• 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.

Spitfire and Mustang recommendations

Hiya,

Daube said:
The Dunkirk Spitfire from AH is the most recently released model. It is also a Mk.I if I'm not mistaken. Compared with the A2A, the 3D model is a bit nicer and some textures have a very nice photorealistic effect. The flight model, sounds and graphic features are probably as good as the A2A one, but there are less features. Of course, the price is lower too, so it could be a very good choice based on your budget or the features you are looking for.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, i own A2A accusimed Spitfire and flown the AH Spit in Demo modes (which should be fully functional for 15 min).
With the AH one you start to miss the accusim stuf right from the start, in flightmodel and sound for example.

So nr 3 (JustFlight/AH Dunkirk Spitfire Mk.I) is best to compare with nr 1. (A2A Spitfires (Mk.I and Mk.II) without its Accusim addon). Which are also in the same price range.

Regards,

Marcel
 
Thanks for all the input. at the moment, I'm leaning towards the Warbirdsim 'Stangs just for the fact a few of them are available in the two seat configuration. I've never been a "systems" flyer. Mostly because I rarely have more than an hour or two to fly a few times a week. I don't want to spend 45 minutes just getting something started... (Some sim aircraft are so "over modeled" that they are harder to start than the real deal. and I do know how to start a King Air, Citation Encore, Citation Excel and a Challenger 601 for real...)

That is why I love the A2A/Aircraft factory P-51H. I can hop in and fly. I do have Accufeel and that does most of what I want.

I'm also only running P3d 1.4 as my sim as it's pretty much 95-99% FSX compatible.


As far as Spit's go. I'd be happy if someone could rig up a paint kit for Scrub's new Mk V clipwing over at Simviation.
 
Let's not exagerate though: it takes more or less 30 seconds to start the A2A Mustang with Accusim, and less than that for their Spitfire.
Getting the engine up to takeoff temperatures might take something like 5 minutes in the Mustang and you'd better get ready to takeoff in less than 5 minutes in the Spit, if you don't want to overheat the engine ;)
 
Given that your using P3Dv1 and your not a 'systems' flyer I think your choice is sound. A2A/accu-sim is great if you want a study level aircraft and are willing to stay with FSX, but it sounds like you are not.

For spits I used the JF/AH Spifire both BOB (mk1) and MkV and liked them, there level of detail is very high and the Dunkirk version takes it up even more. If the Dunkirk version seams like too much to spend look at the BOB version, good deal for only 15$
 
The only FSX P51D I have are several Warbirdsim ones and I'm very happy with them. The fact that it is not accompanied by "Accusim" doesn't mean that it isn't realistic. You can fly (or even should) fly the WBS P51D by the book and it all different models are absolutely authentic.

When you consider the Mk.V Spitfire a "late model", the RealAir model (Mk.IX and Mk.XIV) and the JustFlight (Mk.V) are the options. They both have their strong points but also their limitations. I personally prefer the looks of the JF Spitfire and to fly the RealAir one. But they are both nice and its a matter of personal preference which one you like best.

Cheers,
Huub
 
A2A Spitfire Mk.I flies in P3Dv3 without any problems.
It functions in P3Dv4 without any major dramas but for the moment it's not quite right.




The glazing is a little hazy but can be either ignored or fixed by turning off reflections IIRC.
 
huub vink said:
The only FSX P51D I have are several Warbirdsim ones and I'm very happy with them. The fact that it is not accompanied by "Accusim" doesn't mean that it isn't realistic. You can fly (or even should) fly the WBS P51D by the book and it all different models are absolutely authentic.
Click to expand...

As I said, the Warbirdsim Mustangs are realistic, for the flight models, 3D models and textures.
But the Accusim brings much more.
So it depends how much realism and which features you're looking for, that's all.
 
All credit to WBS as deserved, but the difference between their Mustang and the A2A one isn't "realism", it's "consequences".

If you don't operate the WBS Mustangs within limits (I have a bunch of them and think they're excellent) then... You didn't fly it by the numbers. That's it. If you don't operate the A2A Mustang within the limits, it breaks.

That, I think, is what people are referring to as "realism", rather than being able to operate by the book numbers.

The consequences of mishandling and abusing are what stops the majority of otherwise fantastic models reaching their full potential, but that's primarily a sim issue, not an add-on one. While getting aircraft to stall correctly and spin is a work of art, rather than a default, for example, and while you can run engines in the red forever, then we need things like Accu-Sim and the 'failure' modules to bring said consequences.

Cheers,

Ian P.
 
In my FS world, most the time I like to just get in and fly.

That is easily done with the WBS Mustangs, but you can also do that with the A2A Accu-sim Mustangs. The pop-up menu provides the option of a quick-start and the ability to turn off the damage, for example.

One other difference between these two Mustangs is the sound. With the Accu-sim version there are a lot of additional squeaks and groans from the landing gear and fuselage as you taxi.

As already stated, both versions have a lot of available repaints. The WBS version offers many different Mustang models, but you have to purchase each package to get them whereas there are only two packages for the A2A version.

