Just a quick note. Normally after you flip the prime and boost switches you wait a few secs for the inertial starter to spool up (if you listen carefully on the outside you can hear it winding up) and then hit start, wait a few turns then bring the mags on. The way you do it wouldn't start the engines because there isn't enough momentum from the flywheel yet but obviously it's not modeled exactly.
Well hidden feature, but the switch next to the avionics master switch on the top left will swap out the navigation gauges for a GNS 530/430. I love when developers give you the option to fly a more historical version or one set up with modern quality of life technologies. Overall a brilliant product for a good price that's very approachable to fly.
On an engine start on a round engine you woul count six propeller blades through before turning the magneto switch on and watch the oil pressure waiting to see pressure before asking anything from the engine and taking your hand off the magneto switch.
I'm happy you chose Monterey Regional Airport (KMRY) to showcase this beautiful bird. It's one of my favorite airports in California, because I lived in Monterey for a couple of years and I had the pleasure of living near the top of a hill that allowed me to see the length of the runway everytime I drove to work. The Stratoliner itself is marvelously detailed. I just wish, as you said, that the camera boundary didn't exist. So many good planes have this issue. Anyway, thanks for the first look, Jon!
Back in 1952-54 I lived in Monterey just across the canyon from the airport in what was then called Del Rey Woods. The airport back then was a really interesting place. It had an active Naval Air Station where they flew SNJ trainers and F6f-5N Grumman Hellcat night fighters. Our house was right under the downwind leg and when the SNJs would fly over and they would put their props into low pitch for landing they would make this horrible noise kind of like the world's loudest chain saw gone berserk. And since there was a lot of training activity then it tended to be a very noisy place to live.
I love these classic steam gauge instrument panel type cockpits, in these older planes. I really like the glass cockpits too, but this is a little old school, which really gives it that older classic look. Glass cockpits are for newer planes, then this. The only other thing for me is, looking thought the windshield, look like the same as looking thought prison bars.
Historical note: part of the takeoff procedure for piston-engine airliners was to run each engine up individually while lined up on the runway. (How far, I don’t know. I was a child. It was loud.) Presumably this was some kind of a safety check to help prevent losing an engine at take off. Could also have been to clear the plugs of possible fouling from start-up and taxiing. My last ride in a piston-engine airliner was across the U.S. in a Navy Reserve plane, the military cargo version of the DC-6. Something of an antique by then (late 1970’s) and the reserve unit was justifiably proud of it. Don’t remember the individual engine run-up on that trip, may have gone out of fashion. The French pilots never seemed to do that back in the day: come peeling around the corner to the runway and throw the throttles down.
I had to get this as I love the look of it and that era. It is buggy but I managed to get the AP to work using the autopilot and gauges. There is a switch between NAV and GPS. When using the Garmin's, I couldn't get it to track on NAV. I will try again but oddly with the gauges, it automatically switched to VLOC when in range for ILS approach. It did bring the plane down but ILS unlocked like it does sometimes with the DC-3, but its not that hard to land. The guy that modded the DC-3 could really fix this baby up, but I don't think he's allowed to in pay ware. The DC-3 was freeware. I'm sure this plane will get an update down the road.
I went ahead and purchased this but I've actually been waiting for the C-46 Commando. I really liked the cargo variant of the Commando in FSX. Although the cockpit textures weren't very good, the plane its self looked nice and it flew as you might expect. I hope to have as much fun with this gorgeous Stratoliner. I think the price is absolutely worth it for what you're getting as well. Thanks for posting this first look at the Stratoliner. Another great video!
I typically don't enjoy flying modern jetliners within the sim. Real pilots have so much skill and knowledge but in the sim hitting autopilot then landing at the end isn't my thing. This however looks like alot of fun though even if dumbed down somewhat. I really enjoy the ford trimotor.
Interesting the elevator trim is just like the early Boeing jets. A wheel on each side of the center stand. The autopilot is modeled of of the King unit that Microsoft Flight simulator has used in the past even when it was not a normal application for the King unit.
