pleasantly surprised....

I waited until DTG issued version 3. For $25, I decided that it was time to see what FSW was all about. As a hard core simmer, I am already aware that the battle on some forums is becoming a bit like us against them, exactly like when I used to fly the Cessnas and the Pipers at the local airport near a metropolitan city, and the big airliner pilots were annoyed at our presence-- as if they had forgotten where they came from.

While it takes a bit of trial and error to figure things out with the UI, and I still can't figure out the view commands,

this sim appears to have some very interesting features, specifically how it forces one into the immersion factor of flying.

In FSX, many times I load it and simply fly the airplane. The lack of "environmental factors and aircraft physics" pretty much allow anyone to push the throttle and fly away.

Not with FSW aircrafts. Boy, if you don't pay attention to the rudder pedals, you will crash. The physics regarding the takeoff roll has me all excited, reminding me of the days when, as a student pilot, how I would tense up with my feet on the rudder pedals while the instructor would gently ask me to relax. Wow, what an experience. I am glad when the wheels are off the ground. It reminds me of how crazy I am to try to master this crazy horse.

The cockpit panels are fantastic, and the slight shaking is great, especially because you can't turn it off, forcing you to "experience" the environment , just like the real thing. I love it. I had forgotten how flying was really about mastering a foreign environment: the physics, the bouncing, everything about 3 dimensional space.

The scenery needs some work, but it's immersive. Airports need work, no AI and poor building texures don't attract you to wanting to park anywhere.

The weather effects are simply superb, especially fog, thunderstorms, and the over all effects on the aircraft.

The interface, and how it allows you to go from free flight to flight planning is confusing. In fact, I am not sure if you can change aircrafts without ending the flight plan.

My biggest gripe, so far, is the lack of documentation on the various aircrafts. As I am trying to master the Piper Seneca, I still don't know if the autopilot is broken, or I am doing something wrong due to lack of documentation on it.

As I fly some more, I will write about it.

My impression, so far, is to not dismiss it. I welcome it as a new entry to simming, and I am glad i own it.

The mission section is intriguing, but I always wanted to replicate Lindberg's flight across the Atlantic. Maybe this will let me do it-- as a good distraction from simply flying from point A to point B.

As I learn more about this sim, I will post my impressions.

But to those who are "too scared" to spend 25 bucks, I say, "come on" , it's not the end of your savings if you decided to abandon it.

I see this sim becoming the sim for "the others", for those first time users who are intimidated by the big boys and don't have the money to spend on all the add ons to make it complete.

If you're a 16 year old, interested in aviation, your father will not hesitate to spend 25.

DTG has done a good job so far, and I am not ready to criticize them for the missing features and for defects that are expected in an early access.

The fact that some folks have already converted some FSX aircraft to work in FSW, tells me that developers may have an easy time ( for extra revenue) porting their planes to FSW. We'll see.

tony

This morning I took the Seneca for a short flight along the southern part of the Dolomites, the mountains below the Alps. This area is spectacular to fly over and between the various peaks. The Seneca lends itself to great flying through these mountains, since it has very good short field characteristics.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, the takeoff and landing behavior of this aircraft is, I believe, great. I just love taking off and landing with this airplane.

One discovery I made is some of the views that one can fly with by simply hitting the A key on the keyboard.

With this view I feel I am in the cockpit, viewing the most critical and beautiful moment in the approach as I am able to get the top and front view of the aircraft's nose. Nice.

I am still not able to fly the Seneca on autopilot. The airplane is so stable in flight that I am able to enjoy it by hand flying it. It will keep altitude and heading very nicely.

Once configured properly, the sim produces a steady 30 fps in all phases of the flight.

I have not been able to figure out how to get ils and com frequencies. I have tried very hard due to the fact that I don't have the plane on autopilot. The few times I wandered around the cockpit, the aircraft has gone into a stall or tail spin. One needs the AH or outside view at all times in order to have control of the aircraft.

tony

As I learn more about the sim, I still feel that if DTG stick with it by fixing bugs and adding features, it will have strong appeal with first timers. I say this again, but as an old flight sim timer, I feel that some folks in the simming community have become too impatient, radical, and at times too dismissive of anyone or any new product that does not meet their narrow view. On the other hand, I must emphasize the fact that FSW is still an infant, and it's not for those who have been living with P3d. Pd3 has a good following, and perhaps it's the one to beat in the future.

Let me go back to FSW and my discoveries.

I used TrackIR and the program quickly and easily recognized it. It was a pleasure to fly with it. The Seneca has two big engines on either side which prevent good side view visibility. The TrackIR makes looking around these engine during an approach so much fun and realistic.

Some people complained that yaw control is touchy on these aircrafts. I am speaking strictly about the Seneca, and I must say that initially it was tough controlling the aircraft without going from side to side during takeoff.

I now have full control of the aircraft, and it's like the real thing. You've got to keep the rudders going back and forth, ever so little, in order to maintain directional control during the initial roll.

I can't emphasize enough the fact that I think DTG got this right.

Ps. The sound of these engines if one the best.

tony

Oddly enough, the view controls are the same as in FSX+A, FSX:SE...

S: for category

A: for view within category

 

With this view I feel I am in the cockpit, viewing the most critical and beautiful moment in the approach as I am able to get the top and front view of the aircraft's nose. Nice.

tony

As an XP user (most of the time), I have to admit that the cockpits look great in FSW.

As with any new sim, sometimes we are quick to judge. Maybe it's my old age, but I enjoy exploring new and old features in a new sim.

And in FSW, there are many FSX features that I had forgotten about.

The one that I resurrected is the "OPACITY" or Transparency of the pop up panels.

As in an earlier post, I remarked on how nice it is to have only the view of the airplane nose, especially when coming in for a landing.

The problem with this is that basic information, such as airspeed, altitude and vertical speed are missing.

Well, as soon as I re-discovered that pop up panels can be set to different degrees of transparency, I was all set.

As the image shows, I've made the pop up transparent, so when I am on the approach, I get the best of both worlds. The beauty of this is that by simply moving the mouse, I can focus or defocus the pop up.

Incidentally, I am not in any way trying to sell FSW.

I purchased it, as I have purchased all the other sims, and am giving it the benefit of the doubt until I no longer have a reason to do so.

In my opinion, I consider $25.00 a good selfish investment in the evolution of our hobby.

Heck, the market is small, so I need to have a different attitude than simply knocking that which does not fit my idea of what I want.

tony

Hi,

When referring to FSX I'm curious as to what "environmental factors and aircraft physics" you're referring to. I agree that vertical terrain is poorly modeled but I don't see any improvement in FSW.

As far as gauge visibility I simply pan down. In FSX I have the trigger button set to return my view to looking forward. When I'm driving I look down to see the speedometer and then return to looking down the road. I don't process much information about what my eyes pass over between the two views. Feels pretty much the same in FSX. I'm a bit surprised that with TrackIR you even thought of messing with the opacity. If the FSW scenery ever approaches the quality of what was in MS Flight I'll re-visit.

Jim F.