If you can tell me which Cessna is more realistic than this one for flight sim, I promise you I will make a video on it and change the title of this video.
@@Q8Pilot I was remiss in not adding to my comments that you have presented an exceptional video here, Sir. Subscribed! This is the most detailed and realistic Cessna 172 I have ever seen in a flightsim. I do hope that they do create a 172 with analog gauges. My other feedback, and one that has always been a major issue for me with all X-Plane iterations, is that the graphical anti aliasing needs improvement! As a good example, right at the beginning of your video, you can see a LOT of aliasing (jaggedness) in the left wing shadow. This issue has always broken the full immersion for me when playing X-Plane. I also hope they will finally work on this issue, too. PS @Max Blade did we just watch the same video? Your "click-bait" statement is totally unmerited.
Hmm...have you ever been in a C172? If so...please, do point out the flight simulator that is more _realistic_ . I don't care about pretty (go to MSFS if you want pretty), I care about accurate. So, which sim was that, again, that was hyper realistic? It has been 3 days, surely you've recalled the name, or the producer, or the developer, or something, right, @maxzeblade?
I fly and teach the exact 172 represented. You can argue the "Best" all you like. (The stock XP12 172 is very good) ... But this is the most realistically flying 172 in sims, unless I missed some. I use it for flight training.
Test Flight- I installed and purchased the 2012 X-Plane after watching your video on the Airfoils Best Cessna. I flew the same flight you did except turned left(stay low over river on AP and enjoy scenery) after take off from Darrington Muni>KBVS>KNUW>KNRA>KAWO.This 2012 X-plane is really nice and the round robin took several hrs with great scenery.Highly recommend.I have flown and owned all the sims back to the oldies and the 11.This is really a dream sim and tops all that I have ever had.(Almost as good as the real thing). Again thanks for your excellent videos.
Hi. My understanding of how to use the VOR in this scenario is:- set your course pointer to 300, set your heading bug to 330 and with HDG mode engaged, select NAV. Your AP will fly the a/c to the left on a heading of 330 to intercept the 300 radial from the VOR station. As you close on the radial the AP will acquire the VOR and change from HDG to VOR mode and steer you to the VOR station. You’ll need to avoid the mountain as you approach of course. As you touched down your CDI was deflected to the left so the VOR station was on the left of the runway.
Thank you that was just brilliant just like the plane. I have bought it and just love it. I bought it for xplane 11 and then upgraded it to xplane 12 as well for only the original cost. I would like to say I was clever but I got the xplane 11 version by mistake but it worked out really well.
I will definitely buy this plane! I also have msfs 2020 on DVDs but cannot get it installed due to our poor internet speed! So I'm happy with my Xplane 12 DVD version, it works and so do all updates so far! thanks for introducing these planes!
Yes this is a next generation C172 with newer avionics. I personally prefer analog gauges but this is still an incredibly realistic and study level simulation of the real world counterpart.
In the 172sp POH, free on the net, in the Normal procedure section amplified, you will find the correct lean procedures. Includes Recommended, and Peak Performance methods. Q8 is not real world pilot but is quite knowlegeable and makes quality videos.
I am so pleased you appear to be getting the same joy out of the Airfoillabs Cessna as I am. It has an incredible amount of depth, and the fact that there are real consequences if you don’t maintain it is the icing on the cake. You are a man of impeccable taste :-). Enjoy!
Thanks for the excellent stream and thorough exploration of this outrageously comprehensive aircraft! $50 for something of this level of detail and immersion is a total bargain - think of it in terms of spreading the cost over the amount of hours you'll use it and gained experience and entertainment value. Watched on replay, no buffering issues at all! And thanks for the heads up on OrbX central update - can't wait to get their products properly installed into XP12.
19:45 - They should also have a manual that gives you the important details and specs, emergency procedures, etc (to work with the simulated failures, of course). Would be a nice additional touch.
Hi, Thank you for drawing my attention to this marvelous piece of craftsmanship and thank for your hard work. I bought it straight away. A bargain. By the way. The beacon light has to be switched on before you start the engine. And shout clear prop hehe.
