recommendations on a great king air twin aircraft

[sewells]

I know very little about twins but now want to know more.

After just upgrading form standard to pro I was excited to fly the king air 350. I was pretty disapointed at the graphics detail (expecially the guages) and have been spoiled by the dreamfleet and fsd offerings. What ist he best king air twin aircraft out there? Would the fsd Cheyenne 400 LS be a good substitute? I'm willing to throw some $$s at this one.

---Steve


http://www.flightsim.com/dcforum/Use...874916530e.jpg

[khouseknecht]

On a reccommendation, I bought the Cheyenne. It's a pretty complex aircraft but also has some drawbacks:

1. The gauges in the primary instrument view are too small. FSD knows this and gives you the option to enlarge some of them by clicking on the panel. However, you can't enlarge all of them. Engine gauges can be enlarged, but that's it. I'd like to be able to see the horizon indicator better.

2. HUGE engine nacelles! This has nothing to do with FSD's design, it's just how the plane is built. If you're on base, forget looking out the side window to see the runway. You can't see past the engine housing.

3. Big front panel makes it difficult to see in order to land. Yes, FSD gives you the option of switching to a view that offers only a subset of the instruments to give you a better "over the nose" view. In my opinion, however, this screws up my instrument scan. Now I have to learn to scan two different panels in flight.

4. Despite what Andrew Herd thinks; the virtual cockpit sucks. The default FS aircraft (that have VC's) do it just as good or better. I'm definately not as ga-ga over this feature as Andrew is.

5. The stupid thing taxis at Mach 9!!!

Now, for the good stuff:

1. Counter-rotating props. Very nice. Now you don't have to compensate for p-factor by using rudder on takeoff and climbout.

2. All the panels. There's the primary panel, the overhead, center console, bus panel, etc. And you'll use them all! You have to. I decided not to cheat and try to manually start the engines (without consulting the manual first). Following the checklist on the kneeboard, it took me nearly 15 minutes to figure it out, mostly because I had to search the panels to find the necessary switches. It's that complex. I imagined it would be the same as if I had just sat down in a real Cheyenne and tried to start it up through the checklist.

3. The primary panel view has the radio stack visible. Nice feature.

4. The multi-function HSI is a nice touch.

[Tinfish]

My favourite twin prop plane is the Beech King Air 200,
by Chris Lampard. Its freeware and flies nice; plus Ive added a "water bomb" to soak any planes that hog my air-space!
:)

ReadMe files enclosed for King Air, and water bomb (which is available in the Colorado Forest Fire scenery).

Cheers,

Tin


------

Beech King Air 200 --
---------------------------------------------------

This aircraft was built by Chris Lampard, using Aircraft Factory 99, and repainted by Coleman Green.

The model is partially animated, including propellers, flaps, undercarriage and door. Note that the door is operated by the spoiler key. Ailerons, elevators and rudder are not modelled, mostly because the complexity limits imposed by Aircraft Factory 99 have already been reached. Animations by Lee Hall.


INSTALLATION
------------

Installation is straighforward. Unzip to your AIRCRAFT directory, using folder names.


Recommended Panel
-----------------

Bill Walsh's superb King Air 350 panel ska35v4g.zip has been found to work very well with this aircraft. It also matches the King Air's panel fairly accurately.


Recommended Sounds
------------------

Aaron Swindle's KingAir sounds, produced using S.D.R.A.M., work very nicely. However, any smallish turboprop sounds should however be satisfactory.

And that's it. Enjoy!

The developers can be contacted via:

Aircraft files by Chris Lampard CMDL1650@aol.com
Aircraft configuration file by Steve Small steve.small@bigpond.com

======

Water bomb / fire ReadMe

--

*** www.planesimulation.com ***

Colorado, USA

These two scenery areas represent Ft. Carlson and Grand Junction where the worst of the forest fires are still burning. Each has been assigned an NDB Ft. Carlson being 523Mhz and Grand Junction being 524Mhz. The Fire itself can be partially extinguished using frequency 108.10. So, in theory you would make a pass drop your water effects and toggle 108.10 to firefight.

** Installation Main Instructions**

1.)Cut and paste the folders Colorado and Colorado2 to the folder FS2002\scenery (NOT ADD_ON Scenery!)

2.)Refer to the folder effects for the readme file found within the Colorado folder.

3.)Start Flight Simulator. Select settings on the bottom left side vertical menu. On the left side select under scenery Scenery Library... When at the scenery library manager select ADD AREA. Then find the scenery(NOT ADDON SCENERY) folder in the Pop-up Selection box. Double click the scenery folder. You'll see the 2(more if you have additional scenery from elsewhere) folders you added earlier. Double click the first folder Colorado and click okay. Do that for both folders and then you can finish up in the scenery library. Now the locations should be available when you select
Create A Flight >> Current Location >> Search Add-on scenery under the Scenery areas menu.


**Framerates and settings**

1.) Set effects detail to high. We have tried to make the scenery small enough so that FPS is not affected too much.


*** Copyright and Distribution ***
- This scenery is released as Membershipware. Copyright (C)Owain Robinson and Garreth Jones. You are not permitted to distribute this
archive to any website.

-You are not permitted to change, re-use or alter the sceneries associated textures without explicit agreement on Planesimulations part.


Copyright Planesimulation.com
Owain Robinson and Garreth Jones

This scenery is not to be uploaded to any other website than www.planesimulation.com. International Copryright.


