• 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

Carenado or flight1 172

C

clmooring

Charter Member
OK this has probably been asked a thousand times, "Which flight model closer to real world 172; Carenado or Flight1?"

I own the Flight1, but the Carenado panel is much closer to the one I took a first lesson in today. So of course I am dieing to repeat to day virtually.

I dont know if I will do lesson number two, two kids away at college and two living at home, but it sure was a blast. The instructor let me land twice.

great day.
 
If you have the patience? RealAir has stated their next plane will be a C172 and if past products are any indications, I would suspect that it will be the best version available.
 
Or..of you can't wait than the Flight1 Cardinal II might be an option. It's was the proposed successor of the C172. And the rendition seems solid according to the reviewer. Look at the review on avsim.
 
Just to chime in here. I have a plethora of 172 choices. It is the ONE airplane I have real life experience in. I have all the MS flight sims back to 2000 Pro, I have XPlane, and I have purchased the Carenado. I have the RealAir 172 free download for FS9, the "trainer" that I downloaded somewhere, the green and white one. I will be purchasing BOTH 172's from A2A and RealAir when they're released. The Flight1 version is one I do not own.

I must say, I am totally convinced of the Carenado over any default just in the handling department, and when I plot and plan flights, the fuel burn is very accurate to what I used to see in the actual airplanes I flew. I would have loved to have an airplane equipped like the default FSX 172SP with all the radios and stuff, but in real life I didn't have access to a GPS except for ONE of the aircraft in the fleet I had access to. We all got one lesson on that GPS. The Carenado is very much like what I flew. If I could get an intermittent radio, it'd be just like the real thing! I like the fact that one must hand fly it at all times, because that is all I ever did. Even the sound is very much like what I remember.

The Trainer, whose author and source I cannot recall just now, is a big improvement over the default FS9 172 in handling both on the ground and in the air. The Carenado (FSX version) is even better. It handles the way I remember, the feel when turning, the amount of rudder needed, the attention to trim, etc.

The worst one of the bunch is the XPlane version. Twitchiest, nastiest thing. Although I will say it will stall/spin you into the ground if you're sloppy. That actually is a good thing to avoid, but the real 172 is so docile one must be exceptionally careless to do that. XPlane is way too sensitive.

If RealAir and A2A can top the Carenado, I'm going to be ecstatic.
 
i appreciate all of the good feedback. for now, I think I will stick with the flight1 version and wait on the realair or a2a version.
 
The issue of a realistic 172 FDE was brought back some time ago and Bernt Stolle, who having worked on the 182 with Carenado, offered to make a good 172 FDE provided he had some real data available from people flying it. I offered to help and I got his questionnaire, but unfortunately, even though I flew once or twice per month, our club's planes are grounded due to insurance cover issue (one effect of the terrible crisis in this country I guess) so I haven't had a chance to get the data, having not flown since July.

I have now taken up membership to another club who operate three nice sparkling 172Ps and flew with them this Saturday. Once they get to know me and trust me I think I may be able to collect the data Bernt needs in a couple of flights.
 
To be honest, I keep looking for seomthing behaving like in real life

I have the Carenado one on FSX and X-Plane 10.

The XP10 feels more close to the real one I fly, but in both sims the behaviour fails when it comes to wind. Recently I was flying out of LSZB with winds, variable, 8 to 14 knots coming from front to 90 degrees sideways. I must say, that boths sims cannot simulate the real behaviour on takeoff nor on landing.

While manipulations are much better to handle in FSX C172 from Carenado.

I have been talking to a flight instructor at LSZF a few weeks ago and he said that by far the most realistic FDE he found was the RealAir one. He flys a turbine duke in real life and on FSX.

Conclusion for me is to wait for the RealAir C172 ;)

Cheers
Martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top