The real aircraft only had the gyro-pilot - they added the autopilot, because every time any realistic aircraft gets released, a legion of idiots comment "would be better if it has autopilot, autothrottle, and autoland"...
That's a good looking plane. I do like these vintage aircraft although my tail wheel landing are horrible 🤣. I especially like the "No aerobatics including spining approved" sticker, just in case the the pilot thinks spinning didn't qualify as aerobatics and might be ok in a bird that big 😆. Nice video
Hello , What's this ohhhh looks quite interesting. Blimey had a hard time setting up the Tri Motor for my Bravo set up but this oh deaar think I'd go round the bend.
As soon as I heard this plane was built by aeroplane heaven. I was like, ehh, nah thanks…and so far is what I expected. A dead plane with a magnificent external model.
This new addition is a work of art. I will make one small complaint, and it's not only focused on this new 307, which is I'm not super happy with the sound of the engines. Perhaps I've been in too many real planes with large radial engines, and it just seems the sound models used for these aren't great, missing the deep rumble of realism.
With the new B307 Stratoliner, there is a bug with the ILS CDI needle. I am standing on runway 24 in Paderborn, and NAV1 is tuned to the ILS frequency. The needle is now centered, as it should be. However, when I move the aircraft, the needle moves in the wrong direction.
The cockpit is a mish-mash of the modern one currently in Clipper Flying Cloud and the original. There are two large scale photographs of the cockpit on the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum website; one that shows the original instrumentation and one that shows the current setup. In the modern setup the gyropilot has been gutted and a full Bendix-King autopilot and radio stack has been fitted. IMO it would have been better if they had picked one or the other and not made up an instrument panel, but that's just me. The modern version would have been easier to implement in its entirety as there is more information available for it. I was also wondering how they'd implemented the Sperry A-3 Gyropilot but you answered the question; the developer has locked it to the MSFS autopilot. The behaviour of a gyropilot is nothing like an autopilot. Also those engines: they sound very much like PT-67 series turboprops. I've flown behind a big fat radial (P&W Wasp on a T-6) and it sounds nothing like those engines. The obvious question is: what would I know? I am an ex-pilot (road traffic accident injuries) and a flightsim developer (both P3D and MSFS).
@@jonbeckett Looks like my original response has gone AWOL. Basically, it would be a waste of time because no developer (including me) is going to make such drastic changes to a project that has been released. The external model and the internal textures are very, very good but it is let down by (what appears to be) poor decision making about the flight instrumentation and sound set. I've made my fair share of payware screwups - search "pilot's b314 gyropilot" for what is without a doubt the worst one I ever made. I did fix it in the end but it took three iterations to get it right.
Looks kind Boeing based the stratoliner off the B-17. You can see the wings are a dead on match as is the primary tail section. Was probably even running the same Wright Cyclone 9 cylinder turbo supercharged engines. The Stratocruiser was based on the B-29
How do you access the cabin in flight like shown in Microsoft’s trailer? Really disappointing to me that you can’t seem to access it from the cockpit view even though they make it appear as though you can.
Still very similar basic systems from fsx and earlier, just graphics and engine boost really.. Why? You can still slice and go trough things like in earlier games! 9:00
I still can't get the engines to start. I've tried everything. Only time they start is if they're already running (on runway), shut down and then they'll start. If I turn off the power and back on (battery/ground), then they won't start again. Have to restart the flight. Shame.
I am interested in this. Can a 4-engine aircraft be programmed onto 2 throttles? I have a Thrustmaster Boeing yoke and Thrustmaster Boeing 2-throttle quadrant. I would program engines 1 and 3 on the left throttle lever and engines 2 and 4 on the right, but I'm not sure how to do this.
You can assign multiple throttle axes to a single lever. In this case, throttle 1 and 3 to the left lever and 2 and 4 to the right lever. Or, better, assign 1 and 2 to the left lever and 3 and 4 to the right. That way, you can use differential thrust to help steer the aircraft in tight spaces on the ground. Set up a profile for the Stratoliner, either in MSFS or in a third-party program like Axis and Ohs if you don't want the assignments to apply to other aircraft. Hope this helps!
