled, it cannot be looped, and one can not land it - all virtually mind you - because as far as I'm concerned, if it can do all that, it sounds like it is at least the majority of the way there. Please don't just slam an entire piece of work, especially from a new developer, which seems to make an extremely nice looking product besides, simply because of a few items which might not be absolutely perfect - let alone, dismiss it for not being able to do what hardly any other alternative could. If you really desire better, contact the developer first hand, and don't go in with fists flying - make it a motive to help, rather than advise or call attention to just issues alone - it might be surprising just what it gets you, who knows! I think I can safely say, that the route taken through the ways displayed here, won't get anyone anywhere.

Again, if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you.

[SeanTK]

There never has been, nor will there ever be....

It's always amusing to come back to points like this after a few years of further development.

Also, the post as a whole is a simplification of the argument, from my understanding. I think everyone here realizes that Microsoft Flight Simulator X has current engine limitations that prohibit the possibility of completely realistic flight dynamics, and I don't think people are looking for by-the-numbers, mathematically precise, all-encompassing aerobatic fidelity with this addon. However, they are looking for a closer approximation over what's been provided. It's possible to refine a product while maintaining the realization that current technology will prevent you from getting it 100% perfect.

Note: I made a long post about this on the previous page for those that may have missed it...

And yet again, this will thread will likely be shut down because some rest on their laurels, some want to act holier than thou, some want to white knight, and some can't express their critique of an addon constructively.

Another note: I've only seen one person here label it as unflyable. Other points about the FDE have been cited from real world examples, and the capabilities of other aerobatic addons.

As others have mentioned, it's a computer game hobby. It's a game that can be used to train for real world flying events, and a game where you can cruise around at mach 3 in the grand canyon, or anything in between.

Why there are egos involved here is something that's puzzling to me. All I hope for is that continued progress is made, new boundaries are pushed, and new previously "impossible" features are "unlocked", in order to further our enjoyment of this hobby. We've seen some remarkable advancements in FSX capabilities over the previous few years from a number of developers, and I hope this "fear of criticism" trend doesn't slow that process down and entice a mindset of "well, there's no new tech in this plane, but we're XYZ company, and they'll buy from us no matter what."
As I said on the previous page, while we have to have reasonable expectations, we still should be able to push for advancement, and not settle for "same-old, same-old".

[Roger]

Sean, what John and Felix have posted is correct. As John wrote:

"...if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you."

We have an unprecedented over-heating of our FsX forum at the moment and as moderators and administrators of this site we have to take the heat out...for the sake of SOH: it's that simple. If we slackened our moderation, anarchy would prevail and we won't allow that. We have a long and proud history here, advert free and covering as many sim related topics as possible; we have something of great value to the community in these forums and we will protect it at all costs.

[SeanTK]

Sean, what John and Felix have posted is correct. As John wrote:

"...if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you."

We have an unprecedented over-heating of our FsX forum at the moment and as moderators and administrators of this site we have to take the heat out...for the sake of SOH: it's that simple.

And I agree fully that issues, wishes, and other notations need to be addressed to the developer. I also agree that SOH (at least the FSX part) seems quite argumentative lately. From my lurking observations, the mods here have done a pretty good job of eliminating the obviously non-constructive points made by the more aggressive members here, but on that note, I would hope that, as adults (and I think I'm one of the younger ones here) that we can talk about the pros and cons of various subjects without resulting to grade-school drama and a re-adoption of our teenage years.

In my opinion, the need to heavily moderate (some may call it censoring) a forum reflects extremely poorly on the mindset and maturity of the community. Obviously, there's not much anyone can do, and the moderating is indeed needed, but it certainly leads to unfortunate circumstances, such as developers removing themselves from public discourse, as has happened recently.

The members here have a right to know what's good and bad about any product. I know that's it's especially dangerous to point out a bug or issue as it relates to any freeware production, whether or not that bug is related to a realism factor, or a "technology-is-fighting back" factor. On that same note, especially since money is involved, it should be appropriate to bring up constructive criticism and complete, honest observations (and even opinion!) about payware addons!

The crux of the matter is maturity levels. I've seen 80-year-olds act with the abrasiveness of the "stereotypical" teenager, and teens here and elsewhere conduct themselves with dignity and class. A forum that cannot hold civil discussions on topics as docile as an airplane addon for a computer game is one that, I'm sorry to say, needs to reevaluate certain aspects of it's membership. We're all guilty of coming off in manners sometimes that we wish we could take back, that's the internet and our asset of anonymity...but when it becomes a routine issue, is when there are further issues with a membership's mindset.


