Guest Private-Cowboy Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 I just did a short flight from Hobart to Bruney Island and found the strip pretty quickly. It all looked very doable from above so I descided to land there. I settled my Mooney slowly onto the strip and was already rolling out as suddenly a bump in the strip caused the front wheel to collapse... After skidding along the strip for a bit I finally came to a hold about 20feet in front of a few roos that where watching (and prolly lauging). I thought the FSX would call such a thing a 'crash' and end the flight but I skidded to a halt and could disembark the plane. Now I have to tell my mechanic about that. Man, he's not going to like that. Bottom line, be careful with your Mooney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogie Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 hello there is not to wound this the principal one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwlee Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 A bit brave trying to land the Mooney there. Marchhetti is fine, though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Private-Cowboy Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Well the strip looked perfectly judging from an overpass, wide enough and long. I was mistaken as it seems But why is the SF260 better suited for that than the Mooney??? Both have retractable gear and "normal" wheels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwlee Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 I think the Marchhetti can fly a little slower and is perhaps a little lighter? Being Realair, it will have a better (more interesting at least) Flight Model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Private-Cowboy Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Well, the Mooney is not an aerobatic plane as the SF260. The flight model of the Mooney may be just as good as the one of the SF260. That you're not able to do spins and barrel rolls does not mean it is bad, it's just not made for that. And about speed and weight I'm not so sure... SF260 empty weight around 1700lbs (gross weight 2430lbs) M20J empty weight 1671lbs (gross weight 2740lbs) So depending on how you load them, the weight is pretty much the same. And the Mooney can fly as slow as 60, althouth I prefer a little safety margin. I don't know the SF260 speeds but I don't think she will be much slower. The undercarriage is also similar so I'd say the SF260 is not more able to land there as a Mooney would be. Prolly you should not do either one but heck ... it's a sim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolter van der Spoel Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Great screenies ! Thankx for sharing ! Personally I use the Aerosoft Beaver, one can land that almost on a stamp, wich is quite handy with the little strips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biscuit Chucker Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 If you've ever set foot on the strip at Bruny IRL, you'll quickly find it's buried in inches of roo-poo! Haha.. Actually it's nice and solid, very rocky with lots of pebbles-lots of roo-poo though so I wouldn't want to be landing there at night, especially with no PAL! Great pics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 You really should get the ReaAir Scout for this! Specially the Scout Tundra with the big wheels would have helped here. But I use the normal Scout for all my flights and it can land really slow (42kts). The Ideal plane for FTX! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Private-Cowboy Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Oh the Scout is nice. I got it as 'American Champion' from Flight1 but I did return it for a refund. As nice as the plane is and as great as it flies I just don't feel comfy in those clinically clean VCs that RealAir does. The VC of my Carenado Mooney looks much much more like a real plane interior and less than a inside of a die-cast model. I need planes that make me feel at home and the Scout unfortunately did not. It's pretty sad because otherwise that package is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Hall Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Now I have to take the 260 down to Bruny and give it a go, thanks for sharing those shots. I guess we can keep pushing the envelope now and see just what we can land on these strips. sounds like fun lads, whos in??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Oh the Scout is nice. I got it as 'American Champion' from Flight1 but I did return it for a refund. As nice as the plane is and as great as it flies I just don't feel comfy in those clinically clean VCs that RealAir does. The VC of my Carenado Mooney looks much much more like a real plane interior and less than a inside of a die-cast model. I need planes that make me feel at home and the Scout unfortunately did not. It's pretty sad because otherwise that package is great. I know what you mean: this was the main reason why I waited a loooong time before getting the SF260... But when I finally got it, the incredible smooth gauges (beautifully 3D too!) made me go wow! I also like the way you turn the dials and so on: very easy and intuitive. But I would also like some wear and tear... Still, I bought the Scout recently because I wanted a slow highwinger and well, as I said, thise gauges.... it all looks so good...! But still I can understand your dissatisfaction with it. In between the SF260 and the Scout I bought the Aerosoft Dornier Do-27 because of that wear and tear it had! If you want to have a plane that looks real and 'lived' THAT's the plane to get! It is awesome! But in the end I found it to be a bit much work, keeping things repaired and starting up was a lot of work... At that was in a time I didn't fly too much: now I am flying all the time again and maybe I should reinstall that Do-27. It is a one-of-a-kind and unique addon aricraft that's certainly worth checking out! Hm, forgot that it did have quite an impact on fps... that was a pity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biscuit Chucker Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 kman, just don't challenge the AI, they are experts at that kind of thing.