Kitfox STi Review

A huge issue with the Kitfox in my opinion. Well, two really but one might be a deal-breaker.

 

First, the flaps aren't modeled on the aircraft. They are on the flight model, but not the visual of the plane. For a bush plane that's a big deal as you would look over for visual confirmation while flying all the time.

 

The other glaring issue IMO is that it makes all your scenery look horrible out the glass. Go to an outside view or another plane and its sharp as a tack, but inside the scenery looks all muted and low res.

 

Example here in this review:

 

FALSE INFORMATION. I own it, and YES FLAPS ARE MODELED. Please don't lie about aircraft and I don't have any issues with scenery out of the glass. Please don't make posts to thwart people from coming to this sim. Very, very disappointed in dishonest reviews. You're supposed to be looking through Glass, so it won't look ultra sharp as though you're not.

Third issue - the damn thing is allergic to the ground. It has a short takeoff but happily skims on zero throttle and full flaps about 6 inches from the runway for hundreds of yards. But otherwise is fun to fly. They better fix those other 2 issues though.

FALSE INFORMATION. I own it, and YES FLAPS ARE MODELED. Please don't lie about aircraft and I don't have any issues with scenery out of the glass. Please don't make posts to thwart people from coming to this sim. Very, very disappointed in dishonest reviews. You're supposed to be looking through Glass, so it won't look ultra sharp as though you're not.

 

Maybe the flaps are modelled on yours and the windscreen isn’t a cataract simulator but mine is exactly as the OP describes, at least as of 8 hours ago.

I apologize. I meant ailerons. Sorry about that. I thought that's what they were referring to. My bad. :o Flaps do NOT work, though physics ARE there. Edited September 14, 2020 by JohnnyJohnJohn

I also purchased this plane, looking through the windscreen is like looking through a fogged up shower door. I am hoping for a fix, if not I wasted 8 bucks.

I apologize. I meant ailerons. Sorry about that. I thought that's what they were referring to. My bad. :o Flaps do NOT work, though physics ARE there.

 

No problem. There’s also another serious issue. The throttle doesn’t zero. That’s partially why it’s so reluctant to land and why when you spawn in it’s moving. Hopefully it gets all fixed up soon because otherwise it’s fun to fly and trims out easily.

I also purchased this plane, looking through the windscreen is like looking through a fogged up shower door. I am hoping for a fix, if not I wasted 8 bucks.

 

Yea. Realism or not, the scenery is a major selling point and I want to appreciate it like I can in all the others. I don’t regret buying it but someone has dropped several quality testing balls on this one.

No problem. There’s also another serious issue. The throttle doesn’t zero. That’s partially why it’s so reluctant to land and why when you spawn in it’s moving. Hopefully it gets all fixed up soon because otherwise it’s fun to fly and trims out easily.

 

I noticed throttle issues with most aircraft. Seems too much of a "dead zone" to get from Three quarters to zero. Hope they fix it in the next update. Don't get me wrong, I Still LOVE the new sim, and yes, you can still land, you just have to almost dead stick it every time you want to touch down.

I noticed throttle issues with most aircraft. Seems too much of a "dead zone" to get from Three quarters to zero. Hope they fix it in the next update. Don't get me wrong, I Still LOVE the new sim, and yes, you can still land, you just have to almost dead stick it every time you want to touch down.

 

i can land it but not in the few tens of yards it should. Need more practice but at least for me the throttle issue is it won’t zero. It is always generating thrust. T literally won’t stop moving forward. Don’t have this issue with any other ship. Completely shutting down the engine before touchdown might be the answer.

 

Despite the issues I am really enjoying this plane.

FALSE INFORMATION. I own it, and YES FLAPS ARE MODELED. Please don't lie about aircraft and I don't have any issues with scenery out of the glass. Please don't make posts to thwart people from coming to this sim. Very, very disappointed in dishonest reviews. You're supposed to be looking through Glass, so it won't look ultra sharp as though you're not.

 

Hi Johnny,

 

I disagree. I stand by my review. The Flaperons are not modeled on the aircraft although (Obviously or it wouldn't fly) are modeled in the flight model. I stated this in the video.

