Download PC games, player game reviews, new and classic, latest PC games, read walkthrough hints, cheats

Visit our forum and leave your questions, hints, propositions. Get answered on every question.
search
 •  Downloadable PC Software  •  CD DVD Games  • 
PC games download, read game reviews
contact us | submit | help
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch       Log inLog in

A2A Cessna 172 - My Review

 
Goto page 1, 2, 3
   TerraGame Forums (Home) -> Flight-Sim RSS
Next:  Ambasciatore_~di_Camorra~_a_Panama:_Giancarlo_Mar..  
Author Message
Randy L

External


Since: Sep 21, 2011
Posts: 37



(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:59 pm
Post subject: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review
Archived from groups: alt>games>microsoft>flight-sim (more info?)

How could I not spend the $49 on this aircraft? I have logged about 100
hours in C-172's, most of those hours in the older models, but many of those
hours in the fuel injected R model. Here is what I like about the A2A Cessna
172 Trainer product...
I really appreciate how I can now use the real fuel injected C172R
primer procedure to get the aircrafts engine started. No other FSX C172 that
I have found acts like this. I love that you can move the GPS from the
instrument panel to a windshield mounted model on the left side of the
windshield. This Garmin GPS 295 is close enough to the pilotf face in the
virtual cockpit to actually be readable and useful, and it is not in the way
of any other instrument. I appreciate that every knob, switch, indicator,
lever, and control is exactly where it is in real life. The 3D cockpit is
beautiful, and looks just like the one I used to fly-- except that the A2A
cockpit is much, MUCH cleaner!!
I love being able to do a pre-flight walkaround and check the oil, the
fuel quality, the aileron and flap hinges, etc, etc.
The A2A C172 flies like I remember the real Cessna flying. It handles
differently according to how much weight I load into it, and how warm the
air is outside (density altitude). I love the fact that if you are not
careful you can foull a sparkplug - and "clear" it too. The turn rate, rate
of climb, rate of descent, cruise speed, and V-speeds all seem to be right
where I remember them being.
All-in-all this has got to be the most realistic aircraft for FSX that I
have ever flown. If you are a real Cessna driver, or want to get the
experience of flying a real C172, then you will really appreciate this
aircraft. The only criticism I have of this aircraft is the manual. Some
will like its colorful "magazine brochure" like interface. I woupld have
much preferred a regular POH style. Instead of a handwritten checklist for
this aircraft, I would have preferred a more professional printed version.
There is a real learning curve on this aircraft, but if you have logged any
time in a real C172 then most things will be familiar.

Take care...

Randy L.

--
A difference that makes no difference,
is no difference.
Back to top
Login to vote
Varmit

External


Since: Aug 15, 2013
Posts: 13



(Msg. 2) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:07 am
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Are you getting the "stuck in honey" acceleration problem even at default
airports?

--
Varmit
Back to top
Login to vote
Danny

External


Since: Aug 14, 2013
Posts: 57



(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:00 am
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I have it, too, Randy. I have never flown as a Pilot, but I do enjoy, for
the time being, some of the 'chores' needed to get it started and airborne.

Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg and
'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that was
changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness. Seemed odd
that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set it to 0.25
and will test that for a few flights.

Getting some tips from this Pilot guy in Big D.

Thus far my Hobbs is showing 8.3 hours. It is definitely a cool plane.

Danny












"Randy L" wrote in message


How could I not spend the $49 on this aircraft? I have logged about 100
hours in C-172's, most of those hours in the older models, but many of those
hours in the fuel injected R model. Here is what I like about the A2A Cessna
172 Trainer product...
I really appreciate how I can now use the real fuel injected C172R
primer procedure to get the aircrafts engine started. No other FSX C172 that
I have found acts like this. I love that you can move the GPS from the
instrument panel to a windshield mounted model on the left side of the
windshield. This Garmin GPS 295 is close enough to the pilotf face in the
virtual cockpit to actually be readable and useful, and it is not in the way
of any other instrument. I appreciate that every knob, switch, indicator,
lever, and control is exactly where it is in real life. The 3D cockpit is
beautiful, and looks just like the one I used to fly-- except that the A2A
cockpit is much, MUCH cleaner!!
I love being able to do a pre-flight walkaround and check the oil, the
fuel quality, the aileron and flap hinges, etc, etc.
The A2A C172 flies like I remember the real Cessna flying. It handles
differently according to how much weight I load into it, and how warm the
air is outside (density altitude). I love the fact that if you are not
careful you can foull a sparkplug - and "clear" it too. The turn rate, rate
of climb, rate of descent, cruise speed, and V-speeds all seem to be right
where I remember them being.
All-in-all this has got to be the most realistic aircraft for FSX that I
have ever flown. If you are a real Cessna driver, or want to get the
experience of flying a real C172, then you will really appreciate this
aircraft. The only criticism I have of this aircraft is the manual. Some
will like its colorful "magazine brochure" like interface. I woupld have
much preferred a regular POH style. Instead of a handwritten checklist for
this aircraft, I would have preferred a more professional printed version.
There is a real learning curve on this aircraft, but if you have logged any
time in a real C172 then most things will be familiar.

