• 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

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

As Real As We Want It

Daveroo said:
didnt a2a make planes without accu-sim?..you could buy it seperate and add it to the plane if you wanted?..what happened to that?
Click to expand...

They started buying and flying REAL airplanes. New business model required...I kid, I kid....but seriously, every company goes through business model adjustments...seems like the price range is working for them...however, now that are flying and owning real aircraft, it is not unrealistic that the sim will closely follow it's RL counterpart...aviation is expensive. I doubt they will ever adjust prices down. Just syaing. And that's NOT a bad thing. They are doing very well in deed. And rightfully so. It kind of answers the questions without having to argue it....What's "better" in this case...the one that makes the most money. They seem to have a catalog of "better" products don't they. The market seems to think so. At any rate...I still have the Wozza T-6 and just installed it into P3Dv3.2 And I'll likely NOT remove it even if I do purchase this new one. To me, it's still that good.
 
My advice is don't worry about what one developer makes or doesn't make any more. They have their reasons. Instead of giving them a hard time for what they choose to make, support the developers who do make what you like. Supporting your favorite developers encourages them to continue making what you like.

Its like the people who are well aware of the kind of addons that Carenado/Alabeo make, then go on tho their forums and complain about how simple or unrealistic they are. Doing that is not going to do a lick of good get Carenado to change what they make. They obviously have a big demographic who enjoys the kind of stuff they make, and they will continue to do so as long as they have that demographic who supports them. If you don't like what Carenado makes, don't buy their stuff. Don't even go on to their aircraft release threads and rant that you aren't into what they make...no one cares. Instead, just participate in the developer threads that you are into. Simple.

I think that over time, the spectrum of FS addon variety has gotten much bigger over the years. Don't be upset or afraid that this appears to be going to a more 'professonal' direction. That is simply development and technology getting better. Lets call default FS aircraft the 'baseline' standard. Over the years, development techniques have gotten better and so on. The difference between the baseline and the most realistic addon available has grown considerably over the age of this hobby. As such the middle of the pack has logically shifted toward that direction as well. However, just because the variety of addons is much wider, there are more choose from, and freedom to choose what you want is a good thing I think.

If you don't like the choices available now, you can always go back and fly the planes you did like. Heck I still pull out the RealAir 2007 Citabria sometimes....its almost 10 years old...but it's still a fun little bird to hop around in.

Cheers
TJ
 
As a small child, I was taught that "Mummy knows best" Now that my Mummy has passed away, I have to make my own mind up.

Den.
 
I will admit that I do believe that the models that are coming out are getting to complex. Now I know that developers do have target audiences but im sure im not the only one that sometimes cant get to grips with some add on aircraft, What I like about A2A is that they say here you go heres a Texan now you can have a simplified version or you can have a as close to the real thing version. I know many people will say where is the fun in that but for people like me I dont care if it doesnt handle like the real thing im just happy if it looks and sounds like the real thing with quite a few features.
 
Ed what you said doesn't make you a dinosaur...I know lots of guys in this hobby X-Plane, FSX, FS9 etc., that feel the same way you do. As me, they can't get it real enough. I've been flight-simming since the days I worked for Spectrum Holobyte. I have flown the real thing for 16 maybe 18 years and I miss it, but it will probably never be again. I can't afford it. Now, I find I can't afford the realism I crave that the folks at A2A put out-either in hardware or software. Things have happened that put me on a very limited income. Everything extra I make on builds for others goes to my kids while they are in college. That's really too bad for those like me, but hey their planes are worth what they ask for them in my opinion. I'm glad we have diversity. I did like the fact that A2A did put aircraft out there without Accusim but being an old ex-programmer myself, I can see why they don't do it any longer. If 75%-80% of your buyers are constant clientele and they buy both why make both available? At least I still get to enjoy flight-simming and that is enough for me.

Thanks for starting the thread Ed...it's good one!
Ted
 
I have to say that when I get a chance play fsx, I currently tend to fly a mix of the more complex planes. But even the recent lear 24b and the mu2 have pretty complex systems.

And I like planes that "natively" support add-on gps systems like the f1 gtn.

I am thankful for the whole range of planes.

but I will tell you, I wish that all had the shake and vibrate like realair and a2a. That adds a lot of realism for me.
 
Here's my point of view.
I have been using MSFS for about 15 years, it was nothing but the planes that came with the download for about 7 of those years.
I then started downloading freeware planes and from that point I never flew the default planes.
About 7 years ago I bought my first payware plane and from that point I never went back to the freeware planes.

I used to put out about $ 150 a year buying planes from Carenado, Alabeo.and Sibwings.

And then I bought my first plane from A2A. To me, they are the gold standard of Flight Sims.
I have bought a couple of other brands of planes that keep me interested for a week, and then it's back to the A2A planes.

Alabeo just released their Piper Aztec.....Price= $35.00

I will no longer pay $35 for something that I know will not keep my interest. For $15 more, I'll buy the new A2A T-6 and put many, many hours on it. I will more than get my money's worth out of it.

As A2A only puts out a new plane every two years or so, the amount of money I put out on planes is now about 1/3 of what it used to be.
As I will never fly an actual plane, A2A is as real as I'll ever get. The enjoyment and frustration of learning to get them started and landed is well worth the extra $15 it costs over the price of what Alabeo is now charging.
Thank you A2A for taking your time and getting it right the first time and giving excellent service afterwards. Actually for the amount of time they put into research, the manuals you get and the quality you get, I think they are a bargain.
 
I go both ways. I like some accusim aircraft, and some non accusim aircraft. Including many older FS9 aircraft that I enjoy flying in FSX.
Pricewise, I think 50USD for A2A's aircraft is fair enough.
 
Wow, A2A and "The Donald" sure do get a lot of free advertising don't they. No need to respond, I just thought it was kind'a humorous. Carry on.
 
To quote the late great Johan Cruijff : ieder nadeel hep ze voordeel ( every disadvantage has its advantage ) :wiggle:
 
My problem is I like them all. But price point, while correct for the work that goes into the product, does limit my ability to purchase some of these planes. I also find I don't fly the in depth aircraft as much as the aircraft with much simpler systems, mainly due to time constraints and because I like flying so many different aircraft that it becomes a big time sink for me to keep looking up the operating procedures. Having said, as I posted in the thread about my top five planes, I really like the Iris F-20 because I can just hop in it and go flying. We have options. Besides, when it comes to the T-6, I've kind of been spoiled by the Warwick Carter T-6 and Bomber_12ths repaints (Where is my P-39, man? ;) )

I should also mention I have an old PC and need to upgrade, so even planes with more eye candy then systems have to sit in the hanger for now. When I can finally afford a new PC I'm going to have a lot of new planes to fly instantly. :)

I should also note, there are some really in depth aircraft I have that I do hope one day to have some extra time to learn and I do realize that these are what really turn many people on to simming. However, I think it also comes down to there are fewer people making planes now. Piglet stepped out of the ether and into the real world and we've lost some freeware developers (Paul Clawson) and even just the eye candy planes take a lot of work to develop. But when something new comes along, I think we're all interested to one extent or another. So while I think this is a great discussion, I just want everyone to know I'm thankful for what we do have.
 
Interesting discussion and caught my attention not about A2A but the issue of realism. I don't think there will be any final aircraft that will satisfy all tastes or experiences but the best thing about flight simming is that allows us as armchair pilots to simulate to a quite satisfactory degree the experience of flight (less the gravitational and meteorological sensations that accompany real flight), this in itself is a great thing.

A quick overview of myself and where I come from on this, lets call it a real world aviation perspective. I was a career professional pilot and military flight instructor. I was a check and training captain and testing officer for the regulatory authorities for IF and Multi-Engine aeroplanes and I held aerobatic ratings (including low level aeros). I have been flight simming since MS98 was about and still do. There were a large number of real world professionals who sim and still do, for a number of reasons, one and this is the best its fun and you can do or simulate all the things you knew you could not for real. So you have to use a little imagination but nonetheless if you really want to immerse yourself in aviation and design or history you can. FSX and its predecessors made this possible. A lot of real world pilots use it to practice their IF skills and to prepare for tests and simulation has been used in the aviation industry for a long time. Now to give you an example about what is real or not, for years I flew Dash 8's, we did our tests in the sim on a full motion simulator but guess what, the Flight Sim version on a PC had infinitely better graphics and simulation capability, but regulatory authorities always refused to allow real world pilots to use PC based systems for legally logged time despite the fact the computers that ran the full size sim were dinosaurs compared to a comparable PC.

I think a lot of people expect too much from realism, for instance, if you made the model totally realistic, a lot of people would give up on it, because it would be hard, a lot of aircraft were designed with two to four crew members working as a team to make it all happen, you just would not enjoy the experience nor could you because while the pilot might have been flying the engineer was adjusting and keeping systems working etc. I call the GPS gauge my Navigator and I don't care if it was never fitted or around when the aeroplane was at the time because it does the work that my navigator did and it takes of the workload when I sim so I can enjoy the experience. Another reason I say people expect too much is simple, there are a lot of aircraft that while interesting were in real life, dogs or hazardous unless flown precisely and carefully by someone who knew the aeroplane and its characteristics, others were dreadful ways to spend a day, they were noisy, draughfty, uncomfortable and unreliable, some would kill you very quickly if you were careless, so even in real life it was a compromise. A quick example my Uncle flew Spitfires in WW2 he said it was the best aeroplane he ever flew but it would snap into a spin and kill you real quick if you strayed out of the envelope, I have never been able to reproduce this aerodynamic in the sim but have come close. The DC-3 was a delight but a handfull on the ground and a bit of a barge in the air, the sim model by Manfred reproduces this nicely but in real life while you could pogo a DC-3 to the point where an inexperienced pilot would lose control you cannot reproduce the effect of stiff undercarriage oleos completely especially on an undulating gravel surfaced runway, so thats the way it is.

I have my favourite aircraft and modellers (freeware and payware) but for me the journey with flight sim has allowed me to explore historical aviation in a way that I could not in real life because the aeroplanes have all gone or are now museum pieces and thanks to flight sim I can see for myself what It was like to pilot a flying boat for example across the Atlantic in mid winter with no autopilot in atrocious weather but if I get tired of it, I stop and turn it off, let me tell you there were many times in real life and in the life of all pilots they wished they were still on the ground and not battling with a aeroplane that was damaged or had stuff busted or you were immersed in weather that was simply -hell aloft!.

Simply thanks to all the freeware designers and painters who have made what is a really authentic experience possible - its not real but it is authentic and its fun. Because the sim world is what it is I have been able to make changes and mods to some models to bring them into line with what I worked out the real thing would be and I have hours of fun and enjoyment exploring the history of some types and finding the information to make it more authentic. My only regret I have never mastered painting and have given up, just not in my skill set.

Enjoy but have fun!
 
Nice one Bendy :encouragement: I'll still be looking forward to that freeware tractor/bus of the sky, the DC-3 .. end of the day .. Us Desktop Simmers , its for fun :adoration:
 
Seems as if I'm one of the very few on here that doesn't like the "bells and whistles" so to speak. For me it's about the illusion of flight, period. Being able to suspend disbelief for a couple of hours, and soar through the skies in the aircraft of my choice. I would say 99% of my aircraft don't have a VC. Did they come that way? Most of them, Nope. Either I comment out the interior models in the FSX native aircraft, or in the case of FS9 aircraft I use a hex editor and hack the model to remove the VC. Have I bought a number of high quality payware aircraft and done the same thing? Yup. I can hear a bunch of you now going WHAAAAAAT? I like the 2d panels. but 99% of the time I am actually flying from my very highly customized minipanel that shows all of the info I need to get a plane (or helicopter) airborne, go from A to B and get back on the ground. That minipanel is in EVERY one of my aircraft. Why? Because to me it's about being able to see around me, look at the ground, the sky, the clouds, see where I'm going and where I've been. To look down into the valleys as I cruise overhead, to watch the water ripple as I go over, to see the mountains and the rivers and the lakes and the meadows. Sometimes I want to do it fast in a supersonic fighter, sometimes I do it in an ultralight. Sometimes I'm hauling freight into the rugged dirt strips of Idaho forest service airfields, sometimes I'm delivering supplies to a hunting camp in Alaska. Sometimes I'm in an X-Wing fighter, searching for Darth Vader at 100,000 feet. But everytime I load one of my aircraft, I am, in my mind, FLYING. I don't care about starting all the systems, and taxi-ing for takeoff. I want the freedom that I feel when I can look down and see the ground recede, chase my shadow through the clouds and hope there isn't Cumulus Granitus on the other side. I enjoy the challenge of setting up for final approach to that rough, bouncy dirt airstrip knowing that if I don't come to a stop and bounce off the mountainside, I can simply set up that approach and try again. It's not " As Real as it Gets", for me, it's "As Fun as it Gets".

Joe
 
My view is that what ever floats your boat is a matter of personal choice.

I'll keep my preferences to myself but I do have some questions to direct at the segment of the group who regard 'Acusim' as a 'must have' addition to 'enhance' their FS 'experience'.

The object of this addition is to make a simulated aircraft as accurate to operate as possible, which is a great selling point.
No argument from me at all.
However (there's always one), do the proponents of this simulation experience really take this to the extreme by using the following hardware additions?

Obviously a HOTAS unit such as the Warthog for current military aircraft, a basic 'Stick' for earlier aircraft, the full Yoke/Throttle Quadrant/Instrument Panel/Rudder Pedals package for multi engine aircraft, a TrackIR 5 Ultra Pack, all built into an enclosed 'cockpit.
I know this would mean swapping out controls depending on which 'As Real As It Gets' aircraft to be flown, but that would be in keeping with the 'in depth' experience.
And I almost forgot ............ 'Tac Pack', and to complete the 'experience, one leather 'Biggles' helmet and goggles, plus a 'Bone Dome' and Oxygen mask with built in comms.
Costs big bucks but it certainly would be de riguer for those who require complete reality!

:biggrin-new:

I know, I'm a cynic!!
 
wombat666 said:
My view is that what ever floats your boat is a matter of personal choice.

I'll keep my preferences to myself but I do have some questions to direct at the segment of the group who regard 'Acusim' as a 'must have' addition to 'enhance' their FS 'experience'.

The object of this addition is to make a simulated aircraft as accurate to operate as possible, which is a great selling point.
No argument from me at all.
However (there's always one), do the proponents of this simulation experience really take this to the extreme by using the following hardware additions?

Obviously a HOTAS unit such as the Warthog for current military aircraft, a basic 'Stick' for earlier aircraft, the full Yoke/Throttle Quadrant/Instrument Panel/Rudder Pedals package for multi engine aircraft, a TrackIR 5 Ultra Pack, all built into an enclosed 'cockpit.
I know this would mean swapping out controls depending on which 'As Real As It Gets' aircraft to be flown, but that would be in keeping with the 'in depth' experience.
And I almost forgot ............ 'Tac Pack', and to complete the 'experience, one leather 'Biggles' helmet and goggles, plus a 'Bone Dome' and Oxygen mask with built in comms.
Costs big bucks but it certainly would be de riguer for those who require complete reality!

:biggrin-new:

I know, I'm a cynic!!
Click to expand...

That was bad...go back to your corner :biggrin-new:
Ted
 
I wouldn't say accusim is 'must have' as there are many people here who have different preferences. I will say, I would not be nearly as much into this hobby if there was no 'study sim' option available to us.

I have mentioned it on the A2A forums. When I fly a non accusim plane, I feel like a 'flight sim enthusiast'...which is fun and fine when I want to do that...Sometimes I do thoroughly enjoy being a 'flight sim enthusiast'. FARs are sure fun to bust aren't they?:mixed-smiley-010: When I fly Accusim planes, I feel like a pilot. It makes me draw on my real life training, and rely more on my instincts, experiences, and knowlege. It makes me think and do more of the things I have to think and do when I fly for real. As such it is excellent practice to keep my brain in the game, help my brain stay 'current' during the times I can't fly for real.

For instance starting a typical airplane piston engine. A real pilot must think about....fluid levels, fluid temps, ambient air temp and pressure. Was the engine run recently, has it been sitting for a few days, has it been sitting for months? Is it fuel injected or does it have a carb? Is there fuel pressure, is there sufficient juice in the battery? Did the oil pressure rise when the engine started?...and so on...starting an accusim engine is just like that. It doesn't start the SAME way every single time as in a non accusim plane. Starting a real airplane engine is a major part of the flight and requires active participation from the pilot. Thats just one example of many as to why some of us really like the accusim concept.

There are a lot of simmers, like me, who are into that kind of detail, because it forces us to follow checklists, memorize procedure flows and such. This a great exercise in mental focus, keeping the 'flying mind' sharp. Obviously there are also simmers here who just want to press the ctrl e type starter and go....and that is totally fine, luckily there are addon makers who make planes to satisfy all of us.

A2A is the addon maker for those of us who want that kind of detail. This is what they do. PMDG makes highly detailed airliners...that is what they do, it is their 'mission'. Everyone knows this. Like PMDG, A2A makes highly detailed GA and Warbird addon aircraft. This is what they do, it is their 'mission'...to make the MS Tagline 'As Real As It Gets' stand up. Everyone knows A2A makes highly detailed study sim addons. Can you all accept that? Study sim addons are what they do, it is no secret. Accusim has been around for quite a few years now. They obviously do this very well with their large following. Can you just let A2A continue to do what they do best?

If you are not into highly detailed sims like that, that is perfectly fine, no one is saying you should be, or you are wrong for not wanting highly detailed flight sims, thats totally fine. No one is saying you are not 'cool' if you don't have the latest greatest super detailed PMDG airliner or A2A GA/Warbird. You participate in this great hobby of ours because you are looking to have fun, and that is wonderful, as it should be. For some of us too...the highly detailed checklist stuff is fun for us as well.

Bomber12, Mike CYUL, Bazzar, Ant, Bill, Milton, the Milviz boys, Rob and Sean at RealAir, Razbam, Sibwings, Classics Hangar, Aerosoft and others all make absolutely wonderful beautiful looking addons that have the 'fun' mixed with varying levels of level of systems depth to fill your needs for having fun addons that don't need all checklist level stuff. You already have a whole host of great developers giving you exactly what you want.

Please stop hounding A2A and PMDG because they are catering to the serious study sim crowd and not to 'you' especially when you already have so many great developers catering to you already. It makes you sound ungrateful to the guys who already do provide you what you like.

Cheers
TJ
 
Great discussion thread, Everyone! I like having options to suit how deep I want to get into a flight. I like having a plane that has all the bells and whistles but also having a "jump in and fly" mode in the event I just want to get into the air, take my seat out on the wing and spend 80% of the flight gawking at the visuals. There are a/c out there that offer this feature and I'm grateful to the developers for including it.

For those that don't, I'll grab the manual and get'er into the air the old fashioned way.

Other days, I'm in full simulator mode and go thru the checklists and fly strictly from point A to point B, just like in the real world.

And I appreciate all the detail (visual and system) that the developers put into the model and realize the amount of work involved. I have my favorite aircraft in the hangar and always look to support the developers
whenever they debut a new a/c. I do notice that more and more simulator a/c are giving you built-in missions and this immersion is very welcome as it makes you feel like you are utilizing the a/c as it would be
used in real-world use. Sometimes I'll add an aircraft and not really use it until a nice layer of dust is on the wings, but that's a personal choice more than anything.

I think at this point in time with packages that include the mission aspect, detail upon detail both visually and system-wise, are wringing every ounce of sim-goodness out of the base simulator. It's a great time to be
a sim-pilot where you can walk out into your sim-hangar and step back into any era of flight you desire.

Top drawer, gentle-aviators, top drawer!!!
 
falcon409 said:
Rather than turn the Release thread for the A2A T-6 into a debate over price and "Accu-simability" (I made that word up), I decided to make a separate thread to express my thoughts.

I realize more and more as I read current threads on various aircraft types and the dedication of many to immerse themselves into every aspect of an aircraft operation that I am becoming a Dinosaur. A2A has pushed the envelope when it comes to immersion and while I personally can do without it thank you. . .I also accept that more and more enthusiasts are demanding this type of "fully functional" aircraft. I realized this especially after just reading a members query in the A2A Release thread when he wondered why anyone would want a T-6 without accu-sim. For me, the answer is simple. . .I don't care about any of that. Without accusim, would the wings fall off? Would the airplane suddenly disintegrate in mid-air? Would it cease to fly straight and level? Would it's ability to climb, descend, turn, etc be lost to us? Of course not and so a T-6 without Accu-sim would still be an enjoyable aircraft to fly for those of us (whose numbers may be dwindling) who simply want to jump in an aircraft, crank it up and fly somewhere we've never flown before or shoot touch n' go's at our local airport.

Do not dismiss those of us who find Accu-Sim an unnecessary addition that simply drives the price out of range. . . .and that is in no way a slap at those who use it and must have it before they feel an aircraft is worthy of flying. I'm just saying that it shouldn't mean that an aircraft without it isn't worth flying. I got into this hobby because I wanted to enjoy the sensation of flight, something that in the RW I will never get the chance to do as a Private Pilot. Here I can fly anything from the largest Commercial Airliner to a high performance fighter or the worlds smallest twin (the cricri). I don't have to be qualified as anything more than an individual who enjoys flying, someone who, for a few hours a day or more can climb into any aircraft of my own choosing and fly to anyplace in the world. . .I don't even need to know a single thing about navigation. As long as I can program a GPS. . .I can follow the line. I can just hear the sounds of dismay, lol. . . .OMG you find that fun? Just sitting in an airplane while it takes you someplace? Yep. . .sure do, I do it every single day and I enjoy it.

So I'm a dinosaur, maybe there are more of me out there than I realize. To those who push to learn every aspect of an aircraft and study charts and graphs to see if the flight dynamics come up to what they should be, who test and read and test again and take developers to task when something isn't as it should be. . .I salute you. That's how great airplanes for this Sim are made. . .keep up the good work, but don't expect that everyone in this hobby is as serious about flight sim as you are, don't assume that an airplane without the addition of accu-sim like precision is less worthy of our hard earned dollars. Those dollars are getting fewer and fewer, just as prices for addons go higher and higher. I understand it, sorta, and to say that it will eventually start killing sales is naive. . .there will always be people who will pay the price for what they want, regardless. It just won't be me and what others there are like me who just want to fly and have a good time doing it. . .just not at any price.
Click to expand...



Eloquently and succinctly put Ed!;:encouragement:
I fly the simulator to relax and enjoy the experience of flying, to be in a good representation of the aircraft I've chosen and to see places near and far that I would otherwise not be able to go!
If, however as you say, I did want to make things as 'real' or as complicated as possible for myself; I would like to think that at least I had a choice in the matter from the start!
So, I guess that I must be a bit of a sim dinosaur too Ed!

Cheers for now,

ChipShop:loyal:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top