A2A or Carenado.

[Dadtom65]

Hi all. Do not know which one to pick. A2A 182T, or some thing from Carenado. Not sure if I whant to go that deap into the A2A. I mean the A2A is supposed to operate like a real aircraft, so say when the engine needs a overhaul, do you have to pick another aircraft or is it not that real. It is very tempting though. Think this will be a case of personal choice. Thanks Derek.

[Stewart Hobson]

I would recommend going with the 172 or Cherokee first to see how you like it.  The experience kinda grows on you after awhile.  I love my Cherokee, and with the exception of bush flying, which you *might* use the 182T for, I fly it everywhere and anywhere, except on exceptionally long flights, say, more than an hour or two.  Engine overhauls are dealt with very easily.  You go into the "shop", hit the button for engine overhaul, and you're done.  After a flight last night, I damaged my right flap on the Cherokee and it stuck in the down position.  Went to the repair shop and repaired it, now good as new.  Changing oil is the same, replacing spark plugs, the same, even tires and batteries, all handled in the repair shop.  Try it out.  After flying A2A, Carenado turns out to be a tad "stale".

 

Stew

[Ziggy]

For the utmost realism go with the A2A 182, also great looking all round!

I own almost all Caranado aircraft including their 182's. While a lot of people will say that the Caranado doesn't come close, I believe it is a wonderful choice for simple start up and go kinda stuff and still looks great even though it's getting long in the tooth, all of the NAV features work great and it handles well compared to the real thing.

If you want to learn the 182 systems go with A2A, it's the real deal!

If you want to get up and fly for fun with great looks and still decent realism quickly, go with the Caranado range.

Hope this helps

[FreeBird]

A2A has soul. It is almost like it is alive. Carenado,s are good but abet lifeless and sterile. You really do get your moneys worth with A2A. Ironically I have been flying the Carenado 210 lately for a change. But A2A has made me a better pilot. Josh

[purduekev]

I concur with Stewart - the Carenado aircraft are visually quite impressive, but once you have flown a few of them you can become tired of the lack of depth in the systems and flight models.  They all seem the same after awhile.

 

If you want a great-looking GA aircraft that you will just use to explore with, then Carenado (or even better Alabeo, their affiliate) is great.

 

If you actually want to fly a realistic GA simulator, with proper systems and flight model, A2A (or Realair) is the route to go.

[Eric Bakker]

Hi Derek,

You should try A2A, no doubt about it. With accusim the plane is so much more alive. And if you don't like the extras you can also switch them off. But trust me, you will not

The Cherokee is my favorite too, but the 182T has more power and a constant speed propeller, if you like that more.

[sightseer]

I bought the A2A Cessna 182 because everyone said it was so good and that I could turn off damage modeling if I wanted. I absolutely

love the plane but it isn't true that you can just get in and fly. I did that one time and my right flap broke and forced me turn back

and land and fix it.

it isn't realistic that something should break simply because I didn't do a walkaround. BUT... the plane is REALLy good and I love to fly it.

Im sure that what flying a real Cessna must be like.

Everyone should try A2A. but Im a big fan of my little Alabeo Cessna. Ive not been disappointed yet with an Alabeo product. I know they're affiliated with carenado but they seem to work better (for me).

and Real Air has always been good...most enjoyable.

[jabble]

A2A = serious flying.

Carenado = fun flying.

 

Not quite true - I find the A2A Cub a lot of fun and I do a lot of serious flying with the Carenado C185 Bush, but generally the A2A range (with Accusim) is as detailed and realistic as it gets, while Carenado are easy, reasonably performing eye candy.

 

Edit: Oh yeah, if you want realistic, check out RealAir too.

[dominique]

Josh said it all. A2A aircraft have soul, a depth that I didn't find in the two Carenados I bought (the 337 and the Abaleo Waco YMF5) which I found toyish, uninteresting.   

 

The A2A Cherokee is a superb beginner aircraft, very stable with a quaint autopilot. The C182 is more powerful, faster. You do not need a MIT diploma or spend nights poring on a pilots's handbook to fly them but you've to do it the proper way. Or they bite. At best, you won't start, At worst your engine will take fire or your flaps will break in flight. Repairing is a matter of some clicks in a special SHIFT 7 page.

 

The Carenados : I flew them a couple of times and they have been gathering dust since. The A2A : I fly them months in a row, they grow on you.

[Guest]

The choice depends on what you focus first when simming.

[pilottj]

Comparing A2A to Carenado is like PMDG to Capt. Sim (or CLS in some cases).  If you want to fly and make aeronautical decisions like a real pilot, go with A2A,  If you want to just look and take screenshots of a pretty looking shiny shell of a plane, go with Carenado.  There is nothing wrong with either choice, it depends what you want to accomplish with your flight simming.