I plan on purchasing the Su-26 in the coming days to evaluate it myself. If this thread, or a related one (as has happened with a division in the DC-6 threads) opens up, I will be giving an honest opinion of the product. Good points, bad points, and constructive criticism to go with that.

Threads like this help me make decisions on what products to pursue, since screenshots and formal marketing from the developer can only tell one side of the story.

It would be unfortunate to only see an "announcements" section, with a lack of critical analysis due to members here being unable to conduct themselves with decorum, and disagree amicably, and possibly constructively.

[Roger]

Sean, as you posted:

"It would be unfortunate to only see an "announcements" section, with a lack of critical analysis due to members here being unable to conduct themselves with decorum, and disagree amicably, and possibly constructively."

This is exactly what is not happening. I agree it's what should happen and to a certain extent it's what used to happen until fairly recently, but it has been wrecked by a few individuals who seem intent on destruction.

[skyhawka4m]

Can I recommend that if anyone ever has a problem with a product they contact the seller to see if they are aware of it? It just seems these days you can not make everyone happy and frankly.....its the same in the real world. I tell customers everyday "NO!" because guess what....its how things are done...get over it. If they don't like it they will go else where.


So....I say...if you have an issue...take it up with the company...if they don't make you happy. move on. Stop trying to rain on the parade of others who are enjoying the product. The worst thing is...there are people here who havent' even bought it and they are trashing it. WHAT!?!?!?!?


Come...mod's I actually support an announcement sticky and then locking it. Let them take their complaints elsewhere this is getting very old very fast........not only that...I'm tired of threads complaining about complainers......uuughhhh


Can't we just have some fun once in a while in our life? Why does eveything have to be so absolute. If you want aboslute....try out a divorce case like I have to deal with now......trust me...you would rather fly the SU-26.

[Ark]

The aircraft looks awesome!

Can somebody post up a quick Youtube vid of the VC and maybe a pan around of the outside of the aircraft?

Thanks!

[skyhawka4m]

Ok....so...because I want to keep this a postive thread as it should be.......I have found what I believe to be a very good sound replacement.......I am now using the sounds from the Alphasim YAK-52........it is VERY close to the SU-26 sound. Its much better than the supplied sound. I am hoping that one of the payware companies will do one with the FSX sound cone configuration.


I also found that changing this has helped and eliminated some of the side slip....I felt that the plane was a bit underpowered and adjusted the prop thrust some.......I have no idea what I'm doing here guys so.......but I like how it flys and sounds now.

[propeller]
thrust_scalar = 1.5 //Propeller thrust scalar
//thrust_scalar = 1.0 //Propeller thrust scalar

[napamule]

I wasn't aware (I don't do aerobatics) that there wasn't any 'good' videos of the Yaks or Sukois IN SIMULATOR at YouTube. And someone said 'that's it-no aerobatics in FSX'. Well, I decided I would try making my own FDEs as I did not find any that 'worked'. Imagine that. We have had the Extra 300 around a long time. Nobody worked on it? I know I didn't. I got ahold of a Sukhoi 26, by Ricardo Batalha (Ferrari repaing by Stephen Browning) and tweaked it. Mind you I am NOT any kind of aerobatics expert. I'm new at this. I spent most of my time landing F-18's on carrier, and bush flying, and tweaking vehicles, and flying 'extreme' ac like the Concorde, etc. But not yaks. I made a short video (posting to YouTube now). I'll be baaaack (with link). We (yes, 'we') need to do something about this 'no aerobatics in FSX'. I am willing to share (payware guys too-why not) what I have. Need to 'polish' the FDEs a bit more. It has 'issues' (for one it can't slow down enough to land-flys even on idle! Yikes).
Chuck B
Napamule
Edit: Here is the link to YouTube video: http://youtu.be/9bodec2Ycn0

[Navtech]

A good source of inspiration for flying the SU26
Svetlana Kapanina :applause:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6SiFtOunzk

[jmig]

Interesting read. I do like aerobatics. I did them in USAF flight training and later in a rented Citabria. While the Citabria isn't what you would consider a competition aircraft, it could snap roll and scare the poo out of me :) Because of this, I have had a soft spot in my heart for aerobatic aircraft. I have bought most of them. So far my favorite is a freebie.

