http://www.alabeo.com/index.php?acci...duct&correl=99
Ill pick it up tonight.
Glenn
http://www.alabeo.com/index.php?acci...duct&correl=99
Ill pick it up tonight.
Glenn
Lol I flew one back when i was working on my commercial and thats what we called it "gutlass".
As agpilot says, it was intentional. . The one I flew a time or two had a double tilt airframe. When I took off, the pilot's seat rotated a few degrees more than the rest of the airplane. If I remember right, the RG was worth only about 10 knots over the "down and bolted" airplane. I don't remember if it had a constant speed prop, but the intent was as an intro to a complex airplane.
Glenn
nice... the 'Gutless Cutlass' (heard that name a LOT of times at airfields before!) a worthy addition to my hangar! hope the Pipersport is next!
thanks for the H/U!
SYSTEM :
OS:Win7 Home Premium 64 bit UAC OFF!
DX version Dx10 with Steve's Fixer.
Processor:I5 4670k overclocked to 4.4 gHz with Corsair CW-9060008-WW hydro cooler
Motherboard:Z87
RAM:16 gig 1866 gigaHz Corsair ram
Video Card:MSI 1070 8 gig ram
HD:2Tb Samsung 850 evo SSD
To err is human; to forgive is divine
So.... how does it fly...
Ahh yes, the Gutlass, the only airplane I ever rode on where I felt uneasy. I was in the back seat observing an instructor/student. During his slow flight dirty manuvering, gear flaps down....full power would just maintain level lol. Sadly the 172RG was involved in ERAU Prescott's first fatalities. Felt much more comfortable in the 177RG. I even felt more comfortable as a passenger in a TU-154 LOL. Nonetheless, the Alabeo model looks like a fine rendition of the Gutlass, might grab during next year's Alabeo christmas sale.
Cheers
TJ
"The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Douglas Adams
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
What made it so bad power-wise? Adding the equipment for the retracts? I just assume that adding that kind of weight would basically cancel out much of the "at speed" benefits and almost all of the lower speed benefits, because of the added weight. Just guessing though, looking forward to whatever insight you may have. Wondering why it would be so much different than the "regular" 172.
The Cutlass is not bad at all performance wise. She's 20kts faster than the 172, climbs better and can carry a 190lbs higher load.
Last but not least the Alabeo version has a real classic cockpit, only VOR/DME and ADF, so IFR only for those who can really navigate!
I don't currently own any Alabeo products but this 172 looks very impressive (as do all their aircraft). I believe there is some kind of tie-in to a certain extent with Carenado and my question is to what degree of procedural operation can I expect with this 'plane - same as Carenado's or to A2A 's level ?
Appreciate any feedback and thank-you in advance
Alabeo planes are basically identical with Carenado planes but Alabeo does the systems/avionics wise less complex planes, e.g. no GPS in the Cutlass.
Ok, Bernt - many thanks for your reply, appreciate it
I have most of Alabeo's Planes, I usually ask myself why they don't spend just a little more time going over things before they release them.
It seems like they are in too much of a hurry to get them out.
This is one I will pass on, I know we're comparing apples and oranges, but I think I would constantly be comparing this plane with A2A's C-172.
Not hammering Alabeao, because I like their GeeBee and classic props, but I'll save a few more dollars and go for the A2A 172. Much more real simulation involvement.
Definite pass for me.. waiting on that c195. Hopefully it releases next Tuesday or so.
Any airplane is going to struggle more in hot and high conditions like summer in the AZ high desert, but the Gutlass seemed to struggle a little more than the 180hp 172FGs did. The 172RG is no doubt fine if you keep your weights low. I think had they used the Hawk XP's engine....the 210hp (or 195hp derated) Continental IO-360 the Cutlass might have been a better plane. Of course at that point you might as well pay for the 2 extra cylinders and 25 more HP in the a 182RG lol. A true 4 seater. Interestingly the Hawk XP made a much better float version of the 172 then did the standard Skyhawk.
With the 177RG, you have the same basic Lycoming O-360 engine uprated to 200HP, cleaner airframe with less drag...no wing struts.
Of course in FSX, we as simmers actually like the challenge of flying underpowered airplanes at MGTOW
For those on the fence with the Cutlass, I would just wait until it hits the F1 wrapper, that way you can return it if you don't like it.
I am definitely going for the Alabeo 195
Cheers
TJ
"The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - Douglas Adams
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Bookmarks