 

If you are not experiencing the scenery issues then I'm glad for you, but I am not alone. I've been told that changing the Windshield effects from Ultra to medium fixes this. I haven't tested that, nor knew that while doing the review, but also refuse to lower my settings to appease a bad model or transparency texture.

 

I don't know how you could accuse me of making posts to thwart people from the sim when all I have done is rave about the sim and its addition to the simming community. You are clearly not familiar with my posts or videos.

 

I can appreciate that people will have varying opinions on things, but I do not appreciate the accusatorial nature of your post. It is not false information and I felt that I was trying to be completely honest with the simming community.

If you not noticed, I corrected myself. I said the ailerons are modeled, not flaps. But physics WERE there. I admitted my mistake. :) But the Kitfox, is it a Microsoft aircraft or another developer? If not, these other developers need to step up and make sure their products are complete before releasing them. Its not up to Asobo for testing these.

Around the 30:15 mark of the video is about as slow as I can get it on approach. pitch way up and you will regain some throttle authority and allow for a three-wheel landing, albeit no record braking landing, but short no less.

 

hope this helps.

If you not noticed, I corrected myself. I said the ailerons are modeled, not flaps. But physics WERE there. I admitted my mistake. :) But the Kitfox, is it a Microsoft aircraft or another developer? If not, these other developers need to step up and make sure their products are complete before releasing them. Its not up to Asobo for testing these.

 

 

I also said all of this in the video. I've never stated the flight characteristics were not there. I even commented on the flight model specifically.

 

My post is in regard to your statement that I was providing false information and thwarting people from the sim. I did not see you correct that anywhere in this thread. Sorry if I missed that.

 

"Its not up to Asobo for testing these"

 

I'm not interested in getting into the weeds with you over this, but you were very quick to jump and accuse. I have yet to see a retraction of that.

 

I stand by my review.

At the risk of being controversial - apologies have been issued so let’s drop it and speaking as someone idiotically prone to posting stupid or sarcastic crap first and thinking later - let’s all agree that if our posts contains accusations of hidden agendas and the word ‘liar’ and the like we will all think twice before hitting Submit.

 

We mostly are all here because we are enjoying this fine sim. Let’s try and temper our passion with restraint. I’m looking at you STEVEMILL. :)

 

Stevemill,

 

I agree with you, I wish it could stay on the topic of simulation. I appreciate the diplomacy.

 

To be fair, I'm not looking for an apology, but one was never issued.

 

The apology was to you over mentioning flaps instead of ailerons, not to me. Just getting the context right here, not looking for something.

 

An apology is unneeded. we all make mistakes and jump to sarcastic remarks sometimes.

 

I do however not appreciate accusations that are incorrect that I was providing false information or being dishonest. A simple redaction of that comment would have sufficed instead of the insistence that although incorrect is justified because I implied something else (that it wasn't flight modeled etc..) which I did not.

 

I don't think replying to a constant barrage of implications that I did not make is also indicative of me being anything other responsive or reactive to my thread. Why wouldn't I respond to something on my thread when incorrect, accusatory and the very thing I'm being painted?

 

How is it that you can paint such an ugly picture of someone blatantly disregarding any facts. I have a non-monetized channel that I provide tutorials for the most part to the community for no other reason than the enjoyment of contributing.

 

I also attempt to be as fair and balanced as I can in my first review of an aircraft.

 

If you don't like it or disagree, I'm more than happy to listen to your criticism or varied opinions. I value them and take notes.

 

I don't need a "Sorry not Sorry" from anyone, nor am I look for it.

 

I just pointed out that what was accused of me is untrue. And that isn't an opinion. Its a clearly stated fact.

 

It's too bad that this thread has become this. Restraint is exactly what I feel I've exhibited.

 

Happy Simming.

Yea. Realism or not, the scenery is a major selling point and I want to appreciate it like I can in all the others. I don’t regret buying it but someone has dropped several quality testing balls on this one.

 

The windscreen is the major sticking point for me. Reaching out to the developer for a fix as the other items can be overlooked for now for the price.

