I really suggest ya´ll head to A2A site

[gajit]

and went into ensuring the Aircraft Factory Corsair was more than just a budget release that looked like a Corsair.

I should bleeping well hope so LOL - even freeware designers do that!!!!

 

[MenendezDiego]

Two more shots:

Regards, Diego

 

[Lewis-A2A]

Hey guys glad you are enjoying it.

Solar Eagle as we have posted we recongnise three types of customer and feel you fit into the Accu-sim area which is the opposite end of Aircraft Factory,.......


....The good news is Scott already has a date set with a corsair to get the needed hands on time for recordings etc which will give us the needed materials to produce an accu-sim pack to bring the Corsair up to and hopefully far beyond your expectations ,...

 

[Lewis-A2A]

Hey guys glad you are enjoying it.

Solar Eagle as we have posted we recongnise three types of customer and have brought three product lines out to cater for as many as possible. I feel you fit into the Accu-sim area which is the opposite end of Aircraft Factory,.......


....The good news is Scott already has a date set with a corsair to get the needed hands on time for recordings etc which will give us the needed materials to produce an accu-sim pack to bring the Corsair up to and hopefully far beyond your expectations

 

[SirBenn21]

Is it just me or are there no sounds for all the switches and knobs in the cockpit?
I've mucked around in the cockpit to see where everything is and noticed the no sound thing.

Ben

 

[rwmarth]

Looks fantastic!

 

[gajit]

Is it just me or are there no sounds for all the switches and knobs in the cockpit?
I've mucked around in the cockpit to see where everything is and noticed the no sound thing.

Ben

Looks like we will have to pay extra for all that in the accusim version

 

[some1]

Is it just me or are there no sounds for all the switches and knobs in the cockpit?
I've mucked around in the cockpit to see where everything is and noticed the no sound thing.

Ben

From all A2A products, sounds for all switches and knobs are currently only in the P47 Razorback with Accusim. That's not standard FSX feature.

 

[SpaceWeevil]

I have found that the FS warbird simmer is a lot less demanding on how an aircraft looks and flies than a combat sim enthusiast. I think the problem lies in the fact that in FS if it looks decent for screenshots then the average FS simmer is more than happy. So many FS warbird addons over the years have had utterly attrocious FMs. Yet still FS simmers think they are amazing. If aircraft performance is out by the same massive amount in a combat sim then the combat sim enthusiast will not be a happy simmer and they will let the developer know it! So I think you are correct when you state "not everybody is so demanding!". At least not in FS9/FSX warbird circles.

People here are very unforgiving about sloppy visuals so I don't agree with the first bit. You're dead right that a lot of FS warbird FMs have been poor, but is it generally accepted that CFS flight models are better? It's a genuine question as I've never been near CFS; I would have thought that the 'combat' part would demand something a bit simpler to make any sort of game out of it but I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[glennc]

My feeling is that the Corsair is approximately equal to the WOP2 series. Which isn't bad at all.

As far the the textures being "cartoony", I have no doubt the usual paint shops will fix that. Besides, I really like the Marine version.

As far as the flight model, I was also a Test Pilot. I've spent more than a few hours in it. Of course, I've never flown anything like that for real, but too me it is very "believeable". My view of warbird flying in FSX is that I am flying a museum or airshow airplane, not a combat version.

That's what was behind my earlier comment to the stall characteristics. The word from a real Corsair pilot about stalls as "don't".

Glenn

 

[ICDP]

I should bleeping well hope so LOL - even freeware designers do that!!!!

Very true, if it's payware it should be more than just a decent 3D model. Unfortunately not all payware meets that criteria. Many many payware releases have nothing but a very good 3D model and pit while the rest is utterly forgettable.

This is just my opinion and nothing to do with A2A.

 

[ICDP]

People here are very unforgiving about sloppy visuals so I don't agree with the first bit. You're dead right that a lot of FS warbird FMs have been poor, but is it generally accepted that CFS flight models are better? It's a genuine question as I've never been near CFS; I would have thought that the 'combat' part would demand something a bit simpler to make any sort of game out of it but I'm happy to be corrected.

Sorry SpaceWeevil, I should have specified I was not referring to the CFS FMs specifically, just combat simmers attitudes in general. They will not forgive a very poor FM as readily as a FS9/FSX simmer will as there is no combat in FS.

 

[6297J]

I'll pass but I'm still very excited about that Cub which I'm guessing is now next in line?

 

[Blade124]

The Cub is well on its way at the moment, yes. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
<o></o>
GlennC, thank you for the comments on the FM. We created this FM ourselves from scratch in preparation for Accu-Sim. Now that the weather is warming up, we will soon get inside a flyable Corsair and also re-visit the P51.<o></o>
<o> </o>
Scott.<o></o>

 

[Gregory Paul]

I too did not like the sound that came with it. I find these better.
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/index.php?lloc=downloads&loc=downloads&page=info&FileID=4469

 

[Roger]

I'd like to try Lawdog's sounds but the download doesn't work at the moment.

 

[dswo]

Bump mapping?

 

[vstudios]

Regarding flight models, I guess the FDE guys read from the true numbers, and to simulate an aircrafts flight model without ever flying one is indeed a big task. I hear lots of people say this and that's wrong regarding handling, however - without being so lucky as to flying one is indeed questionable, I guess you too are all reading the true numbers from relative media, is your findings a guestimate, or have you flown the aircraft in question. This is not a rant or jab at anyones ribs, just an observation.

 

[Barvan40]

Bump mapping?

Yep...

 

[PRB]

Ok, this flight model debate is interesting. A statement was made that combat simmers, in general, are more picky about flight model accuracy than “FS” simmers, who are more interested in “eye candy” and switches that go “click!” when you click on them. If this is really true I would be very surprised. I don’t know if there is any way to verify the accuracy of such a statement. Many simmers fly both combat and civil type sims. I’ve seen some pretty nasty “food fights” in the combat sim forums over FM accuracy, and to make an equally general statement, it’s been my observation that the more accurate the combat sim flight model is, the more irritated the combat simmers get, because you can’t just yank and bank any WW-II fighter around the sky with reckless abandon and not experience accelerated stalls and serious loss of energy.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
Which leads to another question. If FS simmers don’t care as much about flight models as combat simmers, does it follow that FS flight models are less accurate than those of combat sims? There’s no way I will believe that one. I know too many flight model people around here who spend a lot of time getting the flight models of their WW-II FS sim planes right. I’m not quite ready to conclude that they don’t know what they’re doing, as compared to their combat sim FM maker counterparts.
<o></o>
I have both the RealFlight Hellcat, and now this new F4U Corsair. I can’t tell if the flight model is wrong on either one of them. One who has flown them probably could, but I can’t. I do like both planes, inside and out.