Product Review Alabeo Cessna 207 'Skywagon'

[mutley 4,495]

 

Just published is our final review of the year, the Cessna 207 'Skywagon' by Alabeo.

Andrew Godden takes a look at this unique and interesting aircraft and gives his views on its performance in the simulator.  Read on...

[Dean33 29]

I'm sure I speak for all of us in expressing massive thanks to Andrew, Joe and all the other dedicated reviewers for the hard work during the year.

We really appreciate you guys!   :thumbup:

 

[hifly 925]

Hear Hear!

[donnybalonny 46]

x

[Andrew Godden 943]

The aircraft needs very little rudder pedals when turning, but you do need to use a bit of rudder. In general, thats one of the more confusing things in different publishers approach. Some make flying models where rudder pedal are not nescessary when turning while others make a model where you really have to step hard on the thing to make the aircraft turn and this with the same aircraft. 

 

There are few flaws on the Alabeo C207, the fuel system is one. When you change from tank to another, the engine goes out... And the fuelmeters dont show what they should show. You can start up with full tank and fly 1 hour using one tank and the 2 fuelmeters will show the same.

 

 

All aircraft are capable of performing a turn of any magnitude without any rudder input.  However, to perform a standard rate turn, rudder input is required.  These flight characteristics are not peculiar to Alabeo aircraft or aircraft from any other developer.

 

The real world Cessna 207 has the three position fuel tank selector as depicted in the Alabeo model.  To switch between the left and right fuel tanks, the selector lever must pass through the off position.  If done quickly in the Alabeo Cessna 207, the engine will splutter but not 'die'.  It is understood this is a limitation in FSX not the Alabeo modelling.

 

Contrary to the incorrect comments about the fuel system and gauges in the above quote, the 7 hr test flight conducted during the review proved the fuel gauges work correctly when the relevant fuel tank was selected.  During this test flight, the fuel gauges correctly recorded fuel usage, i.e. after 2 hrs on the left tank, the left fuel gauge correctly indicated about 70% used whilst the right fuel gauge continued to indicate full.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the described, so called issues, strongly suggest that you have 'Unlimited fuel' and / or 'Autorudder' checked in the FSX Realism Settings panel.

[donnybalonny 46]

x

[Jess-b 420]

Donny, I'm hard pressed to find where Andrew has malign you in any way. The comments made are in response to your comments, and as this is a public forum, he's entitled to do so. Nothing he's written is a direct attack. And as far as I can see, you are the only person interpreting it as such. In fact, it's your attitude that seems argumentative, and in places, just rude.

You are correct that Andrew has picked up on the negative points of your reply, but he's chosen to do so as a retort to your complaints.

As stated, no where during the test flying for the review did the fuel bug you mentioned occur. I myself have checked and I can find no other reference to any users suffering from the fuel issue you described. The bug you described does fit with the 'unlimited fuel' button selected in your fsx/p3d user settings, so it wasn't unreasonable to for Andrew to suggest that was the cause of the problem.

Jess B

[allardjd 1,853]

There are few flaws on the Alabeo C207, the fuel system is one. When you change from tank to another, the engine goes out... And the fuelmeters dont show what they should show. You can start up with full tank and fly 1 hour using one tank and the 2 fuelmeters will show the same.

 

 

I've noticed in a few aircraft that have a fuel selector that is labeled "Right" and "Left" but do not have a "Both" position, if you just fly without making any changes to the fuel selector, it will draw equally from both tanks.  As soon as you make any adjustment of the fuel selector, then it behaves correctly, drawing only from the selected tank.  Not sure but this may be an FSX bug where a manual manipulation of the selector is required before it works as intended.

 

John

[britfrog 180]

I have to say i had been holding my breath for ages , well since fsx was released, that someone would one day make this a/c, as i am the second highest houred caa registered pilot on this a/c type.

I offered my services to Alabeo to be a beta tester but received no answer but I did register my fear that they would just make it a big 172 , which the 207 most certainly is NOT!!

As the 207 will bite big time, the unsuspecting pilot or lazy pilot especially on landing ( i feel another real world ramble coming on to exemplify this)

 

having installed the a/c and spent a few hours trying it out I have to say I was so bitterly disappointed that I binned it and deleted it, they had made a large 172 which looked quite convinceingly like a 207

 

the stall figures that Andrew used would find you at the bottom of a deep smoking hole, i have tried it many times at 50 knots you are either descending at 1200fpm or you have a good LH wing drop, the actual stall figure is literally 1 knot below the legal limit of 65knots!!!