Take care...

Randy L.

--
A difference that makes no difference,
is no difference.
Back to top
Login to vote
sambodidley

External


Since: Mar 08, 2013
Posts: 166



(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:00 am
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message

>I have it, too, Randy. I have never flown as a Pilot, but I do enjoy, for
>the time being, some of the 'chores' needed to get it started and airborne.
>
> Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg
> and 'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that
> was changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness. Seemed
> odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set it to
> 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>
> Getting some tips from this Pilot guy in Big D.
>
> Thus far my Hobbs is showing 8.3 hours. It is definitely a cool plane.
>
> Danny

Isn't it odd,that with a staff of world renowned pilots on their
development team, one would need to go into the files and edit an
accu-something super realistic aircraft just to fly it? Boggles the mind,
doesn't it?
Sam
Back to top
Login to vote
Gregory

External


Since: Jun 01, 2009
Posts: 736



(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:24 am
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 00:00:23 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg and
>'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that was
>changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness. Seemed odd
>that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set it to 0.25
>and will test that for a few flights.

Well.. it's not exactly MS Ground Simulator. Smile

The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
personal preference? See what others think about it.


-G
Back to top
Login to vote
Vic Baron

External


Since: Jun 01, 2009
Posts: 649



(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:13 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"sambodidley" wrote in message

>
> "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>>I have it, too, Randy. I have never flown as a Pilot, but I do enjoy, for
>>the time being, some of the 'chores' needed to get it started and
>>airborne.
>>
>> Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg
>> and 'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that
>> was changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness.
>> Seemed odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set
>> it to 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>>
>> Getting some tips from this Pilot guy in Big D.
>>
>> Thus far my Hobbs is showing 8.3 hours. It is definitely a cool plane.
>>
>> Danny
>
> Isn't it odd,that with a staff of world renowned pilots on their
> development team, one would need to go into the files and edit an
> accu-something super realistic aircraft just to fly it? Boggles the mind,
> doesn't it?
> Sam


With all due respect guys, how can someone who has not flown the a/c IRL
make a judgment that the "ground steering is way to unresponsive"? THAT is
what boggles my mind. We all tweak to OUR personal preferences but that
does not mean the developer was wrong. If you've ever flown IRL you may
remember how unresponsiove the yoke can be. You may remember wing loading
that makes it more difficult to bank and other real life feelings that are
difficult to model. The ground steering on most FSX models is way TOO
responsive IMHO, especially if there's a surface wind.

Vic
Back to top
Login to vote
nm5k

External


Since: Oct 20, 2012
Posts: 41



(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:46 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Monday, September 9, 2013 11:17:46 AM UTC-5, Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 11:36:30 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Seemed odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 .
>
> >I set it to 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
>
> >values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
>
> >personal preference? See what others think about it.
>
> >
>
>
>
> A scalar of 0.0?
>
>
>
> It has been YEARS since looking at the SDK's.
>
>
>
> A zero scalar would make every and any other value equal to zero,
>
> or it would disable the scalar, making it ineffectual. Not sure!
>
>
>
> So then.. wouldn't a 0.25 value make the response 4x time worse?
>
> There was never any confusion at this basic level in the past.
>
>
>
> I'm confounded Danny. Scalar away!! Smile
>
>
>
>
>
> -G

