A2A is MIA

[robains]

I guess this must be a new meaning of MIA ... happily flying all A2A aircraft for P3D V5.3 ... no melted buildings, no popcorn weather, no ridiculously short LOD radius, and 3 monitor bliss with fully integrated RXP 750/650 540/430 on my RSG Units, DX12 60+ FPS and all maxed out graphics ... flying bliss.

Cheers, Rob.

[Skycat]

Rob, I have to agree with you. I barely touch MSFS despite all it offers 'out of the box.' I flew a circuit in P3Dv5 last night in the A2A P-51D and I was very content. ORBX Global products, Active Sky P3D and REX Sky Force P3D are installed.

Actually, most of my civil flying last week was in FSX over GEX+UTX scenery and enjoying the Accusim P-47D Razorback. I love that plane!

[DrumsArt]

+1 to both

Richard.

[bobsk8]

Tried going back to P3D after flying MSFS for a bit over a year Couldn't do it, it was so bad compared to MSFS.. Wiped it from my hard drive.

[ratty]

I've had an interesting couple of days. My hard drive with P3D on it is acting up, so for a flying fix I went to MSFS, which I haven't used in a couple of months. As I found before, the gee-whiz scenery of MSFS was appealing for a while, but I find it so lacking when it comes to FLYING. I reinstalled my Steam version of FSX, grabbed the Civ Mustang and the Cherokee, and downloaded the ORBX scenery. I'm MUCH happier with FSX, and it'll be my go-to sim until I get P3D up and running again.

I think the difference between the MSFS and FSX/P3D camps is simply based on our individual priorities. I want planes that fly like planes, and for me the appearance of the scenery is a very distant second to the experience of flight.

[Seat7A]

I have not used MSFS for over a year. Quite simply because P3D is so much better and perhaps most importantly a flight simulator with A2A, Q400 and Maddog. It is good that there is something for all of us. Probably Comanche in MSFS would get me thinking differently

[twsharp12]

I have not used MSFS for over a year. Quite simply because P3D is so much better and perhaps most importantly a flight simulator with A2A, Q400 and Maddog. It is good that there is something for all of us. Probably Comanche in MSFS would get me thinking differently

Landclass is superior until they sort out the abrupt changes for different satellite images. Flew near Xi'an China on MSFS yesterday and it looked pretty bad.

[Ron Attwood]

Tried going back to P3D after flying MSFS for a bit over a year Couldn't do it, it was so bad compared to MSFS.. Wiped it from my hard drive.

Just the once? Three times I've succumbed to 'nostagia' and three times I've uninstalled P3Dv5. I'll never to tempted again unless the 'Cloud' goes base over apex, leaving me with nothing. As for the flying aspect..weeeell MFS is improving by the update. There are fewer and fewer niggles with the FDs as we go along. I say this as a person who has an hour in a C152 and an hour in a Warrior. So I ought to know right?

[Blitzer]

As I found before, the gee-whiz scenery of MSFS was appealing for a while, but I find it so lacking when it comes to FLYING.

A Boeing 247D has recently been released for MSFS and it has some very Accusim like traits, effectively the developer has taken a similar path as A2A and provided something that is perhaps a lot closer to what we have become accustomed to from A2A. It’s actually refreshing to see another developer on board doing this and pushing aircraft to the next level, but actually in MSFS.

What is particularly astounding is the low entry price. £14.67 / €17 / $20.47
Don’t be fooled into thinking the low price means poor quality it is not, it is very good. While it does not have ALL the bells and whistles of Accusim it is an extremely good starting point and very detailed with some very nice touches.
Certainly something to enjoy while we continue to wait for the A2A Comanche.

[ImpendingJoker]

Aye, the new propeller model that has been implemented into the C152, C208, and the Kingair have really upped the realism factor of the base aircraft. That said, I am currently loving the Flysimware Cessna 414, which has similar features to A2A, like a guided walk around, and is a pleasure fly and challenge to fly well. The Twin Otter is also one of my go to planes for scratching the complexity itch. For those of you saying that P3D is better, this is tacitly untrue, as everyone of you site the numerous addons that you are using to make it better. P3D's base architecture is still largely unchanged from MSP/FSX and it's this open architecture that allows OTHERS to make it better, while L-M sits around and collects the money for doing next to nothing. Also lets not forget that FSX was very bad when it released, and it wasn't until Service Pack 2 that any real head way was made to make it better(SP1 only made it more stable), and after SP 3, Microsoft only collected money while Aces tried to keep it on life support. Had it not been for the 3rd party developers keeping it going for all these years, FSX would have gone the way of the dodo many years ago, and forgotten as the horrible base sim that it was. It's fine to look back, but don't forget the bad when you do it. The amount of money I've spent on MSFS pales when compared to what I spent on FSX, FSX:SE, P3Dv3 & 4. When A2A finally brings the Comanche to MSFS what will you all say then? Will you be just another bandwagon riding fair weather fan? Only time will tell.

