Leaderboard

It depends what one is 'training'. If it's how to use complex avionics .. then most of the planes in X-Plane will fail. For some aspects of procedural training it does no better or worse than any other X-Plane aircraft. You're already hamstrung by sitting in front of a monitor pretending to fly an airplane. I thinks it is possible to become overly anal-retentive about these things. It's similar to people who think they have usable infantry skills because they play a complex first person shooter . However!! I take your point about expectations re performance parameters .. well ... how they're represented in sim anyhow.

Arrogant? I think its the other way around Besides nobody takes you seriously.... By the way, the new King-Air looks amazing! I particularly love the style of their textures, I don't know how to describe it...but it has a crisp metallic feel.

File Name: KLM-Cityhopper Saab 340A File Submitter: Leen de Jager File Submitted: 24 Oct 2013 File Category: Heavy Metal X-Plane Version(s): X-Plane 10 Livery For: Click Here For Aircraft KLM-Cityhopper livery for the Saab 340 by L.E.S ( a paint by Leen "Flybike" de Jager ) When I started making liveries for this great bird, I did not start making this Cityhopper. Why?I am Dutch afterall. The main reason was the fact , the paint sceme was not exiting my brushes. Now having done seventeen liveries.....( and having many requests for it)...........at last here it is. Number eighteen, the KLM-Cityhopper., Unzip KLM-Cityhopper.zip into a temp. folder Place the folder LDJ-KLM-Cityhopper-HighRes or LDJ-KLM-Cityhopper-LowRes in the liveries folder of the aircraft. Enjoy! Leen de Jager http://www.flybike-paints.nl Click here to download this file

For beginners, what a laugh. My instructor has 10,000 hours already and is an ATPL holder with a CFI-I rating. He is a qualified examiner under CAD HK. My ground school classmates? Well let me tell you, have definitely will have more airmanship than you do Peter. So tell me:Principles of gyroscopic instruments What is a vacuum instrument system? What is deep stall? What is the Coriolis effect? What is P-Factor and how does it work? How to calculate drift angle? What is 60 to 1 rule? What does "RVSM" stand for? What is class G airspace? Does radio signals travel faster across land or sea? What is the minimum altitude for the Shek Kong Area? So peter, tell me all the KingAirs are great and I can only hope Carenado can make the flight model extremely accurate. They nailed the looks but they should seriously re think their flight model. The polygons on their models are highly optimized and that's great. The airfoils do need some makeovers. Don't forget Dan already told all of us that Carenado does NOT provide training level aircraft. I repeat, DOES NOT! I still will not fly Carenado though, I am afraid it will give me bad habits. I am really not interested in this area of study, however a simple google search will suffice and give enough detailed information. I am looking forward to this king air... And I hope to contribute to this community in a positive way, however you seemed to ruin things quite a bit...but that's my take. When I said it must be for beginners, that was a massive sarcasm quote. If you don't tell which is sarcasm and which isn't, there's a sign that you have brain damage. http://indianapublicmedia.org/amomentofscience/comprehending-sarcasm/ You have my condolences. (Sarcasm in case you don't have the power to process it) Let's draw this to a close, we both have different expertise, mine on add on development, you on your "aircraft training in the Hong Kong aviation club" whatsoever...and "military training"

Cali - Colombia (SKCL)

A quick flight before work.

Hong Kong...Hong Kong...Hong Kong Aviation club.... stahp D: the tomahawk is great! Chadler's planes are used by Cirrus...

Bentley Mulsanne, named after a straight in the Le Mans raceway where the drivers reach their highest speeds, kinda cheeky name for a car that is as huge as the Mulsanne

You guys there is a finominal new one on the .org with a 3d cockpit to. If you look you will find it. I wanted one to since I flew it over the summer and the one in XP is very acurate. That is the only aircraft I have flown myself and I loved it!

I agree with you Ntr09... I never use any stock Carenado anymore " out of the box " ... they have to pass in the Plane Maker customization house before I really use them ... Working on any Carenado on 1h30-2h ( flight tests included ) is generally enough to get a plane that flies like the real thing. Most of the time, I have to edit control surfaces deflection values, as well as ratio of control surface over wing chord... sometimes it's airfoils , sometimes it's settings related to overall airframe inertia, Cx, wing incidence etc ... it really depends on the plane. But now, I can't pretend to be certified on the real C208 for instance, but what I did in PM gave me a more " realistic " feel that what came out of the box initially .. for example, with 90% of the aileron travel, it generally makes the plane roll quite a lot ! while in default planes, it's like if the whole flight model was " calmed down " by some unvisible rails, giving incredible slow roll rate. I'm convinced they know how the real thing behaves, but the initials settings are probably made to satisfy most of the people with " on rails " flight behaviors ... You know, a real GA plane is NOT easy to fly when you want to make all maneuvers done the right way and precisely... it could be frustrating for simmers to take time to really learn the " behind the scene " effects that makes a real airplane not so easy to fly as it sounds to be ... So, I assume picking up a plane and fly around to enjoy sceneries for example is the purpose of these very eye candy planes ! Then, as I said, when correctly re-worked in PM, they can become real training material ... at least regarding flight dynamics ! Nothing worth a deep Gizmo-ed/SASL-ed powered systems... but if they would work as much on any of their convertion we would see a Carenado every year... while we got a lot of more ! In a nutschell, I would say it's the good compromise they found

You entirely missed my point ointment, my comment has nothing to do with price or "control loading". I just want it to fly like the real thing. Let's take the C152 for a simple example: In a real 152, a 3nm descent to final would require 2 notches of flaps and throttle pulled out, creating an appropriate 60KIAS glide. With the Carenado C152, on the same approach with 2 notches of flaps, you will need more than 1500rpm of power in order to maintain 60KIAS. When you look into the issue, Carenado has used the wrong airfoils. Possibly so as to get the cruise speed right, but therefore sacrificing proper performance in other stages of flight. They've applied a band-aid to cover up the problem instead of taking the time to engineer the model to fly properly, as we know is quite possible in X-Plane. With that said, if Carenado made their aircraft to perform very realistically, I would be willing to pay DOUBLE the current prices. -NR

So, in your opinion, which X-Plane aircraft DO fly right? Tell me one developer who sells "training level" aircraft for under $35. There aren't any. I think Carenado, along with the rest of the X-Plane developers, do a pretty good job of recreating the flight experience within the constraints of the X-Plane software. If you say Carenado planes don't fly right, then I say there isn't any plane that flies "right" in X-Plane. I think the following excerpt from a thread in the PilotEdge forums can apply here: "I still think that as long as you treat the sim as its own unique aircraft, as opposed to being a real 172, Piper or Cirrus, and fly it on its own merits, then all works out well."

(SKRG) Medellin - Colombia

Absolutely Kris ! Would love every turboprop of that kind to come out ... even B1900 !