This is the first Im hearing about a 307 for MSFS, very interesting, is this Asobo who have done this or someone else? It's agonisingly close to a B377 Stratocruiser which I am dying to fly in MSFS. - does this aircraft come with some historic liveries? ------ On looking a second time, I can immediately see its an Aeroplane Heaven aircraft. Which are the same ppl who modelled the DC-3 in MSFS. interesting.
I just bought this plane and for some reason when I’m on the ground the plane will ONLY turn left, I can’t taxi to the right in just goes straight, or left… any ideas what may be causing this or is this a bug? I play on xbox btw
@@jonbeckett The earlier attitude indicators were more prone to toppling, the turn and slip indicator was the much more reliable back-up gyro instrument. They only disappeared with jet speeds when the rate of turn information was of too low a magnitude for the possible attitude deviations at very high speed and for the jets more toppling resistant multiple back-up attitude indicators were used instead. At time 21:16 you can see the turn and slip behind the control column.
It is modelled as the original PanAm version , with single-speed supercharger. The TWA airplanes had 2-speed units. Those are the ones that were used by the military during the war, then converted back again afterwards.
The B-17 engines were turbocharged as well as supercharged. The turbo tends to act like a flame arrester which kills the drama of the start. P-47s and P-38s have the same issue
Kindly, How is it supposed to sound? To me it’s sounds fine in this video. At least while flying. I mean what else are you supposed to hear besides the engines and props roaring like they do in the video?
No - it's an entirely different aircraft. Some design elements are similar - but only in so much that the Boeing 247 is similar to the Stratoliner, and the B-17.
Only looks that way. The C-46 was by Curtiss, and came a bit later. This one's by Boeing. It's basically a B-17 (same wings and tail) with a civilian, passenger-carrying fuselage. Anticipates the 377 Stratocruiser, which was a B-29 given the same treatment.
Not realistic.. there's no oil dripping out of the exhaust outlets and sprayed back across the engine cowlings!🤣 We all know radials never, ever leak oil.🤪😆
I suggest that you don't use ATC when showing us your videos as it drowns out your voice. We want to hear what you say, not what ATC controllers are saying. It spoils your work.
Personally, I'd love to see the Boeing 377 Stratocruiser come to MSFS - I've no interest whatsoever in "fast jets" (we have DCS for that) and the exact same airliners being pumped out by competing devs. It's these magnificent old classic birds that nobody has thought of bringing to the MSFS platform I would like to see more interest for. How many times can one fly an A300 across all the flight sim platforms - it's BORING!!! So, to all you "devs" out there... stop re-inventing the damn wheel and think about creating some classics and individual uniqueness that nobody has ever done before.
You mirror my thoughts. I am sick to death of the airliner thing. As they say, real flying is in the smaller stuff. Perhaps we have a mob that aren't capable of real flying and so just go with the tubeliners. There are far too many jet airliners now, so enough is enough.
I think the reviewers must be critical. If they are not critical in judging the modules the opinion that everything is fine will sip to the audience more and then the devs will simply raise the foot off the acceleration pedal. I mean you pan the camera and on the image is obvious "sloppiness" for 2023 standard yet you say you can't fault it. I mean... what could somebody without a youtube channel say? There are two things in a "model. Geometry itself and texturing. When you move around and see round edges that are made out of lines that should immediately snap you out of 2023 and put you to FSX mode. There is no excuse to have a model with obvious low polygone count these days unless skills or effort are low and it was the only way to optimize it. Oh it needs to run on XBox? Let's make it of 1000 triangles and slap some shine on the textures so everything is hidden. I tend to give Asobo's own models as examples... there are default and free planes in MFS2020 that are to "2023 standard" and anything bellow as payware is not to be praised as "can't be faulted". Also the texturing. When you see "ultra shine" or a shine that is not real think that it is masking something not that it's their best attempt to do it because everyone knows to modify the pbr channels so that shine really looks "real" but they choose not to because they have to hide the low details. I am not saying here reviewers should trash a developer. I criticized several devs that are asleep at the wheel and some got really offended although all I said was they should up their game... like they were at the pinacle already and nothing could be improved... ever! And I think is because reviewers praise them for sloppy job. All is needed is to point out "kindly" that the clocks albeit shining are obviously not round but made of a visible polygone of like 32 sides, etc. Point the textures are made with Quake 3 Arena technology and have just some shine added to them. Nowadays in VR all these are super visible and all it needs is that the model of the plane to be not hi def in systems and flight model and that is an obsolete model from get go. Who wants to fly a plane like this one that has low system depth and generic feeling FM for years? All these are made to be paid 10-15$ flew once or twice and abandoned because third time is just awful. Don't believe me? Fly it multiple times...
