mutley 4,498 Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 Our first review of 2011 features one of the most romantically popular aircraft there is, the DC-3 Affectionately known as the Dizzie, her distinctive drone and shape has awed aviation fans for several decades in both civil and military guises. Our reviewer recalls flying in her as a passenger so you could say he has first hand experience of an operational craft! So have the team at Just Flight and Aeroplane managed to capture the essence of this aircraft?? Read on..... Link to post Share on other sites
rob16584 42 Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 A well written review Dai. She sure is fun to fly! Link to post Share on other sites
Aidan 1 Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 Ill have a read of it in the morning, im DC-3ed out of the night! LOL! Im actually reviewing it for AVSIM and just finished my part of the VC tonight, im going pretty in depth, so tomorrow night is the cabin! It will be intresting to see what Dai and I agree on... Link to post Share on other sites
Aidan 1 Posted January 8, 2011 Report Share Posted January 8, 2011 Nice Review Dai- Just finished reading it. I agree with you on most things, but the one thing I will bring up is the Virtual Cockpit- Ive noticed that gauges are incorrect/not in correct location, the cockpit is FAR to clean for a 75 year old warbird and parts that should be modeled in 3D are in 2D. I haven't though about the FlyingDynamics - but when I do, I will let you know what I think ^^ Again, just my opinons on what I thought. Link to post Share on other sites
ehunyadi 0 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Share Posted January 9, 2011 Nice review. I got to fly in one of these once in 1986. It was an amazing experience. LOVE the sound of the old radial engines (and the rumble). Link to post Share on other sites
mutley 4,498 Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2011 We had some great feedback from Norman Hancock, the President of DC-3 Airways the number 1 DC-3 VA site, we were however a bit generous in his opinion. A very grateful thanks for allowing me to read your well written and perceiving review, and a particular thank you for showing me where the manual has been hidden! I have read your review but I haven't yet read the manual, which may I hope alleviate some of the negatives I have about the aircraft package.In the main I will happily agree with much of what you say. The individual external and internal modelling really is excellent, and a lot of care and effort has been taken over the production, and I still can't help thinking that this is where the main effort was spent. Just my personal habit of course, but after a first look around a new aircraft I rarely, flight sim wise, look again at the outside, and only at the panel in front of me. I still believe they've missed an opportunity. The VC panel, ok, I admit that it does look nice but I simply cannot get on with it, and there are the issues you have identified. As you rightly say, the ILS was well established in the fifties. I know, I worked on the ground side! It would have been nice if JF could have included a second more modern VC with suitable instrumentation for the civilian aircraft. The unforgiveable for me however is the lack of a decent 2D panel, and I felt cheated that no effort at all was spent on this. For this alone I wouldn't rise above a generous 6/10. My lack of enthusiasm must show as since we last spoke I haven't bothered at all with flying any of the JF aircraft. I think a general lack of enthusiasm is also evident in that there haven't been any references in the DCA forum! I will look out for the upcoming update you mention and maybe then give it another go. As you say, great on the eye .... Again Thank You David and an excellent review, Norman Well done Dai, more proof we really are #1 in reviews! Link to post Share on other sites
rob16584 42 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 Whilst the comment about the 2D panel is very valid, I think people need to accept that they are now a thing of the past. Rather than marking reviews down for not having them, perhaps mark them up if they do have a good quality 2D panel. I know I am slightly biased as I use Track IR when I fly so using the VC is fairly simple, and a nice 2D panel is a lot easier on frames, but if developers want to create a great looking aircraft and interactive cockpit, that is quite hard to do from the 2D panel without having to switch between multiple views. In the VC it can be done by moving your head/hat switch/mouse Link to post Share on other sites
ddavid 149 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 Please accept the following comments as my own, personal views - and not an attack on you, Rob! Whilst the comment about the 2D panel is very valid, I think people need to accept that they are now a thing of the past. I'm not sure about this point - certainly for basic training, a detailed 2-D Panel is possibly the best thing to cut your teeth on as each instrument can be accurately represented, albeit in 2 dimensions, so that the actual operation of the instrument is easier to get to grips with. Rather than marking reviews down for not having them, perhaps mark them up if they do have a good quality 2D panel. Marking on this basis wouldn't be straightforward as, currently, a score of 7/10 - representing a model without a usable 2-D Panel - is unacceptably low, from most peoples' view. Remember the FCS Lanc - I, initially, gave it 6/10 - too low for a review! I know I am slightly biased as I use Track IR when I fly so using the VC is fairly simple, and a nice 2D panel is a lot easier on frames, but if developers want to create a great looking aircraft and interactive cockpit, that is quite hard to do from the 2D panel without having to switch between multiple views. In the VC it can be done by moving your head/hat switch/mouse Don't forget the adage "fit for purpose" - and see E.J.'s comments on the GAAR Test Flight, where he couldn't get the 192 VOR radial using the default DC-3 2-D Panel. As it stands, the JF DC-3 doesn't do IFR well at all, the VC instruments are too small and difficult to adjust (I still can't set the OBS on the ILS) and the 2-D Panel (default) needs replacing. Now, JF and Aeroplane Heaven are working on an upgrade - some of these points are addressed by this, I hope. Sorry, Rob - we must agree to disagree! [/rant]!!! Cheers - Dai. Link to post Share on other sites
rob16584 42 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 Dai, not taken as an attack in any way at all. I agree with what you say about 2D training and being able to use the panel, it makes perfect sense as there are less things to distract you. The problems activating buttons in the VC are a problem with a few aircraft, I guess it's something we will just have to live with. But if there was a good 2D panel it wouldn't be a major problem. Overall I think (unfortunately) it comes down to money. Our hobby is a niche market and developers have to allocate their time and resources as best they can for as little cost as possible and it seems that the 2D panel isn't seen as cost-effective. Link to post Share on other sites
ddavid 149 Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 In a perfect world, the VC would be as realistic as the real thing, I guess. As we've only - well, at the moment, anyway - got a mouse and keyboard, we'll have to make do with what the developers can afford to do without the finished product being too expensive for us mere mortals, with our limited pockets. Maybe the touch-screen/tablet will introduce a more effective user interface? Anyways, onwards and upwards, eh?!? Cheers - Dai. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now