Not sure how 0.0 will effect an air file setting..
Normally, if you had a number set in the air file,
and it was correct, and you liked it, you would not
have it even listed in the cfg file.
So I'm not sure if 0.0 in the cfg would overide the
air file and make it zero or near zero, or if it
would be ignored and the air file setting used as is..
Don't get me to lying.. Neutral
One thing I had heard about the A2A 172 on other sites
was many had thought the torque effect was less than
real world.
Back to top
Login to vote
nm5k

External


Since: Oct 20, 2012
Posts: 41



(Msg. 8) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:02 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Monday, September 9, 2013 11:46:37 AM UTC-5, nm... DeleteThis @wt.net wrote:
> On Monday, September 9, 2013 11:17:46 AM UTC-5, Gregory wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 11:36:30 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
>
> >
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > >Seemed odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 .
>
> >
>
> > >I set it to 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
>
> >
>
> > >values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
>
> >
>
> > >personal preference? See what others think about it.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A scalar of 0.0?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > It has been YEARS since looking at the SDK's.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A zero scalar would make every and any other value equal to zero,
>
> >
>
> > or it would disable the scalar, making it ineffectual. Not sure!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So then.. wouldn't a 0.25 value make the response 4x time worse?
>
> >
>
> > There was never any confusion at this basic level in the past.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I'm confounded Danny. Scalar away!! Smile
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -G
>
>
>
> Not sure how 0.0 will effect an air file setting..
>
> Normally, if you had a number set in the air file,
>
> and it was correct, and you liked it, you would not
>
> have it even listed in the cfg file.
>
> So I'm not sure if 0.0 in the cfg would overide the
>
> air file and make it zero or near zero, or if it
>
> would be ignored and the air file setting used as is..
>
> Don't get me to lying.. Neutral
>
> One thing I had heard about the A2A 172 on other sites
>
> was many had thought the torque effect was less than
>
> real world.

Another thang.. Normally when I see a cfg that has flight
settings, and they are neutral, they are usually set as 1.0.
I was thinking "1.0" left the air file setting neutral, but
I'd have to test it to know for sure..
Back to top
Login to vote
Varmit

External


Since: Aug 16, 2013
Posts: 28



(Msg. 9) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:05 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

sambodidley wrote:

> Isn't it odd,that with a staff of world renowned pilots on their
> development team, one would need to go into the files and edit an
> accu-something super realistic aircraft just to fly it? Boggles the
> mind, doesn't it?

Indeed!!!!!!



--
Varmit
Back to top
Login to vote
Gregory

External


Since: Jun 01, 2009
Posts: 736



(Msg. 10) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:18 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 23:51:50 -0500, "sambodidley"
wrote:

> Isn't it odd,that with a staff of world renowned pilots on their
>development team, one would need to go into the files and edit
>an accu-something super realistic aircraft just to fly it? Boggles
>the mind, doesn't it?


In their defense, it takes a long time and a lot of work to verify the
flight model is "accurate and similar" to the real thing. Not EVERY
function or parameter can be scrutinized before release. First you
have the 'Glider' portion to tune, then the 'Motor' portion. I'd say
the Elevator trim and elevator moments don't affect the Motor part
much, so they are of less priority.

I don't have a TABLE readily available for Elevator control and trim
functions, but we can look at the Rudder table as an example.


There are (at least) THREE factors that determine how the A/C reacts
to control inputs.. in this case Pitch Moment due to Elevator Input

1) The Pitch Moment vs EL coeff in the Pri Aero section, AIR file
2) The Elevator Effectivity value vs Elevator (stick) Input
3) The Effectiveness Scalar in the Aircraft CFG file


Here's a typical Effectivity Table from the AIR file...

http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/Rec343_rudder_chart.png


The values are in Radians, so another tables is generated in Degrees
for ease of plotting. The selection in RED is burned into the AIR file
AFTER it's tweaked.

You can see the "response" of the control can be tailored to either a
"roll-off" or a "super-sensitive" relation vs stick input. This can be
done digitally in modern A/C with flight control computers.


So you have the 1) Pitch Moment: Cm_de, the 2) Effectivity table vs
Stick displacement in the AIR file, and the 3) Pitch Scalar in the CFG
file all working together.


Here's an overview of the "supposed" or "decoded" SD's in FS.

http://home.comcast.net/~flightsim/SD_overview.htm


Did someone put Jerry and/or Ron "out of business"? referring to the
AIR Decode forum and its content?