 

Cheers

TJ

[Sylvain Delepierre]

A2A without hesitation. I have the 172 and the Cherokee. All my other aircraft including Carenado stay in the hangar 95% of the time.

[Louis]

Well Derick , i'm a hard core simmer and reading all the above post it all sums up to very true what there saying .

[John Dow]

I used to be a Carenado fan but I always found they lacked realism in one area or another.  For instance most of them have poor engine sound modelling.  That probably doesn't worry many simmers but as you get more in tune with your aircraft you start to rely on engine note for finer adjustments, and quite often the fidelity just isn't there.  (The C182RG actually has prop speed curve modelled in reverse but that's another story).

 

But... for simmers who are still learning all there is to learn about FSX, P3D etc the Carenado range of piston powered aircraft is an excellent introduction to GA simming.  Flight models are real enough to be useful for training, and the cockpits and exterior models are rendered in great detail. I can't recommend their turboprop Caravan unfortunately, as turboprop behaviour just isn't modelled, and without that element of accuracy there's no point in simming in a turbprop.

 

For years, until A2A showed up, the Carenado C182RG was my GA plane of choice, despite the sound problem.  The A2A doesn't yet have a GA aircraft with retractable gear, so this plane is a good way to get your gear checks embedded before landing.  Other ones that still get the occasional outing are the C337, the Mentor, the C185, and occasionally the C206 which has a good floats option.

 

So, as others have said above, A2A rules, but Carenado is also a perfectly good option especially if you're still 'in training'.

[Cabby]

Nothing wrong with Carenado aircraft, I own several, but my premier GA aircraft are the A2A Cherokee/Cessna 182 and the smoking hot RealAir Turbine Duke.

 

 

C.

[pilottj]

One way to think about it, think of your typical PC game...I know this is a 'simulator', but bear with me.  A lot games have 'god mode' options...ie your character can't die, nor are there any consequences to your actions.   Flying Carenados and most FS aircraft are like using FSX/P3D in 'god mode'.  There is nothing wrong with this, it can be fun.  A2A on the other hand, is like playing the game with consequences enabled.   Your decisions/actions have consequences good or bad depending on what you do for a given situation.  The consequences might not happen right away, it may happen much later, thus why it is a good idea to do preflight, checklists and so on.   Carenado and A2A are kind of on the opposite ends of the 'God Mode ON and God Mode OFF spectrum.  Most other developers, ie Aerosoft, Realair, Milviz...etc are somewhere in between.

 

Hope that gives some perspective.  There are no wrong choices, pick what style you enjoy most

 

Cheers

TJ

[Dadtom65]

Hi Guys. Thank you all for your comments, much appreciated. Think it will be the A2A 182 with possibly a couple of the Carenado ones seeing as they have more choice. Anybody any idea on what A2A are working on next. Once again thank you. Derek.

[dominique]

Hi Guys. Thank you all for your comments, much appreciated. Think it will be the A2A 182 with possibly a couple of the Carenado ones seeing as they have more choice. Anybody any idea on what A2A are working on next. Once again thank you. Derek.

 

The T6 Texan has entered into production and the Piper Seminole and T-33 Shooting Star were strongly hinted to. 

 

BTW may I draw your attention to the excellent RealAir Lancair Legacy, one the five best GA sim aircraft of all time...

[Christopher Low]

I have never been into realistically simulating the real world systems, checklists etc. in my virtual planes, but I recently decided to purchase the A2A Simulations Piper Cherokee 180 (because I wanted to start using all of those small grass airfields and asphalt strips that are located throughout the UK; I have been messing about doing circuits at the large airports in the PMDG 737NGX and Quality Wings Avro RJ70 for quite some time). I am so glad that I did, because it's a wonderful little plane. It feels and sounds so "real", and having to think about stuff other than what I can see through the window is making flight simulation more interesting for me. Who knows, maybe I will learn how to navigate via VOR/NDB etc next*

 

* For the record, I would love to learn to do this properly, but I have never found an "IFR navigation for dummies" tutorial that adequately goes through this "step by step". I end up thinking "woah, wait.....er.......why did you do that? How did you do that? How did you know to do that?", and then I am lost!

[jabble]

* For the record, I would love to learn to do this properly, but I have never found an "IFR navigation for dummies" tutorial that adequately goes through this "step by step". I end up thinking "woah, wait.....er.......why did you do that? How did you do that? How did you know to do that?", and then I am lost!

Here ya go!

[PinoyAir]

Whilst asking opinions on aircraft is helpfull, if you can extract the wild emthuisam and extrapolate the chat behind it all.

