-
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.
Good Spitfire
- Thread starter Yob
- Start date
Daube
SOH-CM-2025
Both the A2A and RealAir are really good quality.
Each of them has their strong and weak points.
The Realair Spit offers a beautiful rendition of the late variants of the Spit, while the A2A Spit shows only the earliest variants, but with excellent 3D models too.
However, if you add the Accusim extension to the A2A Spit, then you really get something special, above anything else, in terms of realism and immersion.
I would STRONGLY advise you to go for the A2A Spitfire with the Accusim extension. That's the best you can get for a Spitfire.
Each of them has their strong and weak points.
The Realair Spit offers a beautiful rendition of the late variants of the Spit, while the A2A Spit shows only the earliest variants, but with excellent 3D models too.
However, if you add the Accusim extension to the A2A Spit, then you really get something special, above anything else, in terms of realism and immersion.
I would STRONGLY advise you to go for the A2A Spitfire with the Accusim extension. That's the best you can get for a Spitfire.
fsxar177
Long-Time Enthusiast
Okay, after much study, I think I understand the question... Mr. 'yob' knows that the A2A, and Real Air spits are both available, and good. In fact, he probably has them...however, I idendify that the pulse of the question is; 'warbirdsim quality', so I'll have to answer for myself...
No, sorry yob, there is not yet a Spit with warbirdsim quality. We could only wish...but for right now, with John working on the P-39...I should say we are happy to wait. And the other choices are still quite good in the meantime.
Joseph
Thanks Joseph or Fsxar177 as your known here, yep just wanted to know that had to do a bit of research on the Mk 1 and Mk 2 Spitfires the things that a2a left out, i own a2a spitfire with accusim, A,B,C,D,E wing types then the standard elevator or latter version. The roll rate is a little of, in fact this really annoys me. Even the options Like IFF Self sealing fuel tanks. Merlin flooding. learning these things damages a2a reputation. Although i still like a2a i am not as loyal as i was before.
You are correct, there is no spitfire with "warbirdsim" quality. The A2A Spitfire w/accusim is better than "warbirdsim" quality. That especially goes for the P-51D, which we can directly compare.
A2A crushed these latest accusim planes out of the park. The only developer I compare them to anymore is PMDG. I cannot wait until they release their civilian aircraft.
A2A crushed these latest accusim planes out of the park. The only developer I compare them to anymore is PMDG. I cannot wait until they release their civilian aircraft.
Roger
Senior Administrator
You are correct, there is no spitfire with "warbirdsim" quality. The A2A Spitfire w/accusim is better than "warbirdsim" quality. That especially goes for the P-51D, which we can directly compare.
A2A crushed these latest accusim planes out of the park. The only developer I compare them to anymore is PMDG. I cannot wait until they release their civilian aircraft.
I don't understand. "A2A crushed these latest accusim planes out of the park". So they crushed themselves?
I enjoy John's Warbirdsim's P51s and have no interest in engines that fail as readily as A2A engines do, as I don't have time to worry about such things as I usually only manage about 20 minutes FsX flying every 2 or 3 days and when I fly I do it for fun! I'm also very happy with Realair's later Spits and the non-accusimmed early A2A Spits.
falcon409
SOH-CM-2025
I agree Roger. I applaud A2A and the groundbreaking work they've done in developing the Accusim technology. However, I also fly for the enjoyment aspect of flight and not the system monitoring and tweaking. I know a lot of folks enjoy that as part of their "as real as it gets" experience. . .but there are equally as many or more who don't. Great to be able to pick and choose though don't ya think?
Definitely! FSX has grown so much in the last few years. There are dozens of absolutely outstanding payware aircraft available to us these days.
Jafo
SOH-CM-2024
Definitely! FSX has grown so much in the last few years. There are dozens of absolutely outstanding payware aircraft available to us these days.
.....and freeware...
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
A2A focused on the MK1a and MKIIA/B. No clipped wings. The team that assisted in creating this aircraft consists of a Spitfire historian, Dudley Henriques (who has flown Spitfires), multiple HIGH hour pilots (8,000+ hours) and multiple Spitfires. Even the copper switches are replicated and different between models.
Compared to? The roll rates for these marks were provided by actual and rare RAF documentation and multiple pilot reports. She just doesn't roll well, not to mention the ailerons were initially made of fabric as well as the bit of twisting the wings themselves develop during such maneuvers.
How do you mean? Some of the early Spitfires simply did not have IFF devices. This was removed early in beta at the behest of our historian and the documentation that was found for these baby Spits. From memory they were not introduced until the MK.V, but don't quote me.