This is an ugly aeroplane in my opinion. I also wonder why the engines sound so bad? I doubt that I could listen to those engines for more than a few minutes. Externally the sounds aren't so grating but they still sound off.
![ค้าง (STILL) - GEMINI [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ftxx3hk5vkU/mqdefault.jpg)
Just a quick note. Normally after you flip the prime and boost switches you wait a few secs for the inertial starter to spool up (if you listen carefully on the outside you can hear it winding up) and then hit start, wait a few turns then bring the mags on. The way you do it wouldn't start the engines because there isn't enough momentum from the flywheel yet but obviously it's not modeled exactly.
I'm just showing a reliable way of hacking the aircraft to start it here :)
@@jonbeckett so you claim.
I just saw that plane for real at the Smithsonian last month. It's soo impressive in person!
Well hidden feature, but the switch next to the avionics master switch on the top left will swap out the navigation gauges for a GNS 530/430. I love when developers give you the option to fly a more historical version or one set up with modern quality of life technologies.
Overall a brilliant product for a good price that's very approachable to fly.
Great spot.
Ah yes a B-17 with a Flash Gordon rocket ship welded to it.
That ground guy went right through the elevator like a ghost.
Thank you so much Jonathan for making the tutorials so comprehensive and didatic for us. Cheers!
I am hoping the B29 makes it in at some point. Flying that with this level of realism would be really a joy.
12:26 Oh gawd that sudden sinking feeling... 😮
On an engine start on a round engine you woul count six propeller blades through before turning the magneto switch on and watch the oil pressure waiting to see pressure before asking anything from the engine and taking your hand off the magneto switch.
I'm happy you chose Monterey Regional Airport (KMRY) to showcase this beautiful bird. It's one of my favorite airports in California, because I lived in Monterey for a couple of years and I had the pleasure of living near the top of a hill that allowed me to see the length of the runway everytime I drove to work.
The Stratoliner itself is marvelously detailed. I just wish, as you said, that the camera boundary didn't exist. So many good planes have this issue. Anyway, thanks for the first look, Jon!
Back in 1952-54 I lived in Monterey just across the canyon from the airport in what was then called Del Rey Woods. The airport back then was a really interesting place. It had an active Naval Air Station where they flew SNJ trainers and F6f-5N Grumman Hellcat night fighters. Our house was right under the downwind leg and when the SNJs would fly over and they would put their props into low pitch for landing they would make this horrible noise kind of like the world's loudest chain saw gone berserk. And since there was a lot of training activity then it tended to be a very noisy place to live.
Wow! Very cool! They're really spoiling us now.
I love these classic steam gauge instrument panel type cockpits, in these older planes. I really like the glass cockpits too, but this is a little old school, which really gives it that older classic look. Glass cockpits are for newer planes, then this. The only other thing for me is, looking thought the windshield, look like the same as looking thought prison bars.
Historical note: part of the takeoff procedure for piston-engine airliners was to run each engine up individually while lined up on the runway. (How far, I don’t know. I was a child. It was loud.) Presumably this was some kind of a safety check to help prevent losing an engine at take off. Could also have been to clear the plugs of possible fouling from start-up and taxiing.