The best thing to do... is to go on the A2A forums and post the issue.
Tell (or ask) them to verify the Pitch moments you have an issue with.



-G
Back to top
Login to vote
Danny

External


Since: Aug 14, 2013
Posts: 57



(Msg. 11) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:36 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

I say "...too unresponsive" in my post, not 'totally unresponsive". I
should have said ground steering is not responsive enough." And I would
think that
at whatever level the responsiveness was set by A2A, many users will find
that level is either not enough, too much, way too much, and so on.





"Gregory" wrote in message


On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 00:00:23 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg
>and
>'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that was
>changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness. Seemed odd
>that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set it to 0.25
>and will test that for a few flights.

Well.. it's not exactly MS Ground Simulator. Smile

The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
personal preference? See what others think about it.


-G
Back to top
Login to vote
sambodidley

External


Since: Mar 08, 2013
Posts: 166



(Msg. 12) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:36 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message

>I say "...too unresponsive" in my post, not 'totally unresponsive". I
>should have said ground steering is not responsive enough." And I would
>think that
> at whatever level the responsiveness was set by A2A, many users will find
> that level is either not enough, too much, way too much, and so on.

I'll probably never know how this accu-something steers on the ground,
but if it is anything like how their J3 steered it's a joke. No real plane
ever took a half acre of room to make a 180 turn, with full throttle blasts
all the way around.
The flight dynamics were off too. The glide descent rate was way too
slow. I needed to start my final a half mile out from the threshold to get
it down on the numbers. I would have never been able to land my real J3 on
some of the little patches I used if it flew anything like this
accu-something did out of the box. I fixed this one so I could fly it but I
won't repeat that mistake again. I'll just pass on this one.
Sam
Back to top
Login to vote
Gregory

External


Since: Jun 01, 2009
Posts: 736



(Msg. 13) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:17 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 11:36:30 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Seemed odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 .
>I set it to 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>
>
>The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
>values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
>personal preference? See what others think about it.
>

A scalar of 0.0?

It has been YEARS since looking at the SDK's.

A zero scalar would make every and any other value equal to zero,
or it would disable the scalar, making it ineffectual. Not sure!

So then.. wouldn't a 0.25 value make the response 4x time worse?
There was never any confusion at this basic level in the past.

I'm confounded Danny. Scalar away!! Smile


-G
Back to top
Login to vote
sambodidley

External


Since: Mar 08, 2013
Posts: 166



(Msg. 14) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:17 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"Gregory" wrote in message

> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 11:36:30 -0400, "Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Seemed odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 .
>>I set it to 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>>
>>
>>The effectiveness lines (and others) in the CFG scale or 'tweak' the
>>values hard-wired in the AIR file. Are you sure it's unresponsive? or
>>personal preference? See what others think about it.
>>
>
> A scalar of 0.0?
>
> It has been YEARS since looking at the SDK's.
>
> A zero scalar would make every and any other value equal to zero,
> or it would disable the scalar, making it ineffectual. Not sure!
>
> So then.. wouldn't a 0.25 value make the response 4x time worse?
> There was never any confusion at this basic level in the past.
>
> I'm confounded Danny. Scalar away!! Smile
>
>
> -G

But you do have some real snazzy passengers and you get to change your
oil and clean your spark plugs, kick your tires and rattle your flaps. Some
people are just hard to please.<ggggg>
Sam
Back to top
Login to vote
Danny

External


Since: Aug 14, 2013
Posts: 57



(Msg. 15) Posted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:54 pm
Post subject: Re: A2A Cessna 172 - My Review [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

There is some validity to what you say, Sam. I checked over 10 planes in
my hanger, payware, freeware, and default. Not one of them had
Elevator_effectiveness_trim=0. Many were set to =1.0, one plane was =2.05
and another plane was = 0.55, but not one was set to zero. A2A might have
something in the Model file to handle that and the line in the config file
is not needed. I do not know. I'm not a developer.

The developer's personal preferences always come into the design, no doubt.
Imagine, Sam, for a minute, that YOU developed an airplane. Then you had
other well qualified people test it over many flights, reporting their
findings so YOU could tweak and perfect it.

When it got perfected to the level that YOU and your testers believed it is
now as near the way the I remember the real thing flew back in the 50s,
you release it to the market and the eagerly awaiting masses. Remember,
too, that those each user has a different system than the one on which you
developed the plane, and their mileage may vary.