As you can see from my Avatar, I've photographed "American Beauty" at one of the local air shows near my home. I have several repaints of it for both the WBS and A2A Mustangs, the A2A modern model being my favorite. The cockpit layout is not accurate as compared to the real plane, but there are some additional textures for the VC that get it pretty close.

Bottom line is that I like both and fly both. :untroubled:
 
Got lucky and received the last copy of the Real Air Spitfire package that Aerosoft had,they are now out of stock. Otherwise the only place I have seen it was from Amazon, and its sold by a company in the UK for $45 plus shipping. Got mine for a lot cheaper then that luckily. Cost just under 13 euro's to buy and ship from Germany, translates to around $16, not even half of what Amazon wants, so you don't always get the best price from them either!
 
Last edited:
Daube said:
As I said, the Warbirdsim Mustangs are realistic, for the flight models, 3D models and textures.
But the Accusim brings much more.
So it depends how much realism and which features you're looking for, that's all.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I tried to say. Accusim just brings some extra features. There is no real difference in realism for the part both models cover.

IanP said:
The consequences of mishandling and abusing are what stops the majority of otherwise fantastic models reaching their full potential, but that's primarily a sim issue, not an add-on one. While getting aircraft to stall correctly and spin is a work of art, rather than a default, for example, and while you can run engines in the red forever, then we need things like Accu-Sim and the 'failure' modules to bring said consequences.
Click to expand...

The RealAir model, which is mentioned in this thread often, doesn't have Accusim but your engine will definitely die, with a huge splash of oil, when you don't keep it within the limits. And this is not the only one. For instance the Classics Hangars FW190 will break when you don't fly them within the limits and even the later model are more reliable than the early models. The Aerosoft Catalina is also a nice example of an aircraft which needs to be flown carefully, because it will fail other wise.

Huub
 
huub vink said:
That is exactly what I tried to say. Accusim just brings some extra features. There is no difference in realism for the part both models cover.

Huub
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean, but it is incorrect to say that Accusim just brings more features.
Accusim models much more aspects of the plane, including the physical behavior of the plane and the behavior of the engine, including supercharger (for the Mustang), types of props (for the Spit), wear, damage, fuel and oil consumption, evolution of temperatures, icing, fouling etc... resulting in a more realistic engine behavior and aircraft performances. Which means, additional realism. Not just features.
 
Can I just suggest here that there is a breakdown in terminology - possibly caused by "English as a second language" all round?*

I think what both of you are trying to say is that you want different things from an aircraft. One person wants 'just get in and fly to realistic numbers' and the other prefers 'consequences to messing up by not flying at realistic numbers'.

As someone put it to me in Skype yesterday: "Warbirdsim = more accurate models, generic systems; A2A = generic models, more accurate systems".

Take your pick... Or get both, which is always the ultimate best answer. :very_drunk:

Cheers,

Ian P.

(* - This includes me. My primary language is utter gibberish.)
 
Penzoil3 said:
Real Air Spitfire PC DVD Game UK




Platform : Windows 7





Price:
 $44.26 + $3.99 shipping
Click to expand...

attachment.php
And the disk version runs in P3D4 very nicely.
 

Attachments

  • 2018-4-25_17-4-29-781.jpg
    2018-4-25_17-4-29-781.jpg
    91.3 KB · Views: 0
Well I guess there is your answer, depends on what your sim experience needs are. I have no comment to make about P-51's I have none. I have the A2A and RealAir Spitfire but for two different reasons.

The A2A because it is the early Mark and is a classic in its own right. And is a typical A2A product, detailed, correct and all those things.
The Real Air Mk IX and later Marks because the Mark IX was the one used by the RAAF extensively which is where my interest lay.

The two Spitfires are very different in some aspects. Size and power being one of them, so there is a difference not just who made them. I do not find either of them difficult to fly or get going and both are great fun in many aspects. They are both difficult on the ground in some aspects having a narrow undercarriage and the pilot sitting back near the wing trailing edge so you have a long nose in front of you and that takes some getting used to. It is great fun to do aerobatics in the Spitfire but I have yet to get any sim model to do a stall turn or spin properly and the Spitfire had a nasty wing drop and would spin very violently in a nose down attitude very quickly.

I would grab the Real Air while I could, it is a classic.
 
Did owners of the old Real Air Spitfire for FSX know there is now an installer for Prepar3d at the Real Air website. The aircraft looks even better!
attachment.php
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 2019-7-5_18-29-48-459 (2).jpg
    2019-7-5_18-29-48-459 (2).jpg
    30.5 KB · Views: 0
  • 2019-6-5_17-37-16-613.jpg
    2019-6-5_17-37-16-613.jpg
    55.8 KB · Views: 0
I will recommend the JF Spitfire Mk I/II, and also the RealAir Spitfire (if it is possible to get it now)

2019-7-20-20-14-55-284.jpg


2019-8-17-23-6-48-796.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top