My last ride in a piston-engine airliner was across the U.S. in a Navy Reserve plane, the military cargo version of the DC-6. Something of an antique by then (late 1970’s) and the reserve unit was justifiably proud of it. Don’t remember the individual engine run-up on that trip, may have gone out of fashion. The French pilots never seemed to do that back in the day: come peeling around the corner to the runway and throw the throttles down.
It's quite a procedure - warming oil up, building up pressures, and so on.
I had to get this as I love the look of it and that era. It is buggy but I managed to get the AP to work using the autopilot and gauges. There is a switch between NAV and GPS. When using the Garmin's, I couldn't get it to track on NAV. I will try again but oddly with the gauges, it automatically switched to VLOC when in range for ILS approach. It did bring the plane down but ILS unlocked like it does sometimes with the DC-3, but its not that hard to land. The guy that modded the DC-3 could really fix this baby up, but I don't think he's allowed to in pay ware. The DC-3 was freeware. I'm sure this plane will get an update down the road.
I went ahead and purchased this but I've actually been waiting for the C-46 Commando. I really liked the cargo variant of the Commando in FSX. Although the cockpit textures weren't very good, the plane its self looked nice and it flew as you might expect. I hope to have as much fun with this gorgeous Stratoliner. I think the price is absolutely worth it for what you're getting as well. Thanks for posting this first look at the Stratoliner. Another great video!
It's a civilian B-17. Same engines, wings, landing gear, and tail.
I don't recall the engines on B17 aircraft sounding that bad.
Love this plane and the FW200
I typically don't enjoy flying modern jetliners within the sim. Real pilots have so much skill and knowledge but in the sim hitting autopilot then landing at the end isn't my thing. This however looks like alot of fun though even if dumbed down somewhat. I really enjoy the ford trimotor.
What an airplane...Hopely now the B-29 or B-50. Thank you Jonathan☺
Interesting the elevator trim is just like the early Boeing jets. A wheel on each side of the center stand. The autopilot is modeled of of the King unit that Microsoft Flight simulator has used in the past even when it was not a normal application for the King unit.
The real aircraft only had the gyro-pilot - they added the autopilot, because every time any realistic aircraft gets released, a legion of idiots comment "would be better if it has autopilot, autothrottle, and autoland"...
@@jonbeckett I woulld absolutely love to see someone design autoland for a taildragger, sounds like a handful!
Brilliant, the B-17 would be the next progression hopefully
Beautiful. 👍🏻
sounds really good
09:05 Perfect score, right in the Head XD
love to see a b-17 come out
beautiful
What a great video … the Brit adds a flare to the project!!!!
Thank you for correctly calling her a stewardess!
That's a good looking plane. I do like these vintage aircraft although my tail wheel landing are horrible 🤣. I especially like the "No aerobatics including spining approved" sticker, just in case the the pilot thinks spinning didn't qualify as aerobatics and might be ok in a bird that big 😆. Nice video
Beautiful airplane! 😍
Hello , What's this ohhhh looks quite interesting. Blimey had a hard time setting up the Tri Motor for my Bravo set up but this oh deaar think I'd go round the bend.
"If you are flying by hand..." I mean... it's the ONLY way to fly :)
I jest. .I'm in love with WWII planes.
Best $16 plane I ever bought
It's so beautiful and the fuel truck is a 1937 Chevrolet CEO
It does look impressive, but the phrase “flying diner” kept popping into my head
As soon as I heard this plane was built by aeroplane heaven. I was like, ehh, nah thanks…and so far is what I expected. A dead plane with a magnificent external model.
That's basically a Curtiss C46 on steroids
This new addition is a work of art. I will make one small complaint, and it's not only focused on this new 307, which is I'm not super happy with the sound of the engines. Perhaps I've been in too many real planes with large radial engines, and it just seems the sound models used for these aren't great, missing the deep rumble of realism.
Yeah that's because the reverb of the cockpit drowns everything out. And the engines sound like diesel trucks... Lol.
With the new B307 Stratoliner, there is a bug with the ILS CDI needle. I am standing on runway 24 in Paderborn, and NAV1 is tuned to the ILS frequency. The needle is now centered, as it should be. However, when I move the aircraft, the needle moves in the wrong direction.
