Help me to make up my mind

[kiki]

Ok, this is one of those "which aircraft should I buy" -threads.

I made up my mind. No purchases and absolutely no more aircarfts (not before the MilViz Beaver is released). And NO Carenado -products any more. But now I am tempted, C404 Titan and PA32 Saratoga in the Alabeo line look interesting. Then there is the coming PA31 Navajo with Carenado. The only airplane I have in this category is the good old Duke (v1), but I would like to fly with something else (and not such a rare beast). FW Cessnas doesnt´appeal to me because of their look. And anything without steam gauges are out of this league!

IF Iam not able to hold my desicion and will buy one plane for that category, I would like to read your opinions. How well the Titan and the Saratoga are made. Which one would you choose? Why?

[donnybalonny]

I dont have the Alabeo AC that you mention because I took the decission not to buy more Carenado/Alabeo products a good while ago.
So I will just head you in another direction and say that I have the flysimware C402 and friends of mine have the C441. I´m very happy with the C402 and my fiends told me the C441 is even better.
The C402 doesnt look as flashy as the other devellopers mentioned, but it works and flies really well. Its pretty easy to fly without being a bore. You have to use the pedals in order to make standard rate turns (carenado/beo????) it trims very well and the reaction to you inputs feels good and alive. I would say that it has a nice FDE. The sitting position in the VC is very good with very good views and gauges are smooth and works well.
It is my favorite twin and i rate it higher than the Milviz baron, which is also good. I will say though, that I have changed the sound package to that of another one.
Good hunting.

[Hdguy]

I'm holding off for the A2A Comanche...

[stansdds]

I have the Flysimware C402 and it flies well and the systems work well given the confines of the MS Flightsim engine. Downsides of the Flysimware C402 are virtual cockpit graphics, they are not the near photo real that we see from other developers, even though they are 2048x2048. The only other negative I can say about the C402 is related to the age and obsolescence of my computer. It really taxes my computer and I end up with blurry ground textures.

I was excited when Alabeo announced their C404, but the reviews have been typical of what Carenado and Alabeo have previously produced. Outstanding 3D models, wonderful textures, and systems that either do not work or work incorrectly. I had hoped that by simulating a relatively simple aircraft they would get it right, but evidently not. I've seen the pictures of the Carenado PA-31, again, it looks stunning, but I fear that it will fall short in terms of function.

A2A, Real Air, and MilViz spring to my mind when it comes to aircraft that look great and function correctly. I have the MilViz C310, it looks good, gives the option of installing your own radios, GPS, etc, and flies about as close to a real C310 as you can get with MS FSX.

[heywooood]

Carenado and Alabeo still seem to give a customer the best models in terms of model accuracy wrt shape and dimensions, smoothness of all curved lines (vertices), and all without severely impacting FPS...
they make beautiful planes, with adequate systems and gauges, superior lighting for us nacht fligers, and still for less money than other prime developers.
and did I mention their consistently lower impact on frame rates..?

I know many painters dont like the way they are skinned - but for me, all the other factors outweigh the penalty of not having a hundred repaints to choose from - I can always find a favorite in their included set of liveries.
I know some folks complain about their vc's looking dated or having less than ideal functionality - but to me, they are so finely modeled and provide typically adequate functionality as to render those complaints moot.

My prime motivation, when it comes to selecting a 3rd party aircraft is Frame Rate Impact - and so far, Alabeo and Carenado have not been any trouble

at the end of the story - it doesnt matter to me how much I like the look of a plane, or what kind of radar or auto pilot it has, in FSX, if it slows the PC, causes stutters and or render lag - it does not get flown..

[fsxar177]

Sounds like there's potentially a RealAir product that you don't yet have, that would certainly suit your needs...

- Joseph

[pilottj]

personally, I would wait for the A2A Comanche which is should be released within a week or two. If you have to have something now, the RealAir Legacy might be what you are looking for.

I find A2A's frame rates to be quite reasonable despite the system depth. For instance I got similar frames in the Cherokee compared to the Alabeo DA40 and the Cherokee is much more in depth. Comparing the two is like comparing a really good meat pie (A2A) with lots of meat, veggies and lots of other yummy ingerdients inside, very filling, while the Alabeo is like a pretty looking pie that is really just a pretty looking shell with just some watered down bbq sauce inside. I really wanted to like the DA40 too, but its just a pretty looking shell with some fluff inside.

Alabeo/Carenado and A2A are kind of the opposite ends of the spectrum. From a flying experience compared to real flying, Alabeo/Carenado are like playing this game in 'god mode'. A2A is like playing a game with with the intent to really challenge yourself and learn/practice good pilot decision making. Find a plane that matches what you want to get out of FSX. There is nothing wrong with flying around in 'God Mode', and if you like it too, get an addon to fulfill that.

But like with Cody's thread earlier, it takes ALOT to produce any addon for FS. Alabeo/Carenado make what they make and I am grateful for them. They sell alot, and more power to them. Thankfully there are lots of choices out there to make everybody happy.

Cheers
TJ

[kiki]

Thanks, everyone ! Quite interesting to read your opinions.

