• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

A2A Accusim Feature: Is It Really Worth It?

I think Accusim is well worth the extra $$.When I look in my Hangar at all the payware aircraft I've only used 3 or 4 times and got bored or frustrated with because things don't work right or are modeled very poorly...

..Then in actuality Accusim is very cheap for me because I get so much enjoyment and immersion from it.

One of my favorite things to do in FSX is take-off from Orbx PNW Darrington Municiple Airport in The A2A Accu-Simmed Spitfire MkII with a few bad cylinders.

I love to lean my head out the side of the aircraft and see that white/blueish smoke bellowing from the exhaust!! I can almost smell the burning oil as the Big V-12 Merlin sputters and kicks done the runway!!!:jump:

For me, A2A Accu-sim Aircraft= Priceless!!
 
So it's worth the extra money if you are a "by the book" simmer? I'm not a real pilot, but I have taken one lesson. Does that mean that I won't be able to handle the accusim pack? The instructor said that I was a good potential pilot, but I'm horrible at flying on the sim. (Full throttle and pray that I don't crash :icon_lol:.) I am interested in buying the P-47, but it seems that my throttle settings just might be dangerous....

Walter :jump:
 
the P-47 is the hard one to fly the other A2A planes are much more friendly:salute:

i flow the A2A P-47 from ksfo to ksea and it kept me on top of the plane the full flight

was so tired after i didnt fly it on flights just around the airport lol:salute:
 
Walter said:
So it's worth the extra money if you are a "by the book" simmer? I'm not a real pilot, but I have taken one lesson. Does that mean that I won't be able to handle the accusim pack? The instructor said that I was a good potential pilot, but I'm horrible at flying on the sim. (Full throttle and pray that I don't crash :icon_lol:.) I am interested in buying the P-47, but it seems that my throttle settings just might be dangerous....

Walter :jump:
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't mean you won't be able to handle it, it just means that the "potential pilot" your instructor spoke of, will have to do his homework and learn how to fly by the book. I'm surprised that you say you're horrible in the sim. . . .the instructor saw something that told him you had possibilities (or he just wanted you to spend your money on instructions, lol).
 
Walter said:
So it's worth the extra money if you are a "by the book" simmer? I'm not a real pilot, but I have taken one lesson. Does that mean that I won't be able to handle the accusim pack? The instructor said that I was a good potential pilot, but I'm horrible at flying on the sim. (Full throttle and pray that I don't crash :icon_lol:.) I am interested in buying the P-47, but it seems that my throttle settings just might be dangerous....

Walter :jump:
Click to expand...

Not "by the book" simmer. Just the simmer.
The user that just wants to push full throttle in any plane hoping not to crash is not really a simmer, it's a gamer, someone who could appreciate one of those plane games on Playstation or XBox.

I don't fly "by the book", I have no idea about the engine parameters that should be set for optimal cruise flight or climb or takeoff or anything like that. But I do know that my plane can be damaged, and I should be carefull about it, and that makes my flights MUCH more interesting.

Jumping into a plane, getting the engine on and pushing the throttle all to the max to make any kind of manoevers without caring, that's funny for three minutes, then it gets boring.
 
Cirrus N210MS said:
the P-47 is the hard one to fly the other A2A planes are much more friendly:salute:

i flow the A2A P-47 from ksfo to ksea and it kept me on top of the plane the full flight

was so tired after i didnt fly it on flights just around the airport lol:salute:
Click to expand...

The P-47 ?
I don't think it's the "hard" one. Sure you have to monitor the temperatures during climbs, but that's pretty much all. The rest of the flight consists mainly about keeping the manifold pressure in the green zone. In fact the P-47 is the Accusim plane I fly the most, even more than the Spit.
The B-377 is THE nightmare you were talking about ;)
 
Maybe I should explain a little...:p:

I generally don't have a lot of time to fly, so I don't try to fly as if I were in a real plane. When I was in the real plane, I flew very responsibly. I understand the dangers.