The cockpit is a mish-mash of the modern one currently in Clipper Flying Cloud and the original. There are two large scale photographs of the cockpit on the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum website; one that shows the original instrumentation and one that shows the current setup. In the modern setup the gyropilot has been gutted and a full Bendix-King autopilot and radio stack has been fitted. IMO it would have been better if they had picked one or the other and not made up an instrument panel, but that's just me. The modern version would have been easier to implement in its entirety as there is more information available for it. I was also wondering how they'd implemented the Sperry A-3 Gyropilot but you answered the question; the developer has locked it to the MSFS autopilot. The behaviour of a gyropilot is nothing like an autopilot.
Also those engines: they sound very much like PT-67 series turboprops. I've flown behind a big fat radial (P&W Wasp on a T-6) and it sounds nothing like those engines.
The obvious question is: what would I know? I am an ex-pilot (road traffic accident injuries) and a flightsim developer (both P3D and MSFS).
Would this comment not be better aimed at the developer of the aircraft? :)
@@jonbeckett See below - original response didn't show up so I repeated myself.
@@jonbeckett Looks like my original response has gone AWOL. Basically, it would be a waste of time because no developer (including me) is going to make such drastic changes to a project that has been released. The external model and the internal textures are very, very good but it is let down by (what appears to be) poor decision making about the flight instrumentation and sound set. I've made my fair share of payware screwups - search "pilot's b314 gyropilot" for what is without a doubt the worst one I ever made. I did fix it in the end but it took three iterations to get it right.
Looks kind Boeing based the stratoliner off the B-17. You can see the wings are a dead on match as is the primary tail section. Was probably even running the same Wright Cyclone 9 cylinder turbo supercharged engines. The Stratocruiser was based on the B-29
The B247 is *very* similar to the B-17 too.
last time I used the drone camera i was struck outside and couldn't get back into the cockpit
In your preflight you turned the rotating becon etc on, however the exterior view of the aircraft shows them off. A interesting video though. 😅
3:55 Why is the stewardess saluting with her left hand?
Ain't she a beauty
Thank you one Question I am looking forward to purchasing the PDMG DC 6
Your opinion MSFS 2020 Stratoliner
Versus PDGM DC 6 thank you
The DC-6 is much, much better.
Thank you I'll take your advise looking forward to it I've plenty of time and PDMG DC6 has 20 TH-cam tutorials thank you again
I bought it, there is no silver polished livery ... where do you get that?
How do you access the cabin in flight like shown in Microsoft’s trailer? Really disappointing to me that you can’t seem to access it from the cockpit view even though they make it appear as though you can.
Use the drone camera (insert key).
You'll need to Google the keyboard controls unless you have a game controller like Jonathon is using here...
😊
+++NO ACROBATIC MANEUVERS, INCLUDING SPINS, APPROVED+++
if there are a few bugs - this would be typical for an MSFS model.
Black chrome? Looking at all the real pics it's hard to find 307 looking like that.
Are the engines really that quiet from ins8de the cockpit? BTW, this is a fun plane to fly and easy to get into.
1001 armchair experts that somehow know without ever sitting in one will tell you not :)
Still very similar basic systems from fsx and earlier, just graphics and engine boost really.. Why? You can still slice and go trough things like in earlier games! 9:00
The physics engine in MSFS is on another planet. It models airflow over the aircraft, and over the scenery.
What a beautiful plane
Anyone know if devs have fixed the broken fuel system or it is still a mess? I deleted the plane but would love to fly again if that's fixed.
I still can't get the engines to start. I've tried everything. Only time they start is if they're already running (on runway), shut down and then they'll start. If I turn off the power and back on (battery/ground), then they won't start again. Have to restart the flight.
Shame.
I'll have to try it.
I am interested in this. Can a 4-engine aircraft be programmed onto 2 throttles? I have a Thrustmaster Boeing yoke and Thrustmaster Boeing 2-throttle quadrant. I would program engines 1 and 3 on the left throttle lever and engines 2 and 4 on the right, but I'm not sure how to do this.