Would you believe there is a high probability or a low probability that
every one of those who bought your plane, would believe YOUR settings were
perfect for them? How would you respond when the negativity started to
flow in? Those 13 year "Rivet Counters" would start to flood the forums
with complaints that your "piece of sh!t plane" has 20 rivets on the third
spar on each wing and the real plane only had 18 rivets. You can count on
that stuff...it would happen.

A2A has a loyal following and I feel confident A2A did try diligently to
"get it right". No reason not to, right? But I doubt A2A had any
expectations of perfection on initial release. A2A is responsive to users
input, within reason. They can not 'fix' every complaint from every user,
but they are responsive, none the less.

Beta testers capture the major bugs and a few minor bugs. But, hundreds of
users, with different systems, different conflicting software, payware,
scenery....are better than 10 beta testers when it comes to what final
tweaks are needed. A2A has even admitted to the J3 Tail-wheel concerns that
one prominent member of the AGMFS newsgroup pointed out. But to say the
tail wheel was a big problem with the loyal A2A Cub users, (who never flew
a real Cub as you had), well.....it wasn't a problem to them.

I can say that a few lines in that C-172 aircraft.cfg were a bit strange.
When I bought it, I never gave one thought to whether or not it is going to
be perfect. But, the fact it is not perfect, gives me something to do as
we try to mold and shape it into what I find to be good or better handling
characteristics, and, at the same time...using my aging brain to re-think
their values and keep my brain sharp(er). I never liked those books with
the 'find a word' puzzles, or the Sudoku word games for brain stimuli.

Cut them a little slack. I believe you have one A2A plane. The J3 Cub. I
have the P40, P47, P51, B17, Spitfire, J3 Cub, and the newest C-172. I
consider myself one of their loyal followers, and one who has never piloted
a plane. There is no way I would ever have been able to detect that
inaccurate tail-wheel action that you picked up on immediately. If you
tried those other planes that I have in my hanger, it is likely you could
find inaccuracies in each of them as well. Sometimes I am glad to just be a
fat, dumb and happy simmer!

Love ya, Sam. Don't get into plane development. It is a vicious world out
there!
Danny








"sambodidley" wrote in message



"Danny" <drmckee_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message

>I have it, too, Randy. I have never flown as a Pilot, but I do enjoy, for
>the time being, some of the 'chores' needed to get it started and airborne.
>
> Ground steering is way too unresponsive. I did go into the aircraft.cfg
> and 'fix' a few things...nose wheel steering being one of the things that
> was changed, as well as elevator_trim and elevator effectiveness. Seemed
> odd that elevator_trim_effectiveness would be set to 0.0 . I set it to
> 0.25 and will test that for a few flights.
>
> Getting some tips from this Pilot guy in Big D.
>
> Thus far my Hobbs is showing 8.3 hours. It is definitely a cool plane.
>
> Danny

Isn't it odd,that with a staff of world renowned pilots on their
development team, one would need to go into the files and edit an
accu-something super realistic aircraft just to fly it? Boggles the mind,
doesn't it?
Sam
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Cessna C210 for FSX - I needs. I has a C206 and C182RG (both from Carenado) but I NEED a C210 :-) Any ideas? Payware even. Cheers, David "Self Santa" Varidel

Cessna Trim Wheel for Flight Simulator - http://tinyurl.com/7qw2fes Price: $49.95 I've always wanted something like this.. may have to buy myself a present. -- Dallas

video Cessna engine failure at takeoff - http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=130_1351268464 He never announced his problem over the radio. Tom in Tucson

Followup on Saitek Cessna Trim Wheel cal - FYI if considering the Saitek Trim Wheel: As mentioned before, my only problem with the Wheel since getting it ten days ago, has been the calibration, or lack thereof...... Today it just didn't want to wake up for a flight in the Super Cub, so figured...

Review: Google Chrome - Looks pretty much like Internet Explorer.. just a little lighter/cleaner/simpler. Yeah, it is faster... it kinda snaps up web pages. I put the stop watch to it and IE tested a list of exactly the same (11) pages: Chrome: 30.3 seconds Internet..
       TerraGame Forums (Home) -> Flight-Sim All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada)
Goto page 1, 2, 3
Page 1 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum