Best tube?

[TeiscoDelRay]

Thinking of getting (yes, must be the Iowa winters) a tube liner and want to know from you guys what is the best. My "best" hopes would be for great smooth modeling (curves, no sharp fs9 edges), complete and realistic avionics, tons of animations, beautiful and fully functional virtual cockpit, and, well to sum it up, just a great looking sort of complex and cool tuber.

 

[thefrog]

I've just written down on a scrap of paper what I predict 99% of the answers to this question will be.....

 

[TeiscoDelRay]

And which PMDG model would that be?

 

[DaveWG]

Quality Wings 146 / RJ series, if you don't want to go for the obvious choice.

 

[Dimus]

If you like classics and steam gauges but also fully functional AP and FMC I would highly suggest the Milviz 737-200.

 

[odourboy]

If you like classics and steam gauges but also fully functional AP and FMC I would highly suggest the Milviz 737-200.

My personal favorite 'classic' as well.

Another nice modern model is Aerosoft's Airbus A320/A321. Comes with lots of nifty add-on functionality like full audio checklist, limited edition FS2Crew, a web server that allows you to access the MCDU with a browser...

 

[pilottj]

I don't do a lot of 'tube' flying, but I would jump on the bandwagon and say PMDG is about as hardcore as it gets. J41 for turboprop regional, NGX for short - medium haul, 777 for long haul. The MD-11 still is a very nice addon, with unique systems, and a little easier on frames. You can find CD Boxed copies on Amazon for ~ 50 bucks. If you use FSX Steam, I am not sure the J41 and MD-11 are Steam compatible, at least not officially.

I haven't ventured into other tubes just cause it really isn't my clique other than the occasional freight dogging or charter hop, but heard good things about Milviz 737-200, Coolsky DC-9, and Aerosoft A300 if you want the classics. The Majestic Q400 is said to be very nice too if you are into turboprop regionals.

For vintage prop tube, the A2A 377 COTS package is about as good as it gets, tho the eventual PMDG DC-6 should be quite nice. There have been rumors over at Avsim of PMDG hinting a DC-3 project as Mr Randazzo owns a real one, this would be many years down the pipe if it was the case. This rumor is likely just speculation tho, like most of the rumors there lol.

Cheers
TJ

 

[Stefano Zibell]

Project Tupolev Tu-154b2 + KLN 90B Updated (FS Developer). And won't cost you a penny.

This deserved to be mentioned.

 

[TeiscoDelRay]

Thanks for the great replies. I am leaning toward the Aerosoft Airbus combo. To me it has the most current and best modeling and textures and a great vc plus weather. PMDG is really fantastic but a bit pricey for the top of the line stuff. I already have the A2A B-377 and consider it the best airliner ever for any sim but the modern world of avionics is calling these days so I have some deciding to do.

If I can just find one with all that and rain on the windscreen (sorry but RealAir spoiled me) I would go for it for sure.

 

[Alan_A]

For me personally, this is a complicated question. I'm often frustrated about tubes - I'd like to get into them, but don't want to give up my warbirds and other vintage stuff, and so often find I don't have time to learn and master the more complex tube offerings.

PMDG's stuff is wonderful, but it sits in my hangar because I can never seem to devote enough time to really mastering it. The A2A 377 would seem to be the right solution but isn't in practice because it's a slower-than-jet long-hauler, and I have a hard time fitting its mission profile into the rest of my life.

Short-haulers work better for me. Among these, the Majestic Q400 would be great if I could get my mind around its really gnarly automation. A better fit is the Coolsky DC-9, which deserves a lot more credit than it ever seems to get for its smooth performance, wonderful tutorials and VOR-nav assistance package.

The Milviz 737-200 and the QW RJs are also very nice, though I haven't logged enough time in either of them to really say for sure.

My personal favorite is the Aerosoft A318-321 series, mainly because it addresses nearly all of the sticking points I've noted above - highly automated, looks nice, performs well, and has an excellent built-in AI crew routine - not at the level of FS2 Crew, which is also available, but enough of a crutch that I can manage a quick flight without lots of study or setup time or excessive task saturation, and then get back to 1940's tech, where I'm more at home.

My advice is to think not only about what's best, but also what fits into the rest of your flightsim "lifestyle," then choose accordingly.

Hope this helps.

EDIT: Sorry, TeiscoDelRay, looks like you posted while I was going on and on... Looks like you're on the way to a good solution. Hope my screed will be useful to others who come across this thread.

 

[pilottj]

The 777 is actually quite easy to operate because it is so automated, while the NGX is a bit more 'hands on'. Of course just flying these automated airplanes and not having to deal with emergencies that real ATPs are paid the big bucks to to deal with. On the surface, flying a 777 is no more difficult than a typical complex piston GA twin. The PMDG 777 will certainly simulate all those systems failures as well. I am no ATP so I suppose my 777 flying is totally 'control-e' simming, but I don't care.

Once in a blue moon, I get a bug, I will fly the max long haul possible....load up the 777-200LR with max fuel and about 25% load, go from Auckland NZ to Malaga SP (longest distance between two 777 capable airports on earth) going eastbound with the jetstream, 20 something odd hours of continual FS running. I don't sit at my computer and watch it follow a magenta line for 20+ hrs LOL but it is fun to know what the plane is capable of. The PMDG has an auto step climb feature, which kind of simulates a relief crew. The go Malaga back to Auckland eastbound.....round the world in one stop

It's funny, with GA planes I try to operate them as realistically as I was trained to do, but with tubeliners I have no inkling to fly real world routes, schedules, or fly any particular scheme. I treat the 777 like an over the top BBJ and go wherever I want with it, I don't care if its unrealistic, its fun, like Area 51 to Munich....hey what can I say, ET wants to go to Oktoberfest

Cheers
TJ

 

[expat]

If you want to do the flying, CS 707.

 

[CG_1976]

Ifly 737/747V2

 

[TeiscoDelRay]

That last one was the biggest one so far, maybe too big? I am taking all these replies seriously and googling each of them looking at stats and youtube videos. So far the Aerosoft is ahead for me with it's very nice round corner modeling and the list of features. But keep them coming because some of these I have never heard of and it was great doing the research and watching the videos.

 

[roger-wilco-66]

I second Expats remark, I also love the CS 707. The interior and exterior model is great, also all the animations. It also 'feels right' at the controls. I also have their 777, which is very nice, but I'm a steam gauge flier like many here.

Cheers,
Mark

 

[TeiscoDelRay]

Thanks, I just now have been looking over the Captain Sim products and they look pretty good. Any other thoughts on CS?

 

[Alan_A]

@TeiscoDelRey - the rap on Captain Sim is that their products look good but are often buggy, and that the bugs don't always get fixed. However, the 707 has an excellent reputation. I've never flown it but it's supposed to be one of their best. Well worth a look.

@PilotTJ - Same for me - I've never been able to get hardcore procedural about airliners. It's odd, because airliners were my first big point of connection with aviation (kid spending 60s summers right near JFK). But when I try to work with them in sim, it always feels to me like work. And not just work - work at a detail-oriented, process-intensive, big-organization job, which is not the kind of work I like to do. Getting all creative in a DC-3 is more like it. That said, I ought to give the 777 a try. Maybe short-haul freight, where the freight wont start crying or complain about you if you get a little steep on descent...

 

[donnybalonny]

Hey everyone
The guy just wrote that he wants modern avionics. He wants glass panels, so no B737 -200, DC-9 B707 etc.

I have the Airbus and I dont use it much. Its way to much autoflight for me, listening to checklists being done by the copilot etc. I sometimes feel its like watching the television with the only difference being that it takes hours to learn to watch.
If you have the time to learn the PMDG NGX, go for it. If you want something that is a lot easyer to learn (and a lot cheaper), the Qualitywings B757 is pretty good. The flight dynamics and the sounds are great and the VC and general visuals are good. But it has a troublesome VNAV descend. Make sure you get the last version (1.3.3 I think) and fly slower on descents than you normally would. If not it overshoots and overspeeds. There are tons of info on this on the QW forum.

And the off topic: The PMDG J41 works fully in FSX-SE with one exception, the IAS funcion of the autopilot doesnt work. You have to use the VS funcion. And also, you have to install all the simconnect.dll which come with fsx-steam and manually install the font that the J41 uses. No big deal at all and you can find the info on the net.

 

[William Njurmi]

Of those planes mentioned here and emphasis on modern cockpit, I would recommend also the RJ70/85/100 by QW. Very good immersion, easy on frames and the plane is very versatile and is or was in use all over the world. It can be seen in big airports and in small hubs.

 

[Alan_A]

Hey donnybalonny - he actually says in the original post that he wants "complete and realistic avionics." That doesn't necessarily mean glass - as indicated by the fact that he says just above that he's taking a look at the Captain Sim 707.

I agree with you about the QW 757 - it's a nice get-into-the-air-fast aircraft built on some smart choices about what to simulate and what to leave out. I've never been able to cure the overspeed problems, so I'll have to check out their forums - didn't know there were tips about how to change the descent profile. Thanks for that tip - most appreciated!