You can assign multiple throttle axes to a single lever. In this case, throttle 1 and 3 to the left lever and 2 and 4 to the right lever. Or, better, assign 1 and 2 to the left lever and 3 and 4 to the right. That way, you can use differential thrust to help steer the aircraft in tight spaces on the ground. Set up a profile for the Stratoliner, either in MSFS or in a third-party program like Axis and Ohs if you don't want the assignments to apply to other aircraft. Hope this helps!
Assign the axis in the controller profile.
This is the first Im hearing about a 307 for MSFS, very interesting, is this Asobo who have done this or someone else? It's agonisingly close to a B377 Stratocruiser which I am dying to fly in MSFS. - does this aircraft come with some historic liveries?
------
On looking a second time, I can immediately see its an Aeroplane Heaven aircraft. Which are the same ppl who modelled the DC-3 in MSFS. interesting.
I think perhaps Aeroplane Heaven did it for Microsoft - not sure though.
I just bought this plane and for some reason when I’m on the ground the plane will ONLY turn left, I can’t taxi to the right in just goes straight, or left… any ideas what may be causing this or is this a bug? I play on xbox btw
where is the turn needle and balance ball?
Should it have one?
@@jonbeckett I've never seen an airplane that didn't.
@@jonbeckett The earlier attitude indicators were more prone to toppling, the turn and slip indicator was the much more reliable back-up gyro instrument. They only disappeared with jet speeds when the rate of turn information was of too low a magnitude for the possible attitude deviations at very high speed and for the jets more toppling resistant multiple back-up attitude indicators were used instead.
At time 21:16 you can see the turn and slip behind the control column.
So no 1930s and 1940s Radio Range navigation? and ‘very very easy to fly’.
Hoping the Lockheed Super Constellation is in the works!
It's already available for MSFS.
@@jonbeckettNot for Xbox unfortunately.
So Boeing turned B-17 to an Airliner.
9:05 - Poor guy is killed by tehtail section :)
In your preflight you turned the rotating becon etc on, however the exterior view of the aircraft shows them off. A interesting video though.
4. Engine. DC. 3
Fly higher that 14000ft is Slow of impossible. Cant Acrobats blowers for more manifold pressure.
It is modelled as the original PanAm version , with single-speed supercharger. The TWA airplanes had 2-speed units. Those are the ones that were used by the military during the war, then converted back again afterwards.
I'll have a play with it later - take it up to cruise and see how I get on.
I wish the engines started with a ball of fire! It is a fun plane.
The B-17 engines were turbocharged as well as supercharged. The turbo tends to act like a flame arrester which kills the drama of the start. P-47s and P-38s have the same issue
Is the speed bug at high altitude a real bug, or....? Just read about it.
Mine fly's for a little bit and then dives every time
Not had that problem at all.
It all looks good, but those interior sounds are very off putting.
Yea so are the looks on most of the antique aircraft. Looks like they came off the showroom floor in some areas. But its a solid unit
The sounds are awful and the aircraft is ugly . The texture of the interior looks like it came from FS98.
Kindly, How is it supposed to sound? To me it’s sounds fine in this video. At least while flying. I mean what else are you supposed to hear besides the engines and props roaring like they do in the video?
@@major3336 th-cam.com/video/ObB2FdDGs8U/w-d-xo.html
button on the left where your arm rests will make the control wheel disappear
Yep - I found that - I just like to show the yolk during approach so you can see my inputs.
I'm really disappointed that you can't do aerobatics in this thing...
So this a C-46 modified to have 2 more engines.
No - it's an entirely different aircraft. Some design elements are similar - but only in so much that the Boeing 247 is similar to the Stratoliner, and the B-17.
Only looks that way. The C-46 was by Curtiss, and came a bit later. This one's by Boeing. It's basically a B-17 (same wings and tail) with a civilian, passenger-carrying fuselage. Anticipates the 377 Stratocruiser, which was a B-29 given the same treatment.