For another angle on this go to youtube and watch videos on each of the aircraft you're looking at.

 

Ask yourself. Do you want to enter a cold and drak aircraft everytime you sit down to fly? if yes A2A is the 1

Do you want to click every button thats needed for a start up proceedure.? if yes A2A is for you

 

A small percentage of flight simmer acually want this "Everytime"

Most like to have it "Some of the time"

And some would "Never want this" as they would be lost where to start.

 

Think carefully about how you intend to use your simulator and if you're always pushed for time.. would you really want to add an aircraft that will take longer to acutally be flying.

Carenado- are simpler to use they may not be as complex but they are still Excellent aircraft

I've flown them both and hey theres not much difference.

[Captain Z]

For the more "real" experience, A2A is the def choice. I also really like the Realair and Milviz stuff. It's worth checking out.

 

For the Carenado type aircraft, also be sure to check out Alabeo. They are under the same company, and make nice stuff as well.

 

I've been rather enjoying the Alabeo DA42 released recently.

[John Dow]

 

 

Ask yourself. Do you want to enter a cold and drak aircraft everytime you sit down to fly? if yes A2A is the 1

Do you want to click every button thats needed for a start up proceedure.? if yes A2A is for you

 

 

 

You can configure the A2A aircraft to behave like this, or you can have it save the way you last left it.  And the autostart key will work anyway if you just want to get going.

[Kev D]

Hi Derek,

I use the A2A Cessna 182, and I'm a real world pilot PPL. It is, without doubt, the best Cessna simulation out there. To make it better, I bought a set of pilots notes/checklist for the aircraft, and I use 2 ipad apps specifically made for the aircraft. One is the loading and performance, and the other is an ipad E6B computer. both are in the app store, and thoroughly recommended. The checklist was bought from my pilots store. These all make flying the A2A Cessna as real as it gets. There are also freeware ipad apps to teach you the practical way to use VORs too. If you need any more pointers, or the type of checklist I use, send me a private message and I'll pass on all the details.

Kev

[dominique]

Hi Derek,

 the type of checklist I use, send me a private message and I'll pass on all the details.

Kev

Hey Kev

 

that may interest all of us

[jabble]

Hey Kev

 

that may interest all of us

+1

[Christopher Low]

 

Ask yourself. Do you want to enter a cold and dark aircraft everytime you sit down to fly? if yes A2A is the 1

 

You don't need to enter a "cold and dark aircraft" every time you sit down to fly with A2A planes. You just need to quit FSX/P3D without switching the engine off!

 

Further to my comments about the A2A Piper Cherokee 180, I noted the tendency for the plane to "turn to the left" during the take off roll, and also during climb out. This is of course completely realistic, but I find it somewhat annoying. That being the case, I needed to compensate for this by reducing the fuel load in the left wing tank (although the plane still wants to veer to the left when accelerating down the runway). Then I learned that I need to "switch tanks" at regular intervals to keep it stable, because the Cherokee only uses fuel from one tank at a time. Stability in the cruise can also be maintained by switching on the autopilot. This will be very useful for "point to point" cross country flights, so that I can enjoy the scenery without having to touch the control column

 

As for learning IFR navigation, I really think that I need a "step by step" video tutorial. This would b even better if it was done in the A2A Piper Cherokee itself.

[dominique]

Whilst asking opinions on aircraft is helpfull, if you can extract the wild emthuisam and extrapolate the chat behind it all.

For another angle on this go to youtube and watch videos on each of the aircraft you're looking at.

 

Ask yourself. Do you want to enter a cold and drak aircraft everytime you sit down to fly? if yes A2A is the 1

Do you want to click every button thats needed for a start up proceedure.? if yes A2A is for you

 

A small percentage of flight simmer acually want this "Everytime"

Most like to have it "Some of the time"

And some would "Never want this" as they would be lost where to start.

 

Think carefully about how you intend to use your simulator and if you're always pushed for time.. would you really want to add an aircraft that will take longer to acutally be flying.

Carenado- are simpler to use they may not be as complex but they are still Excellent aircraft

I've flown them both and hey theres not much difference.

Saul

 

You may want to revisit yout A2A fleet  . You can use their aircraft without the Accusim module activated and start them up with control E. You lose, of course, most of the fun but if you go all the way, there are a lot of differences. In the aircraft I own anyway.

[Kev D]

OK Dominique, the checklist I use is very good and has everything in it. It is as follows:

Qref Aircraft Quick Reference - Cessna 182T Skylane.