 

It's a fun little aircraft regardless of the flight model for 8 bucks.

 

That being said, the ZLIN shock ultra if you have deluxe is also a great little aircraft even if it seems a bit too good sometimes.

A huge issue with the Kitfox in my opinion. Well, two really but one might be a deal-breaker.

 

First, the flaps aren't modeled on the aircraft. They are on the flight model, but not the visual of the plane. For a bush plane that's a big deal as you would look over for visual confirmation while flying all the time.

 

The other glaring issue IMO is that it makes all your scenery look horrible out the glass. Go to an outside view or another plane and its sharp as a tack, but inside the scenery looks all muted and low res.

 

Example here in this review:

 

 

As I mentioned of your previous videos, thank you for another thoughtful and thoroughly researched video. I appreciate your positive contribution to our flight simming community.

Edited September 15, 2020 by FrankR409
Spelling

As I mentioned of your previous videos, thank you for another thoughtful and thoroughly researched video. I appreciate your positive contribution to our flight simming community.

 

Thanks Frank, Appreciate the kind words.

Thanks Frank, Appreciate the kind words.

you’re welcome! Do you think you will be doing any work on the C182T? You are one of the few channels I will subscribe to, so I’m sure I will see it if you do.

 

I just appreciate how fair and balanced your reviews are.

you’re welcome! Do you think you will be doing any work on the C182T? You are one of the few channels I will subscribe to, so I’m sure I will see it if you do.

 

I just appreciate how fair and balanced your reviews are.

 

I haven't purchased the C182T for the following reasons, so consider this sort of my review or at least my thought process on it.

 

I don't think the 182 offers many people much in terms of value.

 

If you are training or learning in a Cessna (which you should like almost everyone else on the planet :) ) flight principles and basics, the included Cesnna's are more than adequate. In fact better IMO.

 

Faster isn't better when learning.

 

With that, the standard edition C152 with the old Six-Pack gauges is exactly perfect for learning and well modeled.

 

Once you have that perfected, I'd suggest the C172 (Premium edition) without the G1000 (six-pack instead) so that you are not re-learning flight instruments, and just getting used to a more powerful aircraft in every way.

 

the Standard edition C172 G1000 is perfect to familiarize yourself with a glass cockpit.

 

If you are proficient with the C172 G1000, your next step should be some of the more powerful aircraft or low-wing with different (less stable) flight characteristics. And there are lots of options here. Cirrus or Diamond Aircrafts etc...

 

So for a beginner, the 182T offers little.

 

From what I understand, its a nice enough aircraft model, but with stock G1000 avionics (so they didn't add anything here) and really nothing in the way of being addon specific.

 

All you are really getting (assuming the flight model is correct) is a bit better performance at MSL (Mean Sea Level) and albeit much better performance at altitude. The turbos do not make a huge difference unless you are up high.

 

The included Cessna's were more than adequate for what little flight I might be doing in them. (probably training videos to teach people basic flight principles, circuits, stalls etc..)

 

I'd say the only people I'd recommend purchasing the 182T are those that are huge fans of the Cessna single engines and want better climb or altitude performance, or people who own one and want to replicate theirs.

 

Otherwise its a pass for me. I'd have probably bought it for much less than the current price, but as far as I know its just an aircraft model without anything special.

 

Just my 2 cents.

Just to be clear, If a 3'rd party were to come out with a complete study level Cessna Single I'd buy it for sure. This just isn't it.

 

I also don't want to jump on the comments about Carenado as a company but have a look around at others opinions and it's kind of clear what the updates for this aircraft will look like. Non-existent.

Just bought the Kitfox - It may be common to this aircraft but the scenery view out the front is non-existent? Looking out the side windows I can see scenery but just blue sky out front? I fly with an IR headset and if I lean forward enough I can have my head outside the airplane and have a forward view.... but it's REAL windy that way - lol

 

It also seems that I'm just too close to the dash? Haven't found a way to back away to be able to get the whole dash in view and still see over it? Scrolling the mouse wheel only gets me even closer, ditto for the arrow keys.

 

I profess and confess complete ignorance of the actual Kitfox and what a pilot would in fact see.