Oh
the sound does not seem very realistic. They could have recorded it on a B-17.
Ill never understand why devs model the rear of the planes yet lock them behind a wall you can't pass through..
12:52 Good grief.
That's what I said to myself at the time - only a little more colourfully in my head :)
engine. DC 3
Not realistic.. there's no oil dripping out of the exhaust outlets and sprayed back across the engine cowlings!🤣 We all know radials never, ever leak oil.🤪😆
I suggest that you don't use ATC when showing us your videos as it drowns out your voice. We want to hear what you say, not what ATC controllers are saying. It spoils your work.
I didn't intentionally use ATC. I just happened to spawn at an airfield where ATIS got picked up.
Personally, I'd love to see the Boeing 377 Stratocruiser come to MSFS - I've no interest whatsoever in "fast jets" (we have DCS for that) and the exact same airliners being pumped out by competing devs. It's these magnificent old classic birds that nobody has thought of bringing to the MSFS platform I would like to see more interest for. How many times can one fly an A300 across all the flight sim platforms - it's BORING!!! So, to all you "devs" out there... stop re-inventing the damn wheel and think about creating some classics and individual uniqueness that nobody has ever done before.
You mirror my thoughts. I am sick to death of the airliner thing. As they say, real flying is in the smaller stuff. Perhaps we have a mob that aren't capable of real flying and so just go with the tubeliners. There are far too many jet airliners now, so enough is enough.
All in your opinion of course :)
@@jonbeckett Well obviously!!! 😜
narrator smacks his lips a bit. Maybe flonase will help, smacking is often caused from mouth breathing.
It was a different microphone :)
I think the reviewers must be critical. If they are not critical in judging the modules the opinion that everything is fine will sip to the audience more and then the devs will simply raise the foot off the acceleration pedal.
I mean you pan the camera and on the image is obvious "sloppiness" for 2023 standard yet you say you can't fault it. I mean... what could somebody without a youtube channel say?
There are two things in a "model. Geometry itself and texturing. When you move around and see round edges that are made out of lines that should immediately snap you out of 2023 and put you to FSX mode. There is no excuse to have a model with obvious low polygone count these days unless skills or effort are low and it was the only way to optimize it. Oh it needs to run on XBox? Let's make it of 1000 triangles and slap some shine on the textures so everything is hidden.
I tend to give Asobo's own models as examples... there are default and free planes in MFS2020 that are to "2023 standard" and anything bellow as payware is not to be praised as "can't be faulted".
Also the texturing. When you see "ultra shine" or a shine that is not real think that it is masking something not that it's their best attempt to do it because everyone knows to modify the pbr channels so that shine really looks "real" but they choose not to because they have to hide the low details.
I am not saying here reviewers should trash a developer. I criticized several devs that are asleep at the wheel and some got really offended although all I said was they should up their game... like they were at the pinacle already and nothing could be improved... ever! And I think is because reviewers praise them for sloppy job.
All is needed is to point out "kindly" that the clocks albeit shining are obviously not round but made of a visible polygone of like 32 sides, etc. Point the textures are made with Quake 3 Arena technology and have just some shine added to them.
Nowadays in VR all these are super visible and all it needs is that the model of the plane to be not hi def in systems and flight model and that is an obsolete model from get go. Who wants to fly a plane like this one that has low system depth and generic feeling FM for years? All these are made to be paid 10-15$ flew once or twice and abandoned because third time is just awful. Don't believe me? Fly it multiple times...
What is a better use of your time - writing lengthy critiques of products, or perhaps volunteering to assist developers with testing and feedback ?
@@jonbeckett :D not sure.
This is an ugly aeroplane in my opinion. I also wonder why the engines sound so bad? I doubt that I could listen to those engines for more than a few minutes. Externally the sounds aren't so grating but they still sound off.
MS didnt release shit.
This is a 3rd party add on plane that's $15.
You people should be more clear about this crap.
Asobo released an aircraft that Microsoft contracted a third party to make for Flight Simulator. Apologies if I wasn't clear about that.