Sales reference: QREF Book CE-182T-1

Cost: $24.95

I bought it from Transair Pilots Shop by mail order in UK - but there must be suppliers everywhere - Pilotmall does them in USA

QREF website: www.qref.com

The IPad apps I use are as follows:

Gyronimo C182T

Gyronimo E6B Pro pad

Both around £7 at the itunes all store.......take a look, you will be impressed

Hope this helps

Kev

[dominique]

thanks !

[ridinroun]

I got my PPL in the Cherokee. A2A is spot on. Carenado aircraft to me are real good except for me I hate the G1000 system. I had a few carenado with it and always ended up losing interest and the I came across the Flight one GTN 750. I love it and it integrates into any aircraft effortlessly and I have since been enjoying all my carenado aircraft.

[Rodger Pettichord]

How can a person go wrong with either A2A or Carenado/Alabeo? Both make really beautiful planes that are wonderful to fly. If I had to choose between them, I'm not sure I could. Now, if they just give them out as freeware...

[dominique]

How can a person go wrong with either A2A or Carenado/Alabeo? Both make really beautiful planes that are wonderful to fly. If I had to choose between them, I'm not sure I could. Now, if they just give them out as freeware...

Rodger

 

Caranedo makes their aircraft with the FSX default set of parameters which is at least 10 years old (actually more as parts come from FS9)  where A2A has been doing since a lot of R&D to externalize the engine modeling and aerodynamics in their own software module (Accusim). 

 

Not only the new aircraft tend to be better and better but older versions that you bought, say four years ago, are regularly upgraded. Very much like OrbX, a real long term commitment to products and customers. Carenado  releases some SP to iron out the main flaws of their new products but has no upgrade policy as they don't do any R&D to improve the simulation core.

 

It also means Carenado has no "wear and tear" modeling, A2A has the best on the market. You do wrong, the plane "breaks". You fly a lot, you have to watch your engine wear. And the flight model is much better within the limits of any such simulations.

 

So, as it was said earlier, at the end, it depends of your expectations but both software houses dont play in the same league.

[Stewart Hobson]

Rodger

 

Caranedo makes their aircraft with the FSX default set of parameters which is at least 10 years old (actually more as parts come from FS9)  where A2A has been doing since a lot of R&D to externalize the engine modeling and aerodynamics in their own software module (Accusim). 

 

Not only the new aircraft tend to be better and better but older versions that you bought, say four years ago, are regularly upgraded. Very much like OrbX, a real long term commitment to products and customers. Carenado  releases some SP to iron out the main flaws of their new products but has no upgrade policy as they don't do any R&D to improve the simulation core.

 

It also means Carenado has no "wear and tear" modeling, A2A has the best on the market. You do wrong, the plane "breaks". You fly a lot, you have to watch your engine wear. And the flight model is much better within the limits of any such simulations.

 

So, as it was said earlier, at the end, it depends of your expectations but both software houses dont play in the same league.

Carenado, for example, doesn't model oil leaks.  A2A does, and if you ignore the leaks, you soon deal with a ruined engine and a complete engine replacement, which, thankfully, you don't have to pay $$$ for.

[Guest]

Just imagine you have to pay with real money anytime you start the engine into a flight sim programm [emoji14]

[dominique]

Just imagine you have to pay with real money anytime you start the engine into a flight sim programm [emoji14]

 

the ultimate frontier of flight simulation   !

[pilottj]

A few have asked A2A to create a cost counter to expand on the aircraft ownership side of things.  It would be fun to compare the operating costs between say the 172 and 182, or a Cherokee vs Comanche or whatever is next.  ie....watch what happens to overhaul and insurance costs when you add a constant speed prop or retractable gear.

 

Cheers

TJ

[Stewart Hobson]

A few have asked A2A to create a cost counter to expand on the aircraft ownership side of things.  It would be fun to compare the operating costs between say the 172 and 182, or a Cherokee vs Comanche or whatever is next.  ie....watch what happens to overhaul and insurance costs when you add a constant speed prop or retractable gear.

 

Cheers

TJ

I would think that's doable.

[Dadtom65]

Hi Torchy821, Thanks very much just checking out the App Store right now. Derek.

[cmitch81]

I have the a2a C-182 and some older Cessna models and based on this very small sample a2a wins hands down. You really have to read the manual and fly it right or things happen/ need to be replaced. The 182 is definitely not "flying on a rail". You really have to get a feel for it. The wear and tear aspect of the model really adds both fun... and some incentive to do things right. A2A has also done the "little things right"! Passengers show up in the cockpit and the plane lists to one side or the other as you fill the wings with gas or if you have an unbalanced passenger load, for example.

 

It is not cheap but it is probably the best purchase I have made in GA... along with my Realair Turbo Duke!

 

cmitch

==============