[ImpendingJoker]

I have not used MSFS for over a year. Quite simply because P3D is so much better and perhaps most importantly a flight simulator with A2A, Q400 and Maddog. It is good that there is something for all of us. Probably Comanche in MSFS would get me thinking differently

Landclass is superior until they sort out the abrupt changes for different satellite images. Flew near Xi'an China on MSFS yesterday and it looked pretty bad.

You're mistaking land class for ground texturing. The land class in MSFS is many times superior to that of even Orbx's region reworks. On the texture side, I will agree they need to do some hand blending to not make the transitions so jarring but even Orbx had very bad boarders when they first released the PNW. It wasn't till later that they added the blending and then it only looked good if you had FTX Global. The only thing that MSFS really needs to tone down on is the trees. Too many trees in places they shouldn't be but then, that is STILL a problem in P3D and FSX to this day.

[Blitzer]

That said, I am currently loving the Flysimware Cessna 414, which has similar features to A2A, like a guided walk around, and is a pleasure fly and challenge to fly well.

Yes, I picked up the 414 and within a day or two the 247D. The 414 is indeed very well done, although I have to admit not really trying the walk around. To me it is lacking the Accusim element, but nonetheless it has been very well done and has lot fi character. I was flying it earlier and have to admit I looked around the cockpit and wondered just how cool the Accusim Aerostar would have been, I really hope A2A do crack MSFS soon and do get back to finishing off the Aerostar I can only imagine how cool it would be or for that matter the 414 with Accusim.

[ImpendingJoker]

That said, I am currently loving the Flysimware Cessna 414, which has similar features to A2A, like a guided walk around, and is a pleasure fly and challenge to fly well.

Yes, I picked up the 414 and within a day or two the 247D. The 414 is indeed very well done, although I have to admit not really trying the walk around. To me it is lacking the Accusim element, but nonetheless it has been very well done and has lot fi character. I was flying it earlier and have to admit I looked around the cockpit and wondered just how cool the Accusim Aerostar would have been, I really hope A2A do crack MSFS soon and do get back to finishing off the Aerostar I can only imagine how cool it would be or for that matter the 414 with Accusim.

Yes, I too, wonder what the Aerostar would have been like, and hope that it will still be born into the worlds of MSFS and P3Dv5. One thing I would suggest is FSRealistic. It is a very similar program to that of the A2A Accu-Feel. It injects sounds and vibrations into the simulator to make it more immersive. The best part is, you can try it free for 7 days. I only needed 2 to decide to buy it, and it works on a very wide variety of aircraft from the heavies to GA and even helicopters. There is also a better interior for the 414 over at Flightsim.to, that darkens the gray a bit and changes the seats to a dark gray and removes the "mirror" at the back. Not may repaints for it yet as it is still "early access", so repainters are not too keen on maybe having to redo liveries more than once in case they change something in the model with a future update, which I can understand. Sadly though the good press the 247D is getting is lost on me, as it fits into a period of aviation that holds very little interest for me, much like the GeeBee planes being released next in the Legends series. The "Golden Age of Aviation" to me is boring, but I do admit that a lot of innovation happened in that time. It's like the 1950's, a lot of very ugly, very stupid airplanes came into being during that time but, I acknowledge the progress that was made there in.

[Rioku]

Tried going back to P3D after flying MSFS for a bit over a year Couldn't do it, it was so bad compared to MSFS.. Wiped it from my hard drive.

That and the new propeller model is great, so MFS20 is my choice.

[twsharp12]

I have not used MSFS for over a year. Quite simply because P3D is so much better and perhaps most importantly a flight simulator with A2A, Q400 and Maddog. It is good that there is something for all of us. Probably Comanche in MSFS would get me thinking differently

Landclass is superior until they sort out the abrupt changes for different satellite images. Flew near Xi'an China on MSFS yesterday and it looked pretty bad.

You're mistaking land class for ground texturing. The land class in MSFS is many times superior to that of even Orbx's region reworks. On the texture side, I will agree they need to do some hand blending to not make the transitions so jarring but even Orbx had very bad boarders when they first released the PNW. It wasn't till later that they added the blending and then it only looked good if you had FTX Global. The only thing that MSFS really needs to tone down on is the trees. Too many trees in places they shouldn't be but then, that is STILL a problem in P3D and FSX to this day.

Yes you're right. The ground texturing was a little jarring. I'm aware that this will defer from region to region though. Blending would be nice. The map where I live in pretty washed out and an ugly and unrealistic green over everything. Maybe I need to look at settings or something but it's not my preference. I will say, MSFS is superior around large cities.