One of the better flight model developers here in SOH tuned the Extra 300 FDE to make it an Edge 540. Now that baby flies! You can do an edge fly by for close to a mile (1600 meters). The only thing I don't like is to get the rudder to work properly in the air, you can hardly taxi. S-turning this baby while taxing just happens. :icon_lol:

Anyway, I tried to buy the SU-26. After entering all the information and registering, I got a 'Welcome' screen. When I tried again to buy it, I got a message saying that I wasn't in their database???? I used the "Contact Us" screen and sent a message. That was three days ago. I still haven't heard back.

As a consumer, the one big mortal sin you can do as a developer, is not get back with me. I just spent over $2000 on a used telephoto lens to use in wildlife photography. I have some focusing issues and have adjusted my camera's focus fine tune to the limits. I contacted the dealer and they asked me to contact the the lens manufacturer. I did. Five days later, I haven't heard back from the manufacturer. The lens is going back tomorrow. While I own two other lenses from this company and love them, I don't think I will be buying a third. I will spend the extra money and buy from Nikon. They respond!

Developer's, you guys make this hobby possible for us. Without you we would be flying the vanilla aircraft that came with FSX. Please, respond when someone complains. No matter how silly or stupid the complaint may seem. It is for your benefit.

[Ark]

Found this FSX SU26 video on Youtube. Anybody know what soundpack this is?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA7RSSdAHqE&feature=related

[hews500d]

Found this FSX SU26 video on Youtube. Anybody know what soundpack this is?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA7RSSdAHqE&feature=related

Follow this link that is at the bottom of the video description http://fspropeller.blogspot.com/ (http://fspropeller.blogspot.com/)

Over on the left side of the page is a section for sound downloads. Good find! I haven't heard of this site but it looks like there are some good sound packs on there!

Darrell

[zlin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UULRYRq1j5bdsz158IppFKAQ&feature=player_detailpage&v=HCdAEX4jSvM

[snowbird552]

Snowbird is it really that bad? This is yet another thread dumping on someone's hard work and let's face it just to get the model to look that good must have taken considerable effort! Did you contact the developer first to see if any issues had been reported or to make a report yourself?

Frankly with these stickies of new releases being blasted from a great height it seems it would be better to simply have an announcements page!

If our FsX developers are so poor, deserving so many damning posts of late, then perhaps MS Flight would suit better because the guys who make the sim and all the add-ons are all under the same roof so complaining is easier.


I think this is getting blown out of proportion... I have contacted the dev directly (before posting here) and am still waiting for a response. I posted here after seeing zlins post being discarded as dev trashing, when all I read was that he gave the 3d model praise and the sounds and fde a poor rating. Having purchased the plane myself, I felt that I needed to chime in on my experience which was very much the same. It also seems that any of the positive comments I make in my posts are ignored, while the negative ones have been highlighted. I have stated before that my problem is with the advertisement and not with devs & FSX limitations (even though the problem goes beyond that in this case). I have also never said anything about our FSX devs being of poor quality, please don't put words in my mouth. This is a specific complaint of a product from a veteran developer (Alabeo is pretty much Carenado), they are not new to this game. It is frustrating though, when devs known for first class products (like Carenado/Alabeo) allow something that has aspects that seem unfinished to be released. If they couldn't make the flight model close to reality, then don't advertise real flight model and if you can't find radial sounds for a radial powered aircraft, then don't advertise real sounds.

I look at criticism this way. Would products like the VRS Super Bug or anything from PMDG, A2A, Iris, Milviz etc... be available if people hadn't pushed for higher standards? Think of all the things that were previously "impossible in FSX" that are now pretty common in payware releases.

[hews500d]

In spite of all the negative comments, I caved and bought the Sukhoi. Honestly, it isn't that bad at all. Are there some things that could be improved upon..yes, which I will get into in a moment.

From all of the comments I have read, here and elsewhere, about poor handling I was quiet surprised in that I was able to coax tumbles, torque rolls, high-alpha low speed flight (ala Jurgis Kairys), pretty much 90 percent I would say of what the real Su-26 is capable of doing. Only once did I get it into anything that didn't look like a "natural" aerobatic maneuver. Throw in 18 to 20 gallons of fuel for aerobatics, and this thing is a blast to fly! I just realized I forgot to try any spins, so I will be checking that shortly. Roll rate, could be faster, but all in all this plane has some serious potential in my opinion.

I read on Alabeo's Facebook page where someone was complaining about it taking forever to slow down for landing. I did not find that to be my experience at all. Cutting the throttle gets the airspeed down to landing speeds in very little time. The airspeeds are displayed in kilometers per hour so I am wondering if this person might be confusing 150 km/h with 150 knots or mph?? I don't know, just speculation on my part about that.

