|
|
Post by Bushpounder on Jul 2, 2015 17:39:21 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2015 17:54:43 GMT -5
Well, that's interesting. No word on when I guess, eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by pivo11 on Jul 3, 2015 1:43:30 GMT -5
Well, well, that's nice.  |
|
|
|
Post by Sandy on Jul 14, 2015 23:58:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pivo11 on Jul 16, 2015 1:32:53 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2015 6:43:38 GMT -5
I've been asking some "blind" questions of one of their beta testers to try and get an idea if this thing is even remotely similar to an Otter in handling. He only answered 1 of the 2 questions so far, but my guess from his one answer is this only slightly resembles an Otter, and that would be in looks only. I'll let you know when I hear back on the other question. At this point, it's very highly unlikely I'll be getting it.
|
|
|
|
Post by pivo11 on Jul 16, 2015 7:25:45 GMT -5
Right. Thanks, Glenn. I remain skeptical.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2015 21:12:01 GMT -5
I wasn't able to find anything more out on the Otter. What I did find out though was that to climb you pull the stick back and raise the flaps. What that tells me is they have no idea how an Otter flies, which means the dynamics will be completely unrealistic (to climb an Otter, you push the stick forward to achieve a level attitude and set the flaps to "Climb". The Otter won't climb without Climb flap, just like the Beaver, although the Beaver does have a slightly nose high attitude). I'm leaving alone myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sandy on Jul 19, 2015 23:05:58 GMT -5
I never knew that about the Beaver or the Otter... Very interesting to learn something so basic about an aircraft type that I've long admired. But obviously I knew very little about those aircraft. Maybe I can get a job as an FDE designer?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2015 6:56:59 GMT -5
Certainly for some companies Sandy  . Truth is, unless you've flown some of these airplanes, you'd make certain assumptions that for most airplanes would be totally logical. However, therein lies the problem when you get to the specialized airplanes. Without experience in them, those assumptions can be completely false, and is why I'm very skeptical of the Milviz version (although I hope I'm totally wrong - if Colin wasn't such a miserable sod, I'd offer myself as a consultant and beta tester as I have a lot of time in Beavers and some in Otters). The way the stock Otter and Beavers handle is that they have extremely high lift wings (therefore high drag). They depend on flaps to give them the lift to get altitude. If you find you aren't going up fast enough in the Beaver, and you decide to pull back on the stick, you just go slower, not up faster. Since you don't have a whole lot of margin to begin with, that's a bad thing. I've been in sinks up north in level flight where the only way to maintain altitude was to put just a tickle of flap on (half a pump on the wobble). Pulling up on the nose only slowed it down, but it still sank. The first thing I was told when I got my Otter checkout was as soon as you get off the water, lower the nose to level attitude, get the flaps (slowly!) to Climb and get the power back to climb. If you pulled back on the stick instead of pushing forward on it, you were going to be introduced to the nearest nesting bird's home in short order. It was like going up on an elevator. You stared straight ahead at the trees right in front of you while they sank beneath you (you hoped!). You soon got used to it, but it's a weird feeling at first, especially since it's such a big airplane (bigger than a Caravan) and goes so slowly (you climb at 80 mph (not knots)). And, like the Beaver, your climb performance resembles more the Cessna 150 than an airplane with a 450/650 (Beaver/Otter) supercharged engine in it. On floats, you're cruising about 95-105/100-115 respectively, again, mph, not knots. All that is why I get skeptical when I hear of one of these airplanes being developed. If you fly the DEFAULT Beaver and use their sounds, you'll feel and hear what a Beaver really flies/sounds like. MS got it right for that airplane. Too bad the graphics are so horrible on it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 15:00:01 GMT -5
I know this is an old thread but since I been away I must resurrect it just for a quick question of Glenn.
Glenn what do you recommend for the most realistic Beaver setup currently if some owns the Aerosoft Beaver and of course the default FSX Beaver?
Do you recommend a combo of the two somehow?
Just curious as that is my main plane. Thanks for any help you can offer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 21:17:02 GMT -5
Todd, I am writing this on my tablet so excuse the errors and brevity. I will write a bit more tomorrow.
The FSX Beaver is EXTREMELY well done. I think the Aerosoft Beaver borrows the FDE from it but I would have to check on that later. It may need a couple of tweaks but mostly it is good. AS say their sound package is of the actual Beaver. BS! The FSX Beaver sounds however, ARE the real thing, so copy those in and use them instead. Do that and you should be good to go.
