Aircraft model selection

[Captain_Eirik]

This isn't the typical question that you'll see after that heading...:D

OK, as I am narrowing down what choices that I am going to make as far as which aircraft, I am curious about the aircraft model itself.

For example, if I were looking at building a Fokker 100, I have both the Project Fokker freeware version as well as the Digital Aviation payware version. Which model would I be better off using?

When setting up the cockpit, do I want something basic with no frills such as the freeware model because any of the operational systems will be handled by the hardware and software systems in place with the Sim setup itself ?

Or do I want the Payware modeled with the systems, switches etc. modeled so that I somehow plug in to those with the sim?

Also, is there anything in particular that I am looking for in a model that makes it a better choice for use in a cockpit system?

[BHawthorne]

These are not really questions people can answer for you. It's all personal preference. Sure you can get opinions on these things, but what are you really shooting for, not just what others want? I think you setting your goals for the build are more important than random opinion of others about a few add-ons. The way I went about my particular simpit choice was I set my priorities. Do I want something real or do I want something with readily available simpit parts? Are there any decent aircraft for what I want to build? If there are, buy them all and settle for the one that best suits your needs. The aircraft add-ons are the cheapest part of the whole build. It doesn't hurt to buy them all and test them out. Ultimately, your enjoyment of the build process and flying it should take priority, not what others might think of that particular aircraft.

[Captain_Eirik]

I'm more interested if it makes a operational difference which one I use. I can choose a model on performance and enjoyment with no problem.

I've noticed several people using freeware aircraft models or turning off certain aspects of their payware. Is there a reason beyond personal preference?

[Geremy Britton]

Ah, i just noticed this post. I guess than answers my previous question on your introductory post about what aircraft. Deciding is the hard part LOL ... trying to find a great aircraft to fly, that's comfy, you enjoy being in yourself and of course is supported by FS.

I'll look forward to hearing about your decision. :)

[chukles]

Trying to determine which aircraft to build is a daunting task for me. My heart is telling me (and I am listening) to build the C130. The fun side tells me to build a
Corporate jet.

As I have been thinking about this, an idea popped into my head, but do not know if it is feasible. Can you have the best of both worlds? A truly realistic C130, but by swapping out the instrument panel face plate, a corporate based model? True the Lear would not be as realistic, but would be exciting! I assume this could be done.....what do you think?

[orwell84]

Why not build a more generic cockpit that allows you to choose more than one aircraft to fly? That way, you wouldn't be a slave to finding and copying measurements, panels, etc, for a specific aircraft. You could build in the systems and features that are important to you.

I am building a 737 shell. I am trying to make the shell as accurate as possible but the systems themselves will be quite basic. I am considering having a removable MIP face that will allow me to use the same monitors to display round analogue guages for use with something like the B-25 in Il2 Sturmovik. I know this seems really odd as a 737 looks nothing like a B-25. But looking out airplane windows at a projected image, using a yoke and throttle, this is immersive enough for me. This will limit the detail of the systems I can have in the 737, but that's fine with me.

[chukles]

That sounds like an awesome Idea. I could change the face and have a new layout. !

[Ronson2k9]

I would use the one that is the best and least taxing on your computer. As you are building a sim cockpit the operational side is going to be quite covered by you. The more complete version is for those that wouldn't be using a full out cockpit but still want all the functionality of one. So in your simulation as you are building all that functionality in yourself you need not use all the panels and so on that come with the more modeled version.

Aircraft Model to Hardware it's a sliding scale. The more you have of one the least you need of the other. Sort a speak. More over the more you have in the way of physical controls the least you will need the virtual controls. Eventually turning the virtual controls off in favor of the physical ones.

That said I would if you are looking for variety in your flights pick a model that has different model variations? For the Fokker perhaps the cockpit might be the same for the many variants of their commuter aircraft. You could conceivably fly with different loads and dimensions making the sim more versatile.

Once you have decided what type of flying you want to simulate. I would pick the geography (routes). Then from there the airlines and equipment that fly them then the best model (not necessarily a payware one) but the one that is the most accurate from an airframe standpoint to the actual aircraft. Then build on that.

[anatoliy]

can someone tell wich softaware better to use FSX OF FS2004? and why?

[Ronson2k9]

Mostly it depends on what software you want to run inside your FS... Some addons only work for one or the other so depending on what addons you are running that would be the one I would use and that starts with the aircraft and works it's way down.

[WarpeD]

This is both a philosophical question as well as an emotional one. Two questions need to be answered. First, what type of flying do you want to do? Second, within the bounds of the first question, what aircraft excites your interest enough to spend several hundred hours and several hundreds if not thousands of dollars building a simpit? As an example: if you want to replicate airline flying, then you're going to get a lot more flying action in terms of landings and takeoffs by replicating a 737 or the like. Narrowing this choice down further, you can also assess your budget. If spending on the low side, what cockpit is easier to replicate on the cheap? If getting spendy, how much is available in terms of flight sim products to flesh out the gear that you'll need for realistic operations?

My own situation can help illustrate. What kind of flying? Bush flying - exploratory sorts of stuff. Point to point, but in a hurry. There's no such thing as a "bush jet." I don't mean a jet that can land on an unimproved strip. I mean a jet that can land on the same sort of crap that a Twin Otter would find comfy, low stall speed and all that. No such animal exists. No problem. X-Plane gives users very easy access to accurately designing an airframe/power plant combination that can handle such conditions. So the what kind of jet thing here is whatever I want that fits the mission, as long as I can design something that flies appropriately. Cockpit style considerations come up next, and since I have limited space and hate "half cockpits" that only replicate the left seat, I've gone for more of a fighter configuration, the front seat of a tandem setup. Of course, here things get really easy for me, since I can design and build whatever appeals to me with complete artistic and engineering freedom. Glass cockpit? No problem. One can do lots of clever things within the X-Plane instrumentation scheme, and there are aftermarket software solutions as well. Do I feel like using a Thrustmaster Cougar instead of a yoke? Equally no problem. In short, I've adapted the cockpit I want based on a completely logical chain of decisions. At this point I now "get smart" about the sorts of systems that would be in an aircraft with equipment similar to what I've conjured up from my insane imagination. That's how I design all my own control panels, and I lay out the cockpit both by determining what's been done in a similar real world cockpit as well as what makes sense to me ergonomically. An excellent guide here is the F-16 layout, which is extremely comfortable and well thought out.

That's what worked for me. And whatever cockpit one builds, it should be both what they want and what they are capable of building in a reasonable amount of time.

Best simulation: X-Plane. Reason: More user extensible in aircraft creation, aircraft flying accuracy and in plugin based enhancement. It also scales down to older equipment very well. It's a bit of a frankenstein in some ways, but given it's capabilities I've found it to be the most flexible option in comparison to other sims like M$FS, FlightGear and the like. X-Plane is currently the only retail simulator still in active development. X-Plane 10 is predicted for Christmas release.

Best computer: Whatever you can afford (especially with X-Plane). My philosophy: If you're going to spend money, time and space on a cockpit, your first best buck is spent on your computers. Yes, computer(s). It's too inexpensive these days to not take advantage of the benefits of networking multiple systems. And these are the first arbiters of the quality of the ultimate experience. The thing to remember here is that no matter how pretty your cockpit is, if the view out the window sucks, you will very quickly tire of the novelty of your completed cockpit.