Deep Review, REP F33a, X-plane 11, Carenado + Reality Expansion Pack
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- This is a very detailed review of the "good and the bad" aspects of the Reality expansion pack F33a airplane in X-plane 11. The REP is an add-on that is installed on top of the base Carenado payware airplane, and is intended to give realistic performance to the airplane.
THIS VIDEO IS FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY. DO NOT USE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN FOR REAL WORLD FLIGHTS.
![[X-Plane] Carenado B1900D for X-Plane 11 | Full Review](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fR19nB_z_qs/mqdefault.jpg)
![[X-Plane] Carenado B1900D for X-Plane 11 | Full Review](/img/tr.png)
Good overview of the pluses and minuses to REP. To your point, I think some of it is limited by X-Plane itself. The REP package is as close as I think they can get technically to the 172s I fly in real life, but there are still some things that don't exactly match up (>500 fpm climb in 95 degree weather where I live in Denver? Not going to happen in real life, LOL). But Simcoders do care about the input and try to address issues as they are brought up. Also, like you said, FS2020 is not even close to being a suitable alternative at this point. The scenery looks pretty, but that is where it ends
Agree with your comments 100%.
Just what I needed to accompany my cup of coffee.
Hi - I'm not a pilot, but when you see your video and the review, you're surprised that they do not know some fundamental things about aerodynamics. That when you unfold the landing site or flaps, you should not dive into the abyss or rise into the clouds like a jet stream. This is probably how you are expected to work in REP, that is why you buy the supplement. But it should be something they can fix, I hope efetrsom it is otherwise a nice plan to deal with in the computer.
I'll be your 100 subscriber. :) Thanks for the video.
Welcome aboard! I wish I had more time to make videos.
I ve reported the gear and flaps behaviors being wrong to Nico 3 days ago. Today, he put an update for the F33A REP correcting this. It now barely pitch down and will give less than 500 fpm pitch down after few seconds due to the excess of drag. Same with flaps. You should give a try (don t forget to tick the beta box in the skunkcraft updater because it is still in the beta version for the moment).
Don t hesitate to report him anything that is wrong.
The AP off and change of pitch is not REP but XP11.
Thanks for the comments. He is very responsive, and has watched these videos, but doesn't really understand some fundamental limitations of normally aspirated piston engines. The major issue I have with the REP package is how the power you can extract from the normally aspirated engines is far too high - that you can get 75%+ power up into the low teens. At this point I've washed my hands of things...
@@flightlevel1803 it s not perfect I agree but that s by far the most realistic option we have regardless of the flight sim. Don t check MSFS then or you ll be killing yourself lol!
@@StefBelgium I agree 100%.
As for MSFS, I flew it a couple hours when it first came out, and it was such a mess, I haven't touched it yet.
Hmm i wrote a comment, but why you hide it?
Howdy Janusz:
Strange, I didn't touch it, and I dont see it in the comments management section. RUclips bug?
I send them link to your video, and they wrote me back. They said that at v4.6.0 the F33 supports the EFM and some things got fixed, and they will be happy if you would contact them.
Thanks for the video. I'm more interested in using this airplane for IFR training. Would you recommend it as such and can you turn off the avionics failures?
Thanks!
I think it's good for IFR training.
I think the first checkbox in "REP options" may turn off failures, "disable the plane damages" or something like that.
Anyway, they aren't so frequent that it is seriously painful, but it's just not realistic that the vacuum pump will fail every 50-100 hours.
If you are looking for a plane that perfectly replicates a RW F33a, you will be a bit disappointed- for example, when you drop the gear, it goes down HARD until you trim up, rather than the much more sedate sink rate in the real plane. However, the GNS430 works great, as do the other instruments- everything done by the X-plane guys is bulletproof.
This video made me think of some of the issues I found in the V35b from REP. There are some pretty serious issues with that airplane now- for example, when cruising at around 60% power, 50* LOP, 2300 RPM, i was getting 400 degree CHTs. That's almost impossible in a normally functioning engine (probably possible only in a pre-ignition scenario). I had to open the cowl flaps to keep the engine out of the danger zone. pretty frustrating, i hope the REP guys study up on engine theory and fix some of these issues.
Just tested again, 55% power, 62* LOP, cowl flaps closed, and the temperatures are creeping up to nearly 400f. "WTF" is the thing that leaps to mind. Need to be fixed!
Figured this one out, i had the "winterization kit" turned on. Disable that, and it's all good. False alarm! haha.
Not sure if you're much of a turboprop guy, but I HIGHLY recommend checking out the HotStart TBM900. I think you'd enjoy it. Good to see another video!
Howdy Aleem, that TBM 900 is pretty amazing. I followed the development quite closely- "Jason TBM", the original developer of ForeFlight whose TBM 900 was used to model the HotStart airplane, has a couple great videos where he is giving feedback on the X-plane version in exquisite detail early in the alpha stage. Probably the best X-plane payware addon, IMHO. That's a good channel if you want to see "real life" TBM flying, though he doesn't put out many videos.
For me, I am interested in X-plane airplanes from a practical perspective - airplanes I will actually "take the yoke" in, either now or in the future. Cessnas and Bonanzas are "now" airplanes, and in the "possible future acquisition" category are the Twin Cherokee and Baron. I can't ever foresee owning a TBM- even without taking the $$ into account, I would consider it a bit wasteful to be tooling around in a 60 GPH turbo prop, even at those speeds. Not my bag!
I have a friend who had a TBM 850, but he sold it before I could finagle my way into the right seat on one of his flights. That would have been cool.
Thanks for watching!
@@flightlevel1803 Yup, love Jason's content and love the airplane as well. If we're talking virtual airplanes, have you seen the Uncle Jack Simulations PT-19? Now that's some proper engine management and seat-of-your pants flying in our virtual skies.
@@aleemahmed8384 Thank's for the suggestion, I'll check it out at some point!
As a general rule, a naturally aspirated combustion engine will lose 3% of its power for every 1,000 ft of elevation gain.
At 15,000 feet of elevation your engine will make 55% horsepower.
It's wrong to say that you cannot achieve more than 60% power above 8100ft. It really depends on the power settings.
I suggest you check out the Continental IO-520 Operator's Manual. In there, you find a power chart for the BB variant that shows that the engine can produce about 190HP at 19.5MP, 2700RPM at 10.500ft.
You are incorrect. See Pelican's Perch #66, Where should I run my engine? "At roughly 8000 feet, the red box goes away, and that's the area where you can't get 65% due to altitude." Written by John Deakin, who is one of three world class experts who taught the Advanced Pilot Seminars with George Braly and Walter Atkinson. POHs are notoriously full of errors.
I strongly recommend you bone up on your studies if you are going to make a "study level" airplane. Having errors like this is unacceptable in my book!
@@flightlevel1803 you're using rules of thumb vs engine's operator manual. Always use the POH and the Operator Manual vs the rule of thumb.
In my comment i clearly stated that's a generic rule.
By the way, the issue reported has been fixed I don't know how many updates ago.
Cheers
@@ClaudioNicolotti You are absolutely incorrect on that- your rule of thumb has nothing to do w/ reality.
@@flightlevel1803 that rule of thumb is a generic rule. All REPs are based on the operator manual.