 

the alabeo speeds are total fantasy at 75% the 207 may give you 140 knots on a good day while 23/23 the normal cruise settting will give you 120 knots, Fact! you can add 1 knot if you have wheel spats on.

 

as for the rudder , well upon lign up on the runway you send the trimmer 3/4 of the way to the right hand side, and then open the throttle, failure to do so will end up with the a/c performing a perfect 180 deg turn no matter how much rh boot you put in to stop it. these are just a very few examples of the difference between the real a/c and the alabeo one.

Now a few differences may lie in what is feasable in fsx but even if you set the the throttle and the mixture and the prop to the top of the greens the plane will not reach top of the green speed

so if you are looking for a realistic 207 like me , we shall have to wait for a while longer, perhaps p3d will permit more realistic flight  who knows?

 

 

[donnybalonny 46]

I actually like this AC, but I follow your thoughts. I also installed it, and thought, oh - no, yet another one, but since its used in Ravn virtual, I´ve flown it quite a lot later on. It reminds me a lot of the FS9 C206

 

It doesnt feel like a C172 or C182 IMO. It feels heavyer. And it falls like a heavy stone if you land it like a C172.  I have started landing it with around 75 - 80 knots depending on wind, 2 notches of flap, full prop and a good deal of manifold pressure. Then it lands heavy but controlable.

BTW, I mostly fly it pretty heavy. 6 small passengers, a bit of luggage in the front and some 50% fuel.

 

What you say about speed is the same on my PC (P3Dv2) I normally get around 122knots 23/23 setting. The Alabeo Cardinal is the same. And especially the retractable gear version is way to slow. That addon, I uninstalled after a short while. It was to dull, it looks like plastic and the speeds were to slow. BUT again, it was given rave reviews both here and other places. I just dont get it. (BTW, I used to fly the Dreamfleet Cardinal a lot in FS9 and that was a nice addon, so maybe thats why I deleted the Alabeo. (I miss dreamfleet)

I will most probably be picked on again again because now I have said something critical about AC reviews and that is not well accepthed on this board.

So in order to not be considered to critical, I will repeat myself and say that I actually like the Alabeo C207A and fly it regularely. I have learnt to enjoy what it is, a small workhorse, that feels heavyer than a C182 and lighter than a C208. Since I have never been nowhere near a real one, I havent a clue about that. I definately prefer it over the Carenado C208, that even with Bernt Stolle´s revised FDE flies a LOT better than the original one, but still feels very sintetic and needs about 50 cm of runway to stop if you land it empty and with 85knots. (I was not being ironic, just exagerating a tiny wee bit) 

[Andrew Godden 943]

the stall figures that Andrew used would find you at the bottom of a deep smoking hole, i have tried it many times at 50 knots you are either descending at 1200fpm or you have a good LH wing drop, the actual stall figure is literally 1 knot below the legal limit of 65knots!!!

 

the alabeo speeds are total fantasy at 75% the 207 may give you 140 knots on a good day while 23/23 the normal cruise settting will give you 120 knots, Fact! you can add 1 knot if you have wheel spats on.

 

As per the General Characteristics and Performance Specifications section of the review, it merely quotes published sources, and the quoted paragraph from the review (see below) highlights the problems in sourcing accurate data for the specific aircraft.

 

"The general characteristics and performance specifications for the Cessna 207 'Skywagon' are provided in the table. This is based on data from the official Cessna 207 'Skywagon' Pilot Operating Handbook, data provided by Alabeo, and general research sources. Some of this data varies between sources and also may be an approximation due to variances in data and the specific aircraft modelled by Alabeo."

 

Unfortunately, the aforementioned approximation factor may sometimes be larger than desired.

 

The actual performance of the aircraft on the test flight, as described in the Flight Performance section of the review, did accord with the performance tables provided by Alabeo and these appeared to be copies of actual performance tables from the Cessna 207 POH for the specific production variant modelled.  Again, as stated in the review, "...Alabeo have specifically modelled an early production model of the 'Skywagon' variant...".  A closer read of the the Flight Performance section of the review will reveal the modelled performance was actually typical of the quoted real world aircraft performance, "...while 23/23 the normal cruise settting will give you 120 knots...".  So I don't see what the point is here, except that the quoted performance characteristics in the table appear at odds, but this was explained in the review and has been reiterated here for clarity and edification.