===========

[Jeff S KDTW]

I would definitely recommend the Cheyenne. :-) I will also offer my opinion on the following, with all due respect.

>On a reccommendation, I bought the
>Cheyenne. It's a pretty
>complex aircraft but also has
>some drawbacks:
>
>1. The gauges in the
>primary instrument view are too
>small. FSD knows this
>and gives you the option
>to enlarge some of them
>by clicking on the panel.
> However, you can't enlarge
>all of them. Engine
>gauges can be enlarged, but
>that's it. I'd like
>to be able to see
>the horizon indicator better.

I have never once, other than during my beta testing of this plane, had to use the enlarged gauges. This seems to be a point of contention on many aircraft; however, I have a 19" monitor that I run at 1280x960x16, and I see it all just riiiggghhtt. :9

>
>2. HUGE engine nacelles!
>This has nothing to do
>with FSD's design, it's just
>how the plane is built.
> If you're on base,
>forget looking out the side
>window to see the runway.
> You can't see past
>the engine housing.

If you are on BASE, you better be looking out the forware 45 deg view. :-) This is a large plane that requires an earlier turn to final than smaller GA aircraft. I use the VC and pan so that I can see the runway and my primary gauges simultaneously.

>
>3. Big front panel makes
>it difficult to see in
>order to land. Yes,
>FSD gives you the option
>of switching to a view
>that offers only a subset
>of the instruments to give
>you a better "over the
>nose" view. In my
>opinion, however, this screws up
>my instrument scan. Now
>I have to learn to
>scan two different panels in
>flight.

Personal preference. I won't dispute that one.

>4. Despite what Andrew Herd
>thinks; the virtual cockpit sucks.
> The default FS aircraft
>(that have VC's) do it
>just as good or better.
> I'm definately not as
>ga-ga over this feature as
>Andrew is.

The VC is far from ... errr ... "sucking." Many people, including myself, rank it up with some of the best VC's out there. This one is very subjective, so look at screenshots and make up your own mind.

>
>5. The stupid thing taxis
>at Mach 9!!!

Using the correct procedures outlined in the manual and kneeboard (props/ mixtures), I taxi with no problems--no brakes needed.

>
>Now, for the good stuff:
>
>1. Counter-rotating props. Very
>nice. Now you don't
>have to compensate for p-factor
>by using rudder on takeoff
>and climbout.

This is where the Cheyenne really shines. :9

>2. All the panels.
>There's the primary panel, the
>overhead, center console, bus panel,
>etc. And you'll use
>them all! You have
>to. I decided not
>to cheat and try to
>manually start the engines (without
>consulting the manual first).
>Following the checklist on the
>kneeboard, it took me nearly
>15 minutes to figure it
>out, mostly because I had
>to search the panels to
>find the necessary switches.
>It's that complex. I
>imagined it would be the
>same as if I had
>just sat down in a
>real Cheyenne and tried to
>start it up through the
>checklist.
>
>3. The primary panel view
>has the radio stack visible.
> Nice feature.
>
>4. The multi-function HSI is
>a nice touch.

Again, I offer my differing opinions with all due respect. I just thought it need to be countered.

[hr color=gray]
Jeff S. KDTW
http://www.fsd-international.com/ima...eta_tester.jpg

[MartijnPleines]

I have to disagree on the VC issue. The FSD Cheyenne has the best VC I've ever seen (and I've seen most) especially at dawn/dusk/night, when the gauges are backlit. The gauges are clear enough. The Cheyenne is now my favorite, and the VC is one of the main reasons.

As for taxiing, it does want to taxi like a racecar, but by alternately pressing F1 (full idle) and F3 (increase throttle) you can taxi quite safely. I've set up two buttons on my joystick for this purpose-it can be useful in other A/C as well.

FSD are working on an update/patch with improvements for panel and FM.
They have a Piper Navajo and Seneca V in the works as well, although these may still be some way off. (Pilatus Porter and Talon first)

The Flight1 Cessna 421C is gorgeous as well, especially the external model.

Dreamfleet are working on a Cessna 310.

[WingsofLondon]

>5. The stupid thing taxis
>at Mach 9!!!

:-lol :-lol :-lol

[vfr150]

>>5. The stupid thing taxis at Mach 9!!!<<

It's beyond me why people like yourself don't read the flaming manual.

It clearly states the correct procedure for taxiing and at what state the engine controls are to be set to achieve a reasonable taxi speed.

Not only that, but it is also posted on the FSD website too!

Maybe you'd be better off working through some of the lessons in less complicated aircraft first, before you use totally innacurate information in your misleading mini review.

To the original poster, if you like flying twins then get the Cheyenne, it's a very good aircraft.

'Nuff said.

[sewells]

Guys,

I did pick up the cheyenne from fsd and it is great! I only wish the avionics were abit more advanced (not fsd's fault, the plane just has old world radios!). I want to replace them with apollo sl30s/sl60s :)

http://www.flightsim.com/dcforum/Use...874916530e.jpg

[khouseknecht]

>>>5. The stupid thing taxis at Mach 9!!!<<
>
>It's beyond me why people like
>yourself don't read the flaming
>manual.

Thanks. I DID read the "flaming" manual and those suggesstions do work, however, even Microsoft got the taxi speed a little better on the default King Air.