Huh? Are you speaking about a particular trait that these should have?
Are you speaking about the negative cutout? It's there. You can also flood the engine just fine.
I suspect a lot of people make opinions based upon what designers claim. A2A will fix any issues they are aware of, should they be present. If however there is a problem you see but do not bring up, they cannot address it. The Spitfire has gone through multiple core updates to get the most accurate systems available.
Folks, I think a lot of you forget that Accu-Sim IS optional. You do NOT have to purchase it, and as is they perform in a manner that is "get in and fly." This is why it has continued to be optional. I believe a lot of people however feel it is oversensitive or hyped. Watch the Accu-Sim Revolution video and listen to what real pilots have said about it. This isn't just a pretty model, this is simulating a feeling. Once I learned how these warbirds operate, they are actually quite easy for the most part. There are many options built into them to help get you up in the air quickly even with Accu-Sim, such as the start feature which keeps you from having to wait on temperatures and being able to turn damage off.
A2A has been first in a lot of things that have never been done before. They don't talk about it (Scott is VERY humble), but as I am not a direct A2A member I don't mind mentioning them. Here is a very short list:
-Automatic mixture control system
-Collimated sight (years ago, and first to my knowledge)
-Allow fuel to continue to flow in the lines even with fuel cut off
-Oil pan cut off when inverted due to gravity
-Accurate simulation of turbo and supercharger controls
-Dynamic simulation of flying tail (simulating air from screw over tail surface) used on all aircraft since A2A Cub
-Oxygen system including hypoxia
-Working ejection seat (HE-219 UHU FS9)
-Ability to transfer from fixed pitch to variable and constant speed propellers in flight (without changing model)
-Ability to change to various oil and fuel types
-Interactive passenger (Cub)
-Bent propellers from belly landing
-Dynamic and random damage not only to engine, but individual cylinders and other associated equipment
-Working crew (Captain of the Ship and B-17) who logically adapts to your situation and flight profile
-Cartridge starting system
-Condensation/fogging based on internal cockpit and environmental conditions
-Tundra wheel water landing technique
I could go on for paragraphs, but you get the point.
Now, I am biased as have indeed worked with A2A doing video marketing. I also have John's work and it is excellent, even being a case study in very specific things like individual pilots, etc. I advise you to pick which aircraft suits your particular needs, but I would also like to dispel a tad bit of misinformation. A2A builds their aircraft based upon actual pilot reports, current flying pilots, source documentation from the designers, working around these aircraft in person, physical measurements, having good communication with mechanics and testing the hell out of them. Further the engines are built outside of FSX, using engine measurements of things like fuel lines and oil flow, etc and then reintroduced into FSX. This is not a matter of you do X and Y happens, this stuff is all calculated on the fly based on tens (hundreds perhaps) of thousands of lines of code.
Good luck and warmest regards.
'rate of roll' what is this basis of comparison? Is there actual Spitfire PIC time to refer to? I like the P-40, and the FW-190, RV-7 and a few others very much. I don't have actual time in these airplanes to say...'well the rate of roll is off.' How would I know any different? I am beta testing for the CH 190D, I don't have any real flight time in a FW190D. I can make my best guess by reading documentation, and judging it's relative size to the 190A and other fighters of similar size and power.
A2A might have a Piper Comanche eventually in the works. I have about 20hrs in a Comanche, but gee, I never threw the yoke hard to the side to see how fast it could roll...lol. I do have a good idea of how it rolls into a standard rate turn. If A2A's Comanche's roll is off by a nanosecond or two...who is going to notice?
A2A might have a Piper Comanche eventually in the works. I have about 20hrs in a Comanche, but gee, I never threw the yoke hard to the side to see how fast it could roll...lol. I do have a good idea of how it rolls into a standard rate turn. If A2A's Comanche's roll is off by a nanosecond or two...who is going to notice?
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
It's all good man :ernae: The bottom line is if it gives you a thrill to fly it, it is good in my book:salute: What would FS be without A2A, CH, WBS, Realair, BTS, LHC, GAS, PMDG and everyone who has spent hours/weeks/months/years creating stuff for this hobby? It would be pretty dang boring and lifeless without them, I probably would rather sit in a cubicle and file TPS reports...with the cover letters
1+2 As I never re-installed the A2A Spitfire, did they ever fix the very basic aerodynamic bug that there's absolutely no yaw induced roll ?
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
This was fixed a long time ago in January. I believe in 1.2.