RealAir Legacy ( is that what you meän, Joseph? I don't want to buy Duke "again" , no matter how good it is, and because I am looking for something else) and the next one from A2A are really interesting. But if I want something bigger (but smaller than Twin Otter), there seems to be limited selection of high quality products.

I need to think this over again. Well, it is kind of fun to make this window shopping.

[RyanJZ]

Honestly I think you should take a look at the Cessna 402, 441, and Mu-2. I have the first 2, and I fly the daylights out of the 441. From what I understand though, the Mu-2 is the best of those 3

[donnybalonny]

Yes the comanchee is, of course, interesting. Evererything from A2A and Realair is interesting. But its not what the original thread poster is looking for.
I personally feel the Last 3 flysimware products are "almost there". The things that take them down is the quality of the interior textures. But I feel that inmersion is very good.
I bought the C402 together with the Carenado B200. Both on a sale. I´ve used the C402 a lot and the B200 has had a max of 5 hours. Its not even installed anymore. The Carenado B200 looks better in the VC and outside textures, But the rest is clearly inferior.
And remember that the C441 is the same AC as the C404 Titan. "just" with Garreth turboprops which means better performance. So consider waiting and take one of the flysimware products when on a sale, which they are quite often.

[stansdds]

The C441 is also pressurized, so it can be flown at high altitudes without supplemental oxygen. Not something to worry about with Flight Simulator, but if you like realism and plan on high altitude flying, it's definitely worth considering the C441.

[kiki]

What about the blurry scenery - issue Flysimware C402 has had; are they solved with the C441?

[RyanJZ]

I have my scenery level of detail radius set to small already to keep my frames good (I only have an i3 processor), so I really don't notice much of an impact on scenery detail. Yes, the interior textures are a bit rough, but then we're also getting spoiled by all the really nice developers out there! What kind of flying are you looking to do? If you're regularly going to be doing 1000+ mile legs, go for the Cessna 441 or Mu-2, or if you want to spend a bit more, the Flight1 B200 or the Wilco Piaggio P180. The P180 has some nice features, but the pressurization system baffles me. Alternatively, if those are planes are too big, you might be interested in the Eaglesoft Piper Twin Comanche. There's a chance the Accusim Civilian P-51D might be right up you're ally! One of the big things that makes an addon feel realistic to me is sound, and A2A is the best in the business for sounds

[RyanJZ]

So whats the verdict on the new plane?

[fsxar177]

...Accusim Civilian P-51D might be right up you're ally! One of the big things that makes an addon feel realistic to me is sound, and A2A is the best in the business for sounds

Umm... that bird doesn't even have an external startup sound... ??


Pretty easy for a dev to do that..

Unfortunately, A2A doesn't with the 'Stang;

Exterior_Startup_Sound = 0
Able_to_Fly = 0
Support = 0


- Joseph

[RyanJZ]

You don't normally start an airplane from the outside though...

[heywooood]

Alabeo / Carenado = god mode..?

Do you mean that these models can be flown through the ground?...buildings..?...they walk on water?...turn that water to wine?...expect unconditional love?...something along those lines?

I dunno about that - but I like 'em anyway

I have A2A Cherokee, Piper Cub and C172 - they have the walk around, Accusim, and the other A2A enhancements, but it all comes with a (slight) penalty in performance (except for the Cub) making them, on my rig anyway, fair weather flyers only. And honestly - I don't mind changing the plugs and engine oil once in a while...but I don't NEED to do it either..to enjoy my flight simming experience


With Alabeo / Carenado - I can fly in almost all weather with no FPS problems at all.
Not wanting to change the OP's subject - just wondering again why, whenever this question is asked, Carenado / Alabeo get short shrift...is it because they ONLY do civilian GA ?

[heywooood]

You don't normally start an airplane from the outside though...

..sometimes you want to experience the start up from the flight line...especially when a warbird kicks over

[fsxar177]

Alabeo / Carenado = god mode..?

Do you mean that these models can be flown through the ground?...buildings..?...they walk on water?...turn that water to wine?...expect unconditional love?...something along those lines?

I dunno about that - but I like 'em anyway

I have A2A Cherokee, Piper Cub and C172 - they have the walk around, Accusim, and the other A2A enhancements, but it all comes with a (slight) penalty in performance (except for the Cub) making them, on my rig anyway, fair weather flyers only. And honestly - I don't mind changing the plugs and engine oil once in a while...but I don't NEED to do it either..to enjoy my flight simming experience


With Alabeo / Carenado - I can fly in almost all weather with no FPS problems at all.
Not wanting to change the OP's subject - just wondering again why, whenever this question is asked, Carenado / Alabeo get short shrift...is it because they ONLY do civilian GA ?

That GeeBee is among the prettiest, AND most entertaining aircraft to fly in my library. Probably the best bang for the buck that I've ever purchased!

- J

[donnybalonny]

FPS is so dependant on user machine that its very difficult to compare.
Carenado has over the years made some addons that were very hard on FPS. On my machine, the Carenado Gran Caravan is worse than the A2A Cherokee and its the standard instrument Caravan. The Glass panel HD caravan is a lot worse.