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Oh the Scout is nice. I got it as 'American Champion' from Flight1 but I did return it for a refund. As nice as the plane is and as great as it flies I just don't feel comfy in those clinically clean VCs that RealAir does. The VC of my Carenado Mooney looks much much more like a real plane interior and less than a inside of a die-cast model. I need planes that make me feel at home and the Scout unfortunately did not. It's pretty sad because otherwise that package is great. I know what you mean: this was the main reason why I waited a loooong time before getting the SF260... But when I finally got it, the incredible smooth gauges (beautifully 3D too!) made me go wow! I also like the way you turn the dials and so on: very easy and intuitive. But I would also like some wear and tear... Still, I bought the Scout recently because I wanted a slow highwinger and well, as I said, thise gauges.... it all looks so good...! But still I can understand your dissatisfaction with it. In between the SF260 and the Scout I bought the Aerosoft Dornier Do-27 because of that wear and tear it had! If you want to have a plane that looks real and 'lived' THAT's the plane to get! It is awesome! But in the end I found it to be a bit much work, keeping things repaired and starting up was a lot of work... At that was in a time I didn't fly too much: now I am flying all the time again and maybe I should reinstall that Do-27. It is a one-of-a-kind and unique addon aricraft that's certainly worth checking out! Hm, forgot that it did have quite an impact on fps... that was a pity... It would not take a lot of work to "dirty up" the Scout/SF260 cockpits with a graphics editor to be honest. Maybe even a bug splat or two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwlee Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 ;)Private-Cowboy Blinding me with actual figures for the 2 planes ....... I deserved that! Suffice to say, the SF260, even with full tip tanks, is quite easy to land at YBYI Bruny Island and YSFY Sandfly. I (and Hutchie) have even landed Marchhettis at Mt King William III - now that was hairy! MKWIII is just a scratch in the forest - no field round it - and trees either end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Hall Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 hey Biscuit, how did ya get the AI to do that, In the past whenever my son was getting beaten by a computer game , he blamed them for cheating, Now I now he is right lol cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biscuit Chucker Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Obviously from the ugliness of the screens this is pre-FTX, but I was just flitting through traffic one day (hence the blurries) and this idiot burner driver chooses the dirt over the tar! ??? Was good to watch though, he slammed on those brakes! There are some nutters out there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 It would not take a lot of work to "dirty up" the Scout/SF260 cockpits with a graphics editor to be honest. Maybe even a bug splat or two... Well, I did give it a try (for the SF260), but adding a scratch or splat here and there looks weird because all the rest is so squeeky clean... All that leather is soooooo clean...! You have to do it all, really, to make it look convincing: I mean, also the gauges need a scratch here and there. I ended up with a mod for the backgroundpanel: an off-white one with 'embedded' shadows, you can download it on Avsim, but to make it dirty all over was a bit too much for me. I might give the Scout another try though...! EDIT: You can see that mod I made here: http://www.flightsimworld.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=141446 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Private-Cowboy Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 @markwlee: Hehe. Honestly, I believe you when you say the SF260 might do it. But from the figures I see no real reason why that should work better in the SF260 than in the Mooney. I've never flown the SF260 so I've no idea who well it may be able to land there. @John_Venema/J van E: If you'd be able to breath a little more life into the the VCs of the Scout and SF260 they might be indeed the perfect plane. Technically they are already but they just look too 'cold' and 'artificial' for me. I can hardly put that into words but when I compare this VC... ... to that... I know what my preferred plane would be. A plane like that... ... simply does not look like that... ... inside. That just does not fit together and feels wrong, at least to me. The Mooney on the other side has a VC that looks just the way it should look - not totally torn apart but 'used' but the team at Carenado always did a wonderful job with their textures making them just look right. I'd love to fly the Scout but it kinda feels like beeing in the twilight zone sitting in such a squeeky clean VC when the outside of the plane is weathered and torn apart like a bush plane should look like. That's bad luck for me as I like the plane itself and what you can do with her. But I just don't feel at home in here. Besides I found numerous bugs in the FSX-Scout during the first 30min alone. No bad things but enough things. About the Do-27, that was the one 'misbuy' I did for FSX. I love the plane and the details and I love that you can break her and have to maintain her. BUT the framerate is a joke! I get single digit fps most of the time in areas where my Twin Otter or Mooney give me AT LEAST double the framerate. I simply can't fly the Do-27 on my system. In an Airliner that would be no problem as you could turn down the scenery details BUT on a plane like the Do-27 that you fly low and slow some scenery is a must. And given the fact that good craftmanship like the RealAir scout, the Aerosoft Twin Otter or the Carenado Mooney (that are the ones I tried that are 'similar') give 15-20fps on my system where the Do-27 does not even achieve 10fps disqualifies the Do-27 - as simple as that. This is prolly the reason why I will not buy the Dreamfleet Dakota, if it is ever released. It was on my buy-list very long because I wanted a great GA-plane. But looking at the shots I see that same clinically clean look that I don't like in the VC. The Dakota VC also looks like it would be a white board with gauges stuck into it. The Mooney VC just looks like it was built and used and not just designed on a pc ... if you know what I mean. Take a look at the Aerosoft Twin Otter, the VC might not be as great as RealAirs from a technological standpoint BUT it just looks as if the plane would actually be in use and not like you're flying a die-cast model. But the Mooney is something special anyway as it features all things that make great native FSX-addons, subtle bump maps, spec maps, a great VC and great framerate. And the flight model is also very good. It's quite sad that the Mooney has no following and is generally underappreciated as it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.