Where is your op based and what all are you using?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2016 21:40:02 GMT -5
Hey great! Ya I really like the VC of the default beaver but I dont like being restricted to float only so I am using the AS one and I did check the air file it is the same. I copied the sounds over to the AS Beaver and you are right much better. As for my ops, pretty much based out of Ketchikan just flying to the various Forest Service cabins just using a Beaver and 185. Probably going to put a little satellite office at Yakutat to fly a DC-3 in and out of Whitehorse YT, maybe an Aztec there as well if I find a good deal on one Going to start small and as real as I can. I dont want to over do it as I dont have tons of time ya know? Also and I know probably not totally as real as I would like but I would like to do some flying over on the other side around Kenai, the flat terrain over there and I think it actually freezes in the winter so would be a nice change of pace from the float planes and mountains constantly. So at some point if things go well I might hire a couple pilots over that way to fly hunters in and out of all those many camps East of Kenai. But it would most likely just be a 185 or something like that. We will see. Like I said I want to be as real as I can but I also want to get the kind of flying I want too. I dont think that would be too far out of bounds. Hey a small company has to spread their wings a little to make money right |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 6:26:46 GMT -5
Sounds good Todd. Take it from me - don't try to make it "too real". You'll be bored silly in a very short period of time. Do what moves you and you'll be fine. I like your fleet though. I'm thinking of a similar sort of thing up that way (but not directly overlapping of course). On the Aerosoft Beaver, if you're operating wheel/skis or amphibs, sub out the sounds AS used for the gear with the default Beaver's flaps extension sounds. All that stuff is hydraulic in the Beaver (it takes exactly 50 pumps of the handle to get the gear down and locked on the amphib - I know this from experience ) and AS uses electric motor sounds or something. Anyway, I'd be moving out all the AS sounds if you want something realistic. I don't know what they used but it sure wasn't a Beaver. Good luck with the ops. Sounds like a good one. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 8:19:34 GMT -5
Hey thanks Glenn, I appreciate the feedback as always. Good to talk to you again, its been too long.
Glad you hear you are at least leaving the possibility open to starting up something again.
I have swapped out all of the AS Beaver sounds for the defaults and like them much better.
I tell ya after being away for quite a while its really amazing what we have now if you want to fly Bush in Alaska. Besides all of the amazing scenery from Orbx to now have PlanG with waypoints for ALL of the forest service cabins all over Alaska and how great that makes setting up flight plans is amazing. I dont use it during flight as I dont want a moving map unless my plane has a GPS but PlanG really makes planning routes and making FPs so nice. I surely have missed flying FSX. Been flying combat sims exclusively for too long.
Thanks again for the feedback. Look forward to hearing about your new operation at some point when the time is right.
|
|
. Truth is, unless you've flown some of these airplanes, you'd make certain assumptions that for most airplanes would be totally logical. However, therein lies the problem when you get to the specialized airplanes. Without experience in them, those assumptions can be completely false, and is why I'm very skeptical of the Milviz version (although I hope I'm totally wrong - if Colin wasn't such a miserable sod, I'd offer myself as a consultant and beta tester as I have a lot of time in Beavers and some in Otters). The way the stock Otter and Beavers handle is that they have extremely high lift wings (therefore high drag). They depend on flaps to give them the lift to get altitude. If you find you aren't going up fast enough in the Beaver, and you decide to pull back on the stick, you just go slower, not up faster. Since you don't have a whole lot of margin to begin with, that's a bad thing. I've been in sinks up north in level flight where the only way to maintain altitude was to put just a tickle of flap on (half a pump on the wobble). Pulling up on the nose only slowed it down, but it still sank. The first thing I was told when I got my Otter checkout was as soon as you get off the water, lower the nose to level attitude, get the flaps (slowly!) to Climb and get the power back to climb. If you pulled back on the stick instead of pushing forward on it, you were going to be introduced to the nearest nesting bird's home in short order. It was like going up on an elevator. You stared straight ahead at the trees right in front of you while they sank beneath you (you hoped!). You soon got used to it, but it's a weird feeling at first, especially since it's such a big airplane (bigger than a Caravan) and goes so slowly (you climb at 80 mph (not knots)). And, like the Beaver, your climb performance resembles more the Cessna 150 than an airplane with a 450/650 (Beaver/Otter) supercharged engine in it. On floats, you're cruising about 95-105/100-115 respectively, again, mph, not knots. All that is why I get skeptical when I hear of one of these airplanes being developed. If you fly the DEFAULT Beaver and use their sounds, you'll feel and hear what a Beaver really flies/sounds like. MS got it right for that airplane. Too bad the graphics are so horrible on it.