I'm trying to learn how to make realistic flights on the flight sim. It's not that I don't care about simming, just that I don't really have the time. By the way, I agree that the full throttle method does get boring after a couple of minutes. :mixedsmi:

Walter :jump:
 
It's worth every cent. And if your not in the mood to make it "as real as it gets"(!) Shift 2 and 1 click of the mouse turns it off and on. Just my opinion (A2A J3, P-47, and B-17, all Accu-simmed).
 
I'd have to agree with the sediment previously stated about lack of time. I'd much rather spend my time practicing approaches than worrying if I hit the right switch to initiate the proper start sequence. I respect the realism and wholeheartedly support that, but unfortunately, time is not a luxury I possess.
 
I am kinda torn on accusim also. I never cold and dark any plane. Did so in real life and to me is more of a chore than entertainment. I want immersion but not to the point of being tedious. Even with trackir I wanna puke and get frustrated yoyoing in and out trying to find a small dial while I flying plane right into the ground.
Its kinda like buying the car with the t-tops knowing that you will rarely use them but it gets you the upgraded radio,leather seats and custom paint. I want the crew interaction, additional sounds and effects and is my major draw to paying extra for accusim.
 
I think most of you guys are blowing the extra time it takes out of proportion, especially considering they have an auto-start option. It isn't like you're spending a half hour trying to get these things started like you might when setting up a flight in the MD-11.

Starting the spitfire properly takes a minute at most? Starting the P-47 maybe a few at most? The B-17 takes longer because there's 4 engines, but then you could just use the auto-start feature if you're short on time. The Cub doesn't take long either. I don't know about the 377 because I don't have Accusim for it.
 
Buy DCS A-10 if you are a systems junkie. The Blackshark was bad enough and in russian but the A-10 is pretty brutal. Its like the early Nemeth Russian Hind X10. All these planes from the Cub to the 747 need electrical and fuel. Just the number of steps needed to get each sytem up and running. I enjoyed the A-10 at first but now getting bogged down in the weapons delivery systems. So much going on its a multitasker,systems,flow chart button pushing,dial dialing simmers heaven. All while being shot at.
 
Kiwikat said:
I think most of you guys are blowing the extra time it takes out of proportion, especially considering they have an auto-start option. It isn't like you're spending a half hour trying to get these things started like you might when setting up a flight in the MD-11.

Starting the spitfire properly takes a minute at most? Starting the P-47 maybe a few at most? The B-17 takes longer because there's 4 engines, but then you could just use the auto-start feature if you're short on time. The Cub doesn't take long either. I don't know about the 377 because I don't have Accusim for it.
Click to expand...

The 377 takes a similar time to start than the B-17. And yes, there is an auto-start function. And Accusim can be deactivated with just ONE click, for when you don't want to fly realistically :)
 
I am totally intrigued by the accusim business. I don't own any A2A aircraft, but the Cub is the only one I'm even interested in and not that much. I don't like the cub. It's too slow as mentioned above. In real life, I've only flown a 172 but I'd like to move up to the 180 knot range aircraft types.

I am very interested if I could buy the accusim model and apply it to another aircraft of my choice. Even a 182 for travelling would be quicker than the 172, or the Cub especially.
 
I don't think accusim is particularly more difficult. Maybe even less difficult than learning to program an FMS, or remembering what all those acronyms in the VRS F-18 are for. All airplanes from a C-172 to a 747 usually have the same basic systems, hydraulic, electrical, pnuematic, fuel...etc, it is just a matter of complexity. With accusim you just need to pay attention to those systems a little more.

The 377 seemed really difficult at first but after a few flights, it isn't too bad if things are kept within tolerances.

Cheers
TJ
 
pilottj said:
The 377 seemed really difficult at first but after a few flights, it isn't too bad if things are kept within tolerances.
Click to expand...

This was my experience with the 377. The first half dozen or so flights kept me busy now everything is pretty smooth. Every so often it will catch me slipping but that is part of the enjoyment of the accusim system. It WILL catch you not paying attention. So it really keeps you focused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top