• There seems to be an up tick in Political commentary in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site we know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religiours commentary out of the fourms.

    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 politicion 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 amoung members. It is a poison to the community. We apprciate 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.

New Carenado Archer is up

FSX is growing daily...new environments, new scenery, new planes and the endless artistry of the painters in the community are really having an impact now.
 
heywooood said:
FSX is growing daily...new environments, new scenery, new planes and the endless artistry of the painters in the community are really having an impact now.
Click to expand...

Very true, was thinking this earlier since I have been setting my new system up slowly, so many addons to choose from. I think I may only have a couple of ports and the rest quality native aircraft.
 
My first and somehow still favourite Carenado purchase for fs9. Like that bird, glad they reworked it for FSX with more paintscemes and usual quality:applause:

Alex
 
Yes - although i moaned about the thought of having to buy it "again" - it really is up to the usual excellent Carenado standard. Perhaps it would not have hurt them to allow the small window to open - as when flying the real thing it was a nessesity as often i would forget to get the key from the flight school and use my mobile to ask someone to pass it through to me - saving unstrapping etc :jump:
 
Is it just me, or does the pitch axis seem really twitchy? Not sure - just gave it a first quick flight and haven't formed a full impression yet, but was wondering. Maybe I'm just too used to their 152 and 172.
 
I agree Alan - Pitch always seems to be odd especially on their Pipers. Using trim does help settle it down a bit.
 
gajit said:
I agree Alan - Pitch always seems to be odd especially on their Pipers. Using trim does help settle it down a bit.
Click to expand...

The trim helped a little, although I still found it difficult to get it slowed down and stabilized for approach.

Am thinking the aircraft.cfg might need a tweak for pitch sensitivity. Will see.
 
Alan_A said:
The trim helped a little, although I still found it difficult to get it slowed down and stabilized for approach.

Am thinking the aircraft.cfg might need a tweak for pitch sensitivity. Will see.
Click to expand...


send an email to Carenado - I have gotten a reply to every single one I have sent them..and with issues like that it is important because they will only address 'problems' that are common.
 
Alan_A said:
The trim helped a little, although I still found it difficult to get it slowed down and stabilized for approach.

Am thinking the aircraft.cfg might need a tweak for pitch sensitivity. Will see.
Click to expand...

I agree - it can be like a boat pitching - i feel sick ...............:pop4:
 
Let's hope Carenado have learnt their lesson after the Seneca debacle and have actually properly beta tested this bird. I don't want to sound negative but a little while longer in beta would have avoided all the patching that was required.
 
Dunno bout the Seneca as i don't have it but i find Carenado's latest a real gem. The pitch might be a little sharp but it trims out wonderfully. The model, inside and out is exquiste, textures are superb ( there was a topic going on here about the pros and cons of photoreal textures, if you want to know about the pros Carenado will show you, inside and out ! :applause: ), sound is superb too.

I have never flown a real Archer II ( do have a real checklist from a friend :) ) but Carenado sure does a perfect job of making me believe it feels like this !

Btw, fuel selector switch seems to be stuck here... can anyone verify that ?....

I'm lovin it ! :jump: ( thanks for the HU Heywoody ! :applause:)

View attachment 8721View attachment 8723View attachment 8722View attachment 8724

Cheers,
Jan
 
I agree Jan, I think it is a wonderful plane to fly.


Archer1.jpg


Archer2.jpg
 
thearrowmaker said:
Let's hope Carenado have learnt their lesson after the Seneca debacle and have actually properly beta tested this bird. I don't want to sound negative but a little while longer in beta would have avoided all the patching that was required.
Click to expand...


Yes - Carenado must not drop their standards and lose that good reputation.
 
Javis said:
Dunno bout the Seneca as i don't have it but i find Carenado's latest a real gem. The pitch might be a little sharp but it trims out wonderfully. The model, inside and out is exquiste, textures are superb ( there was a topic going on here about the pros and cons of photoreal textures, if you want to know about the pros Carenado will show you, inside and out ! :applause: ), sound is superb too.

I have never flown a real Archer II ( do have a real checklist from a friend :) ) but Carenado sure does a perfect job of making me believe it feels like this !

Btw, fuel selector switch seems to be stuck here... can anyone verify that ?....

I'm lovin it ! :jump: ( thanks for the HU Heywoody ! :applause:)

Cheers,
Jan
Click to expand...

I'm not a pilot in IRL but I've had the controls of an Archer, and this one feels right in all respects execpt for the pitch. The Dreamfleet Archer models (the Archer II and then the Archer III) really seemed to have it nailed, so that's another frame of reference.

I agree there's a lot to like about the Carenado model - and I really like Archers - so I'm hoping that either through Carenado or on our own, we can get it tweaked.

Last night I tried another flight in unstable air, and had to do a lot of fighting to stay in trim, with big excursions - 500 fpm plus up, then down. After that, in the same conditions, I loaded the Carenado 172, which was much more stable - more stable than a real Archer, which is probably right, but the contrast with the Carenado model was a little too strong. It seems to me as though they've nailed their Cessna's, but there's some sort of pitch issue that seems to be traveling through their Pipers from one to the next.

Again, I hope it's fixable.
 
I already have the FS9 version of this and am quite happy with it. However I would like to ask a question of anyone who has purchased this FSX version, who already owned the original. Do you believe, hand on heart, that the improvements justify a second purchase, or would you say that the improvements are marginal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top