 

There where four main model variants of the Cessna 207 during its production run, involving at least three different engine configurations.  A comparative analysis of the differences between the Alabeo modeled variant and the specific variant(s) on which being the "...second highest houred caa registered pilot on this a/c type...", would provide more accurate feedback on the Alabeo Cessna 207.

 

It is a reality in reviewing an aircraft add-on product, that empirical data is often the only source of information when comparing the performance characteristics of the aircraft.  The sheer breadth and depth of products means it is impossible to have someone who is type rated and experienced across such a range of aircraft in the real world, let alone be capable of sharing this by writing a cogent, intelligible, and objective review.

 

So, let's be realistic and take a reality check!

 

Fact 1!  The retail version of FSX is a PC based, non training certified, flight simulator, and, at best, is used as a non certified training aid for radio navigation.

Fact 2!  For a myriad of reasons, the modelling of aircraft and aircraft characteristics in FSX are an approximation in which most developers will attempt to replicate, as close as possible, the real world performance of the aircraft.

Fact 3!  The level of accuracy in performance modelling is linked to the development cost of the aircraft, the intended market audience, and the target retail price.  The majority of the market audience are not type rated on the aircraft they fly in FSX and do not give a pigeon for such real world detail.

Fact 4!  This is a US$29.95 aircraft add-on and it is priced accordingly for the quality and detail in performance characteristics modelled.

Fact 5!  Alabeo's stated business aim is "...bringing a different type of flying experience to people who may otherwise never get the chance to experience it.  Our products combine the joy, the challenge, and the FUN of flying."

 

As assessed in the review, Alabeo have achieved what they intended with the Cessna 207, in accordance with their business aim, not the over expectations of individuals!!!

[hifly 925]

Well said Andrew.

[britfrog 180]

the reality andrew seems to escape you as always

the plane does not reproduce anywhere near book figures , they managed to do quite a good job with the 210 and others but they didnt research this a/c sufficiently

I admit my expectations were high but so were many others who have also expressed dismay

It may have also escaped your notice that this was not a dig at your review but a criticism of the alabeo product so get off your dead horse you have already flogged it to death

[needles 1,013]

Britfrog, there is no need for your last comment, as you and others have, I believed flogged that same dead horse.

[donnybalonny 46]

the reality andrew seems to escape you as always

the plane does not reproduce anywhere near book figures , they managed to do quite a good job with the 210 and others but they didnt research this a/c sufficiently

I admit my expectations were high but so were many others who have also expressed dismay

It may have also escaped your notice that this was not a dig at your review but a criticism of the alabeo product so get off your dead horse you have already flogged it to death

 

It would be very nice if it was allowed to disagree with A Goddens Aircraft reviews on this forum.

As it is now, its Tabu. Its not allowed to say anything critical about an aircraft addon which Andrew has reviewed.

If you do so, be sure that he will jump out of his chair, write a long post, only with the intention of making you shut up. He will never be interested in going into some kind of dialogue with you. It has happened quite a few times now. This last one is the best example. Someone with a lot more experience in the aircraft jumps in and is being talked down inmediately. I have a few words that describe that attitude. I´m not going use them, because I dont think it will be good for anyones bloodsugar. But think about it.

And every time, the reviever takes it very personal, even though not liking the addon doesnt have anything to do with the reviewer.

 

I find the personal comments on reviewed addons to complement the review itself very well, so PLEASE allow us to express ourselfs. Its NOT a personal attack.

This is a flightsim forum, its intended to be about DISCUSSING different aspects about flightsimming. Only be allowed to say, "well done, thank you, etc, makes it a poor forum.

[Jess-b 420]

Donny,

You are of course free to criticise the review, but we are just as free to answer your criticisms. No one has deleted any posts from this thread, so there's no censorship going on. However, personal attacks are not welcomed.

Here is a good example.

"It would be very nice if it was allowed to disagree with A Goddens Aircraft reviews on this forum."

This is a personal attack. In fact, most of your post is directed at Andrew and your dislike of his reply, not what he has posted.

So I'm clear here. We here at Mutley's hangar do not censor user comments for reviews. We do not delete replies that disagree with the review findings, nor do we encourage a 'here here' attitude at the expense of debate. However, personal attacks are not welcome, and should a thread descend into this category, it will be locked.

This will be the last time I do this. For the help of all members, please, keep opinions on the review, not the person reviewing it. Please answer the facts of the reply, and not resort to attacking the member posting it.