The few things I don't like about it, some of the VC decals could be sharper in the rear cockpit section , and they did not include the two g-meters that are down under the radios. Sukhoi installs two with one of them being inverted so negative g's can be measured above -5 (the g-meters only register +10 to -5, so flipping one will allow you to read up to -10). Also, the tube along the right side of the cockpit should be the fuel gauge, giving you a visual check on the fuel remaining. I noticed they did not do anything with this, but included a fuel gauge in the area where one of the g-meters should be. They also included a mixture control, but the the real thing has an aneroid capsule which adjusts the mixture at various altitudes, so no mixture control is needed.

I didn't like the stock sounds at all, but adding this sound pack http://fspropeller.blogspot.com/search/label/Sound (halfway down the page is a link for an Su-26 sound file) and flying from tower view, my wife who was in the other room thought I was watching a YouTube video of the real thing judging from the sound. These are the closest to the M-14P engine that I have heard.

Regardless of the few "flaws" I'm glad I bought this one and will continue to have fun with it, even if nothing is fixed.

Darrell

[skyhawka4m]

HEWS!!!!! That sound is perfect!!!!

60038

[jmig]

I want to make a correction to an earlier post I made. In that post I said that Alabeo did not get back with me after I email them, saying that I received a messages telling me I wan't in their database. Well I was wrong. They did get back with me. However, for some reason, I only received the email on my notebook computer and not my main computer? I only saw it tonight when I sat down to do some work and turned on the notebook.



... Sukhoi installs two with one of them being inverted so negative g's can be measured above -5 (the g-meters only register +10 to -5, so flipping one will allow you to read up to -10). ...
Darrell

OMG! -10 Gs. I have pulled 2 neg Gs and everything went red and I had an instant blinding headache, as the blood rushed into my head.

[dvj]

HEWS!!!!! That sound is perfect!!!!

60038

That texture looks amazing!

[hews500d]

OMG! -10 Gs. I have pulled 2 neg Gs and everything went red and I had an instant blinding headache, as the blood rushed into my head.

Yep!! The pilot I was corresponding with when I learned about the g-meters owns an Su-31, flies airshows, and has been to the World Aerobatic Championships before. He said they regularly work around +11 just guessing, to -8 unless they are doing a freestyle routine and then both needles are usually pegged. Most pilots don't bother to pay attention to them. In his words, "the Sukhoi is flown with a 'no limits' mindest most of the time.

The thing is built like a tank!

Darrell

[kilo delta]

There used to be a Su-26 flown from my local field (and a Su-29 2 seater)...also flown by a World Aerobatic Championships competitor. Unfortunately it's toast now having gone up in a ball of flame following a fire during start up. The pilot has just picked up a new composite XtremeAir Sbach 342 (http://www.xtremeair.de/web/342.php) for competition use.

[Ark]

I can't seem to purchase the aircraft. I keep getting a connection error in Webpay. All other sites seem to work just fine.

I posted about it on the Alabeo Facebook page and they deleted my post. lol

[Txmmy83]

There used to be a Su-26 flown from my local field (and a Su-29 2 seater)...also flown by a World Aerobatic Championships competitor. Unfortunately it's toast now having gone up in a ball of flame following a fire during start up. The pilot has just picked up a new composite XtremeAir Sbach 342 (http://www.xtremeair.de/web/342.php) for competition use.

The XtremeAir Sbach 342 a Great plane for aerobatics
Potential Alabeo canditate? Hope so

[skyhawka4m]

I'm hoping they do the YAK-50, or the Pitts radial variant

[kilo delta]

The XtremeAir Sbach 342 a Great plane for aerobatics
Potential Alabeo canditate? Hope so

I hope so too. Quite the performer from what I've seen. :)

[zlin]

Sorry, this is my whimsy when I thinking about FS FDE... :)If I speaking about "how should be work an aileron?" then I thinking about something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BJGgAnKx_INot absolutely perfect I know, but much more better than Sukhoi or Pitts.Both of Alabeo product's aileron is a piece of sh... compare to this video.Additional info: This video made ~4 years ago by me from our upcoming project. Model by me and one of my friend, FD and textures made by me. :)

[skyhawka4m]

Is this a 242? I am always hoping someone will do a 242.

[zlin]

No, it's Z-142 with LOM M-337AK engine (6-cylinder, inline) 210HP. The Z-242 have a 4 cylinder Lycoming boxer engine.