You dont have to like A2A, just as you dont have to change oil etc. You can just turn damage off. Its very simple, and then you can fly the A2A AC like you fly fly your Carenado addons with the only difference that the A2A has a flight dynamics engine that is 100 times more advanced. Try comparing the C172 and the Cherokee from both devellopers. Its like two different worlds. But each to his own. And no, this has nothing to do with civilian versus military addons.

[pilottj]

Alabeo / Carenado = god mode..?

Do you mean that these models can be flown through the ground?...buildings..?...they walk on water?...turn that water to wine?...expect unconditional love?...something along those lines?

I dunno about that - but I like 'em anyway

I have A2A Cherokee, Piper Cub and C172 - they have the walk around, Accusim, and the other A2A enhancements, but it all comes with a (slight) penalty in performance (except for the Cub) making them, on my rig anyway, fair weather flyers only. And honestly - I don't mind changing the plugs and engine oil once in a while...but I don't NEED to do it either..to enjoy my flight simming experience


With Alabeo / Carenado - I can fly in almost all weather with no FPS problems at all.
Not wanting to change the OP's subject - just wondering again why, whenever this question is asked, Carenado / Alabeo get short shrift...is it because they ONLY do civilian GA ?

My apologies, God Mode is a reference to common combat games, first person shooters...etc. It simply means that your character in the game can't die, no matter what you do. This is not a putdown of Alabeo, it is a choice.

In those combat games, you can choose to play in god in 'God Mode' or not. We have the same choice in FSX. Take the Carenado Seneca, an unpressurized twin, up to FL180 with no oxygen system...nothing happens. Take an Accusimmed Spitfire to FL180, take off the oxy mask...watch what happens. Exceed flap speeds, ignore systems checks, don't pay attention to flashing red lights in the Alabeo/Carenado...nothing happens, do those things in an accusimmed plane and see what happens....quite a difference. Start the engine on a cold or hot day, with engine cold or hot....Alabeo/Carenado....starts the same every single time.....Accusim, you better pay attention to ambient temp, whether the engine has been run before, oil type...etc

Again this is not a slight against Alabeo/Carenado....it is a choice I quite enjoy the Alabeo Waco. We flightsimmers have MANY choices There is nothing wrong with flying in a 'no consequence' environment. I enjoy no consequence flying too. I enjoy breaking FAA regulations in FSX LOL. Fk the draconian noise abatement procedures that we have to put up with in real life flying

Alabeo/Carenado represent complete 'no consequence' flying. A2A represents the other end of that spectrum, where all the decisions you make in the airplane have consequences. The other developers are somewhere in between that spectrum. You get to pick whatever styles as you want, 'God mode' or not, whatever works best for you.

Cheers
TJ

[RyanJZ]

Although the Carenado planes aren't particularly advanced, I still love them. They're perfect for that occasional relaxation flight where you just wanna fly around, admire scenery, get that $100 burger (unless you're in a twin. then I suppose it would be a $250 burger!!! ). Some of the models have many innaccuracies, but you can still accomplish a cross-country instrument flight if you want, flight characteristics are pretty good to just alright, depending on which plane you're talking about. The big reason I keep coming back to them though is that they will do planes no other developer has touched. I haven't seen anyone else develop a Seneca, a Cessna 340, or the C337, or the Piper Malibu family. (as far as I know, no one else has done these)

[kiki]

Thanks, everyone. I think I have made my choice. I will keep my credit card deep in my pocket. I don't buy airplanes just for to give them a try. There seems to be nothing in this category worth spending my money. Quite odd.

C441 was a close call, but with the poor looking graphics, it's not worth that price, IMHO. And no European repaints. If I find it on sale someday, it could be another story.

C402. Well, if not 441, why then the 402.

Alabeo Titan. People do have issues with autopilot, among other things.

Carenado? I did like the C185, but then I was sorry to buy c208 and b1900d, which were waste of money.

A2A Comanche is great, for sure. But, as already mentioned, it is not in the category what I was searhing.

[RyanJZ]

Kiki, what kind of flying were you planning on doing with your new plane anyway? In the real world, your "mission" parameters dictate what kind of plane you should be looking at. For instance, I do regular high altitude flights in IMC that can be anywhere from 800 miles to clear across the country. I'm always using the C441, the F1 B200, Piaggio P180, or a Sukhoi 80 if I wanna imagine I'm bringing the car along

[kiki]

Kiki, what kind of flying were you planning on doing with your new plane anyway? In the real world, your "mission" parameters dictate what kind of plane you should be looking at. For instance, I do regular high altitude flights in IMC that can be anywhere from 800 miles to clear across the country. I'm always using the C441, the F1 B200, Piaggio P180, or a Sukhoi 80 if I wanna imagine I'm bringing the car along

I wanted an aeroplane that would carry up to 10 customers or some cargo in the distance of...anything from 50 to 500 nm. And no jets, plz, but above the clouds. And, yes, faster than Twin Otter.