When starting up you have to put the mixture in very quick. Prime for 3 seconds and as soon as you start the engine you have to put the mixture to rich very quickly
I fly a 172N IRL. I have this, the stock 172, and the REP 172. Honestly, this one is by far the oddest to land. If you go to idle over the threshold, it just straight up drops from the sky. A little bit of power, it seems to float forever, with hyper sensitive elevator in ground effect. I also notice the engine RPM is unrealistically low to get a reasonable pattern decent. 1700 rpm will have you basically at like 300 f/min for the worlds largest pattern, i'm having to fly it at like 1400-1500 rpm. Go back and check the REP and it's about right, 1700-1750ish and 85-90kts, 1 notch of flaps gives me about a 500-600f/min descent. More doo-dads != more realistic, unless your definition of realism is just clicking through preflight items, not the actual performance of the aircraft.
Yeah, just watched this video and sure enough, same issues on the landing here. He put in a little power then floated forever and slammed down the second he pulled the power.
@@peterblais5282 That is exactly what I was noticing. I made that mistake irl and that didn't go well. During the round out power idle, pull back on the yoke, not all the way back, the plane stays in ground effect until it settles on the rwy. I did had a landing where I smacked the rwy, high pitch attitude and pulled the yoke all the way to my chest. Never again!
Simmers always argued which simulation platform is better and needed to see the difference between those. This AFL C172 has authentic details that I have never seen before. Take my money now.
Good Morning Sir….. I remember watching a video many many years ago from a new TH-cam creator from Kuwait flying a Cessna 172 around Innsbruck giving people hints on how to improve x-plane performance. At the time, it was one of the best productions I’d had seen reference X-plane and graphics settings. Instantly subscribed and somewhere along the way became a member. Then MSFS 2020 came along and dominated all TH-cam channels including yours. I’ve owned FS2020 since its release and have tried on many occasions to like it and use it….. never happened. Certain circumstances forced me to stop supporting your channel but I always found your content unbiased therefore stayed interested. You’ve now re-kindled my respect for your content and I’ve become a member for a second time around……. Cheers. Quick question…. do you do VR?
I love this airplane too, my only problem with it that if you don't set the throttle at least 1400 rpm when landing, it will fall on the runway like a rock, and then swing like crazy. (Okay, not, if your flare is 350% perfect and you can float parallel to the surface 0.2 inch high from the ground, then no problem. Otherwise... You won't have a too beautiful landing.) Now, instead of this, it should beautifully float in the air with throttle IDLE at landing. And not only with 1400-1500 rpm. Obviously, this aircraft is a lot better than MSFS' C172S, but that airplane doesn't suffer from this unfortunate rock and swinging effect. It was great to rewatch your video, Captain, thank you very much once again! :)
Anyways. In X-Plane when you land an aircraft, it almost always looks like you forgot the parking brake ON. :D However you didn't. :) I don't know why they don't correct that highly overaccentuated fraction effect. :D
Thanks for the video. In most respects I am pleased with XP12 but I do have a problem with the 172 dashboard. I cannot get the brightness of the instruments adjusted and the dashboard is really dark until it fills almost the entire screen. Is there a fix for this? TXs.
It’s a very cool plane, but I can’t believe we don’t have the technology in 2023 to get rid of those giant saw blade jaggies like in the opening external scenes. Anyway dig the channel and subscribed 👍
Beautiful aircraft and very cool live thanks Q8 👌 you’re talking about a tutorial how to set the keybindings for the walk mode. I was not able to find it. Is it a video a something else ? Thanks 😊
I noticed when you went to external views about 1 hour 3 minutes 30 seconds into the video, the rudder gust lock is still in place on the vertical stabilizer, won't that effect the full authority of the rudder?
Hey there. Is there any difference between the C172 analog and C172 digital besides the avionics? And can the AoA indicator be removed in settings? Thanks!
What does the CABIN POWER 12V switch do? This is found under the STROBE switch next to the PITOT switch. You did not turn it on during the stream, was it not needed?
I guess which 172 is the best is a matter of perspective and preference as well. I think it also kind of depends on what the developer sets out to create. I agree with q8 that this is the best 172 i know of for xp at least. Cannot speak for other sim platforms as for msf i only own the default ones. I mean yeah scenerywise msfs 2020 blows out all competition. But that is also due to Microsoft owning Bing. If they hadnt had Bing maps, how good would msf 2020 have been then? The only criticism i can toss msf2020s way in that regard is to highways . In many instances you see the traffic on the road of the satelite image, or clouds over the roads etc. Maybe msf2020 can come up with a XP-Esque road system to depict highways and such, that way you get rid of the aforementioned :). Obviously you would need to find a way where this can be autogenerated in a believable fashion and still resemble real life. Which might be hard in mountainous areas. All in all if I look at the region I live in of the Netherlands, msf2020 captures the feel a tad better of the area. But the highways and bridges come out a bit nicer in XP 12. If i could combine both sims, i guess id have a somewhat accurate depiction of my area lmao.
Ah, ok thanks. I found nevertheless an Plugin for walking around the most planes in X-Plane 11 & 12 (WalkAround Plugin for X-Plane 12 and 11) @@Q8Pilot
@@Q8Pilot I'm sorry but you have been given some incorrect information, with the Cessna 172 you lift the nose wheel at 55K and that is based on GVW of 2500 lbs. On some large single engine aircraft you may be required to vary your rotation speed, I believe the Kodak varies rotation speed dependent on gross weight but I'm not positive. I Im listing the POH for a Cessna 172, you'll find you are to lift the nose wheel at 55 K. Section 4, page 18. wayman.edu/files/C172S-G1000-POH.pdf
RNAV zulu approaches where authorization is required are mostly for the airliners. RNP is a standard for sophisticated flight decks and the ability to fly tighter approaches with RF radius to fix etc. G1000 is not AR. G1000 is RNAV Y AND X capable. Bottom line, its your sim, do whatever.
I prefer Xplane 11 or 12 more than MSFS, its more of the same in terms of simulation goes and as compatibility, and everything. it is available on everything rather than just on windows, and XBOX. cmon they should have made MSFS atleast steam addition on both mac and Windows. Thats why I like Xplane it is more of the same interface I think, I have watched videos on both.
Nice - but just a few things. You test and arm the standby battery before turning on the masters. You lift off at around 55 knots in a C172, not 65. Then you set a climb speed of around 80 knots :)
Take off speed will depend largely on weight of the aircraft. Since we had full fuel , 55-65 is fine. Best climb rate for C172 according to POH is between 70 and 75 knots =).
@@Q8Pilot Also, look at 39:41 and check out the speed tape. I do believe it has Vr at 55 knots :) I do concede around the climb out speed though. At both aero clubs I've flown at, we climb out at 80 knots in the C172S.
I am thinking of getting into flight simulation and you sold me on X-plane 12 as well as starting off with this Cessna 172 sim. Also, I came across Flight Sim Coach which has 2 courses that I am interested in taking which are the VR PPL and Instrument Course.
I have a strong question. I have 4 computers running my simulator (1 master 3 slaves). I would like to know if I am running my sim do I need to purchase a XP12 license for each computer or can I purchase one license and just run it on my other slave computers?
Nice! Do you have to use max. nose down trim when landing with full flaps on landing? The XP12 default 172 seems to need max. nose down trim when landing with full flaps. Much more so than MSFS2020 172.
Is there at least one video on this channel where the author is preparing for a flight? In every video he “flies” as if it were GTA 5. Absolute incompetence.
@@Q8Pilot Your videos come across when I'm looking for airplane reviews. Have you considered the option of preparing for the flights and treat them seriously, instead of just suggesting people who constructively criticize your unprofessional approach to move on?
It needs more work on the flight model. I did same flight IRL and the same weather, W&B, the real world one stalled at 62 knots, but the AFL refused to stall till 45 knots. REP C172 however, did stall at 62
@@frankbyte it obviously is since we saw it IRL, more than one of us in the plane. Depends on DA, W&B and winds. That's why I made sure the sim matched, only thing that didn't was the result of the AFL model. REP performed exactly as it did IRL
Thank for this well done stream. However I must disagree that the Airfoillabs C172 NG is the most realistic Cessna 172 when it comes to flight model., This morning I flew traffic patterns in a real C172 Skylane in VFR condition with slight crosswind on the runway (up to 10 kts.). Immediately after the flight I tested the same traffic patterns at the same airport with real weather conditions in X plane 12 and MSFS 2020. Simulated weather conditions were very near to the real conditions. My expressions were as follows: 1. The Airfoillabs is far too sensitive on all flight controls. It is extremely difficult to level the airplane stable at an altitude of the traffic pattern. The slip coordinator reacts much too sensitive on rudder input and frequently in nonpredictable way. The landing behaviour is far away from realism. Using full flaps (as in the real flight) you have to pitch down the nose heavily even with thrust at idle. It is impossible to simulate the real flight using just pitch and minimum of throttle to control speed. A 2-point landing with nose gear up is much to difficult to achieve. A slight amount of turbulence was not simulated at all, which may be a problem of X Plane 12. 2. The default X Plane 12 C172 with the reality expansion pack by Simcoders shows a flight model much nearer to reality as compared to the airfoillabs. Flight control sensitivity, reaction on thrust and flaps is very near to reality. 3. The default MSFS C172 Skylane with WB-Sim 172SP Classic Enhancement package feels extremely near to the real plane and somewhat better than the previous setting. Some gusts are very well simulated within MSFS. My conclusions: When you use X Plane 12 try the default C172 with REP for a very good flight experience very close to reality. The flight model of the airfoillabs has to be tweaked in many aspects to reach this level. At present time, the MSFS C172 Skylane with the WB sim expansion package may be the best choice when you want to fly as real as possible.
I have both, and the MSFS20' flight physics and dynamics are FAR from realistic. I also am a real world pilot flying ~10 hours per month. I find the visual views in MSFS20 very pleasing, but the flight dynamics/physics are lacking horribly. The flight physics/dynamics in XP12 are excellent! They are the MOST realistic in the entire sim community, but the visuals leave a lot to be desired... And while the weather looks much better in XP12 than it did in 11, the clouds are STILL HORRIBLE!!!!
@@AquaStevae It is not a question of MSFS versus XPL - in general the XPL flight is significantly superior to MSFS IMO. It is more a problem of the airfoillabs C172 NG ...
Dude… Come on. Most realistic c172 for Flight simulation? Because of what? Maintenance? Wear and tear? Some pretty animations and models are enough for you to say that’s the best c172. You haven’t even checked basic performance data in POH for this aircraft. A2A is far ahead from any aircraft in XP when it comes to match real world data and maintenance data. In XP even temperature doesn’t affect engine perf correctly or air density at all. P3D also does not, but a2a were able to create their own dynamics engine to simulate that. You love XP “physics” but you can’t basically operate the aircraft. No appropriate engine check before take off, lack of correct take off briefing. You try to pose as an expert but XP’s “physics” are not great for you because you’ve compared it to the real world data. It’s great cause you can feel aircraft bounce nicely.
A2A got this beat hands down and have done it a decade ago. They seemed to move on from the consumer market and now targeting commercial work for customers on (P3D).
The developers of X-Plane must be the dumbest humans that have ever lived. "Hey guys let's wait til MS releases MSFS2020 before we start X-Plane 12, Im sure that is a great idea." Like two seconds ago X-Plane 11 was still full retail price, lol.
Why is the cockpit instrument dash so dull & dark. can it be illuminated or brightened more ? I see this in MSFS - It is awful for the interior of the Cessna 152 a shocking surprise after using FSX & the bright instruments
I have a strong question. I have 4 computers running my simulator (1 master 3 slaves). I would like to know if I am running my sim do I need to purchase a MSFS 2020 license for each computer or can I purchase one license and just run it on my other slave computers?
![ง้อ (ALRIGHT) - FOURTH Prod. by URBOYTJ [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qs8ZeV6Dqj8/mqdefault.jpg)
We all know its not.. really good but.. lol not the most realistic. MAN I wish people would just be honest and stop this click bait stuff
If you can tell me which Cessna is more realistic than this one for flight sim, I promise you I will make a video on it and change the title of this video.
@@Q8Pilot I was remiss in not adding to my comments that you have presented an exceptional video here, Sir. Subscribed!
This is the most detailed and realistic Cessna 172 I have ever seen in a flightsim. I do hope that they do create a 172 with analog gauges. My other feedback, and one that has always been a major issue for me with all X-Plane iterations, is that the graphical anti aliasing needs improvement! As a good example, right at the beginning of your video, you can see a LOT of aliasing (jaggedness) in the left wing shadow. This issue has always broken the full immersion for me when playing X-Plane. I also hope they will finally work on this issue, too.
PS @Max Blade did we just watch the same video? Your "click-bait" statement is totally unmerited.
Hmm...have you ever been in a C172? If so...please, do point out the flight simulator that is more _realistic_ . I don't care about pretty (go to MSFS if you want pretty), I care about accurate. So, which sim was that, again, that was hyper realistic? It has been 3 days, surely you've recalled the name, or the producer, or the developer, or something, right, @maxzeblade?
I fly and teach the exact 172 represented. You can argue the "Best" all you like. (The stock XP12 172 is very good) ... But this is the most realistically flying 172 in sims, unless I missed some. I use it for flight training.
@@Q8Pilot Never heard of A2A huh?
Hello from Recife Brazil
I am a C-172 real life pilot
I really appreciated your video Very good ...keep up the good work thank you
Thank you for taking the time to write and thanks for watching!
Test Flight- I installed and purchased the 2012 X-Plane after watching your video on the Airfoils Best Cessna.
I flew the same flight you did except turned left(stay low over river on AP and enjoy scenery) after take off from Darrington Muni>KBVS>KNUW>KNRA>KAWO.This 2012 X-plane is really nice and the round robin took several hrs with great scenery.Highly recommend.I have flown and owned all the sims back to the oldies and the 11.This is really a dream sim and tops all that I have ever had.(Almost as good as the real thing). Again thanks for your excellent videos.
Thank you for your review. I really enjoyed the presentation. I was trained in a Cessna 172.
Hi. My understanding of how to use the VOR in this scenario is:- set your course pointer to 300, set your heading bug to 330 and with HDG mode engaged, select NAV. Your AP will fly the a/c to the left on a heading of 330 to intercept the 300 radial from the VOR station. As you close on the radial the AP will acquire the VOR and change from HDG to VOR mode and steer you to the VOR station. You’ll need to avoid the mountain as you approach of course.
As you touched down your CDI was deflected to the left so the VOR station was on the left of the runway.
Thank you that was just brilliant just like the plane. I have bought it and just love it. I bought it for xplane 11 and then upgraded it to xplane 12 as well for only the original cost. I would like to say I was clever but I got the xplane 11 version by mistake but it worked out really well.
I will definitely buy this plane!
I also have msfs 2020 on DVDs but cannot get it installed due to our poor internet speed!
So I'm happy with my Xplane 12 DVD version, it works and so do all updates so far!
thanks for introducing these planes!
Very good..,but I prefer on 172 analog gauges. Anyway phenomenal.
There is one, but it's by Thranda.
Agree!
I totaly agree, Nice for practicing!!
@@ncaviationfilms there is an airfoil labs analog now as well
@@TopODaMernin Yeah, I saw that.
That's a lovely aeroplane. Great video thanks.
Thanks for watching!
Defintely different from the ones I flew in real life. Good old steam with a primer and carb heat. What I'd like to see is an older 172.
Yes this is a next generation C172 with newer avionics. I personally prefer analog gauges but this is still an incredibly realistic and study level simulation of the real world counterpart.
they plan to make an older version (without garmin screens etc) in near future.
Wow thank you for sharing all this information with us!
Thanks for watching and for your support!
In the 172sp POH, free on the net, in the Normal procedure section amplified, you will find the correct lean procedures. Includes Recommended, and Peak Performance methods. Q8 is not real world pilot but is quite knowlegeable and makes quality videos.
Thank you!
your approach was just fine. Plenty of runway.
Stay well!
Thanks for watching!
I am so pleased you appear to be getting the same joy out of the Airfoillabs Cessna as I am. It has an incredible amount of depth, and the fact that there are real consequences if you don’t maintain it is the icing on the cake. You are a man of impeccable taste :-). Enjoy!
Thank you for your kind words and I agree with this is an incredible addon and truly educational and fun. Blue skies!
Thanks for the excellent stream and thorough exploration of this outrageously comprehensive aircraft! $50 for something of this level of detail and immersion is a total bargain - think of it in terms of spreading the cost over the amount of hours you'll use it and gained experience and entertainment value. Watched on replay, no buffering issues at all!
And thanks for the heads up on OrbX central update - can't wait to get their products properly installed into XP12.
Thank you sir for taking the time to write and for watching the video.
I went for a ride in a c172 and I was surprised how everything shook and rattled during flight. Turbulence was also like being on a roller coaster.
Reminds of A2A's simulations back in FSX.
Indeed!
Great job ...Excelent video
This aircraft is on sale for US$ 39.99
Landings, ground effect, it seemed to suddenly work a few releases ago, but now it's gone again for the 172.
19:45 - They should also have a manual that gives you the important details and specs, emergency procedures, etc (to work with the simulated failures, of course). Would be a nice additional touch.
That is an excellent idea, Paul! I would really like to see that integrated into X-Plane.
The aircraft comes with fully integrated emergency checklist.
And as far as I know there is a manual in the left west pocket at the front I haven’t picked this aircraft up yet but thinking about it
Hi, Thank you for drawing my attention to this marvelous piece of craftsmanship and thank for your hard work. I bought it straight away. A bargain. By the way. The beacon light has to be switched on before you start the engine. And shout clear prop hehe.
Real as it gets
Excellent video. I'm 78 and just downloaded XP-12 having ZERO experience flying or using a flight simulator.
Thank you for your kind words and happy flying. I am here to help if you need anything.
What you saw on the far side of the runway I believe was a segmented circle, on the near side was the VOR.
When starting up you have to put the mixture in very quick. Prime for 3 seconds and as soon as you start the engine you have to put the mixture to rich very quickly
Thanks for the tip =)
It is 1900 in New Zealand. Cessna look great
Excellent review, thank you very much. You forgot my absolute favorite, the TBM900.
I think you missed the surface lock on the rudder in your walkaround. That’s why you didn’t get much deflection.
Thanks Gary!
I’m looking forward to this
I fly a 172N IRL. I have this, the stock 172, and the REP 172. Honestly, this one is by far the oddest to land. If you go to idle over the threshold, it just straight up drops from the sky. A little bit of power, it seems to float forever, with hyper sensitive elevator in ground effect.
I also notice the engine RPM is unrealistically low to get a reasonable pattern decent. 1700 rpm will have you basically at like 300 f/min for the worlds largest pattern, i'm having to fly it at like 1400-1500 rpm. Go back and check the REP and it's about right, 1700-1750ish and 85-90kts, 1 notch of flaps gives me about a 500-600f/min descent.
More doo-dads != more realistic, unless your definition of realism is just clicking through preflight items, not the actual performance of the aircraft.
Yeah, just watched this video and sure enough, same issues on the landing here. He put in a little power then floated forever and slammed down the second he pulled the power.
@@peterblais5282 That is exactly what I was noticing. I made that mistake irl and that didn't go well. During the round out power idle, pull back on the yoke, not all the way back, the plane stays in ground effect until it settles on the rwy. I did had a landing where I smacked the rwy, high pitch attitude and pulled the yoke all the way to my chest. Never again!
Simmers always argued which simulation platform is better and needed to see the difference between those. This AFL C172 has authentic details that I have never seen before. Take my money now.
Good Morning Sir….. I remember watching a video many many years ago from a new TH-cam creator from Kuwait flying a Cessna 172 around Innsbruck giving people hints on how to improve x-plane performance. At the time, it was one of the best productions I’d had seen reference X-plane and graphics settings. Instantly subscribed and somewhere along the way became a member. Then MSFS 2020 came along and dominated all TH-cam channels including yours. I’ve owned FS2020 since its release and have tried on many occasions to like it and use it….. never happened. Certain circumstances forced me to stop supporting your channel but I always found your content unbiased therefore stayed interested. You’ve now re-kindled my respect for your content and I’ve become a member for a second time around……. Cheers. Quick question…. do you do VR?
Thank you for your kind words and support. I haven't done VR but I will be delving into the Pimax Crystal soon.
I love this airplane too, my only problem with it that if you don't set the throttle at least 1400 rpm when landing, it will fall on the runway like a rock, and then swing like crazy. (Okay, not, if your flare is 350% perfect and you can float parallel to the surface 0.2 inch high from the ground, then no problem. Otherwise... You won't have a too beautiful landing.) Now, instead of this, it should beautifully float in the air with throttle IDLE at landing. And not only with 1400-1500 rpm. Obviously, this aircraft is a lot better than MSFS' C172S, but that airplane doesn't suffer from this unfortunate rock and swinging effect. It was great to rewatch your video, Captain, thank you very much once again! :)
Anyways. In X-Plane when you land an aircraft, it almost always looks like you forgot the parking brake ON. :D However you didn't. :) I don't know why they don't correct that highly overaccentuated fraction effect. :D
saludos desde Costa Rica ya as volado en Quepos a puerto jimenez
Thanks for the video. In most respects I am pleased with XP12 but I do have a problem with the 172 dashboard. I cannot get the brightness of the instruments adjusted and the dashboard is really dark until it fills almost the entire screen. Is there a fix for this? TXs.
Hi from Canada!
Hellob my friend!
It’s a very cool plane, but I can’t believe we don’t have the technology in 2023 to get rid of those giant saw blade jaggies like in the opening external scenes. Anyway dig the channel and subscribed 👍
Welcome to the channel my friend, and thank you for your support.
wow! graphics looks amazing in X-plane 12 but the aliasing is still an issue :- \
Thanks for the stream but what happened to the ' Walkaround ' settings..
To start the 172 Full rich mixture, Fuel pump 3 seconds, Throttle 1/4", Crank engine
With this version of the 172 you don't put mixture on full rich for engine start as it uses fuel injection.
@@Q8Pilot I guess that's why you had so much trouble starting it; huh?
Just try it sometime; at most you likely only need 1" lean out.
X plane 12 looks like it has better landing physics than x plane 11... To me this landing at around 1:43:42 looks more like the real thing.
Looks good to me (a real life C172 pilot). Is the fuel straining system and draining the water from the fuel tank also simulated?
You can drain the fuel from the wings yes, the Water I am not sure.
@@Q8Pilot When fuel is drained, water automatically leaves first as it is heavier.
Lol
Beautiful aircraft and very cool live thanks Q8 👌 you’re talking about a tutorial how to set the keybindings for the walk mode. I was not able to find it. Is it a video a something else ? Thanks 😊
Thanks for watching! It was the first live stream I did of the aircraft when it came out for XP11.
I noticed when you went to external views about 1 hour 3 minutes 30 seconds into the video, the rudder gust lock is still in place on the vertical stabilizer, won't that effect the full authority of the rudder?
Your supposed to prime it for 3 seconds let alone 10 LOL
Hey there. Is there any difference between the C172 analog and C172 digital besides the avionics? And can the AoA indicator be removed in settings? Thanks!
No difference no. AoA can't be removed.
@@Q8Pilot Thank you!
I just watched for the second time
I can get out the plane, but can't walk. :D How could you do it, Captain? :) But... Yeah, I haven't read the manual yet. True.
You have to map a button to walk around mode first.
From where I can buy this aircraft ?
XPlane Org Store.
Buenas tardes,desde Bogota,exactamente cual fue el trayecto o ruta para realizarlo en el Xplane 11..Gracias.
The route 1S2 to KEAT.
What does the CABIN POWER 12V switch do? This is found under the STROBE switch next to the PITOT switch. You did not turn it on during the stream, was it not needed?
Hi James, I will have to look this one up, I am not sure.
@@Q8Pilot Somebody said they think it's just the USB power in the cockpit itself, in the sim they don't believe anything is hooked up to it.
I Always Cessna 172 SP is best. 🤍🤍🧑✈️✈️🛩️
Is there also a normal Cessna?
What do you mean by normal?
What joystick settings do you have on your Cessna? I'm running 'round in circles trying to make mine work properly. 🙁
Which Joystic are you using?
@@Q8Pilot Logitech Flight Yoke and Saitek rudders.
I guess which 172 is the best is a matter of perspective and preference as well. I think it also kind of depends on what the developer sets out to create. I agree with q8 that this is the best 172 i know of for xp at least. Cannot speak for other sim platforms as for msf i only own the default ones. I mean yeah scenerywise msfs 2020 blows out all competition. But that is also due to Microsoft owning Bing. If they hadnt had Bing maps, how good would msf 2020 have been then? The only criticism i can toss msf2020s way in that regard is to highways . In many instances you see the traffic on the road of the satelite image, or clouds over the roads etc.
Maybe msf2020 can come up with a XP-Esque road system to depict highways and such, that way you get rid of the aforementioned :). Obviously you would need to find a way where this can be autogenerated in a believable fashion and still resemble real life. Which might be hard in mountainous areas.
All in all if I look at the region I live in of the Netherlands, msf2020 captures the feel a tad better of the area. But the highways and bridges come out a bit nicer in XP 12. If i could combine both sims, i guess id have a somewhat accurate depiction of my area lmao.
Thanks for sharing your perspective.
Hii sir my self kaustubh v can u tell me what is recommended configurations of pc for xp12
Please check out my XPlane 12 settings guide video.
Is this the C-172 included with X-plane 12 or bought separately?
It is bought separately.
Which Add-On is necessary for walking around the airplane?
It is not an addon. It comes with the plane.
Ah, ok thanks.
I found nevertheless an Plugin for walking around the most planes in X-Plane 11 & 12 (WalkAround Plugin for X-Plane 12 and 11) @@Q8Pilot
Dos it work with Real simgear ?
You made this plane model?
No it is developed by AirfoilLabs.
Think that "shaking" of the plane all over the time is a problem of X-Plane, isn't it?
Yes that's correct.
Need adjustable seats
On the takeoff roll for the Cessna 172, Cessna recommends you lift the nose wheel at 55 knots, not 65 knots.
This largely depends on the weight of the aircraft.
@@Q8Pilot I'm sorry but you have been given some incorrect information, with the Cessna 172 you lift the nose wheel at 55K and that is based on GVW of 2500 lbs. On some large single engine aircraft you may be required to vary your rotation speed, I believe the Kodak varies rotation speed dependent on gross weight but I'm not positive. I Im listing the POH for a Cessna 172, you'll find you are to lift the nose wheel at 55 K. Section 4, page 18. wayman.edu/files/C172S-G1000-POH.pdf
RNAV zulu approaches where authorization is required are mostly for the airliners. RNP is a standard for sophisticated flight decks and the ability to fly tighter approaches with RF radius to fix etc. G1000 is not AR. G1000 is RNAV Y AND X capable. Bottom line, its your sim, do whatever.
Does xplane 11 or 12 have more realistic physics?
XPlane 12 is supposed bring a lot of improvements to the flight model especially for sea planes.
I prefer Xplane 11 or 12 more than MSFS, its more of the same in terms of simulation goes and as compatibility, and everything. it is available on everything rather than just on windows, and XBOX. cmon they should have made MSFS atleast steam addition on both mac and Windows. Thats why I like Xplane it is more of the same interface I think, I have watched videos on both.
Nice - but just a few things. You test and arm the standby battery before turning on the masters. You lift off at around 55 knots in a C172, not 65. Then you set a climb speed of around 80 knots :)
Take off speed will depend largely on weight of the aircraft. Since we had full fuel , 55-65 is fine. Best climb rate for C172 according to POH is between 70 and 75 knots =).
@@Q8Pilot do you fly these in real life? I do :)
@@Q8Pilot Also, look at 39:41 and check out the speed tape. I do believe it has Vr at 55 knots :) I do concede around the climb out speed though. At both aero clubs I've flown at, we climb out at 80 knots in the C172S.
I am thinking of getting into flight simulation and you sold me on X-plane 12 as well as starting off with this Cessna 172 sim. Also, I came across Flight Sim Coach which has 2 courses that I am interested in taking which are the VR PPL and Instrument Course.
Welcome to the world of Aviation and Flight Simulation!
@@Q8Pilot Thank You
I have a strong question. I have 4 computers running my simulator (1 master 3 slaves). I would like to know if I am running my sim do I need to purchase a XP12 license for each computer or can I purchase one license and just run it on my other slave computers?
Why would you need 4 computers to run a desktop simulator?
???? It’s not like a consumer grade sim is a level d full lotion. You only need 1 mate.
Nice! Do you have to use max. nose down trim when landing with full flaps on landing? The XP12 default 172 seems to need max. nose down trim when landing with full flaps. Much more so than MSFS2020 172.
Q8, when do you think we will see a study level trainer of this quality for MSFS2020?
Probably in a year or so. Many addons are catching up, but nothing this complex yet.
Loads of mechanical turbulence there
Is there at least one video on this channel where the author is preparing for a flight? In every video he “flies” as if it were GTA 5. Absolute incompetence.
Then go elsewhere plesse where you can find what you are looking for. Obviously you don't find my content useful.
@@Q8Pilot Your videos come across when I'm looking for airplane reviews. Have you considered the option of preparing for the flights and treat them seriously, instead of just suggesting people who constructively criticize your unprofessional approach to move on?
@@Vladdy89 You are the only one bothered. Go make your own channel and content with your restricted ideas. See how that works out...
Do you think they will make this for msfs?
I very much doubt that.
Maybe they will, they already had a release in MSFS, which was disappointing though. So for sure MSFS is on the radar.....
A2A would probably do one for MSFS but not in the near future.
The constant wobbling of the plane is unrealistic.
It needs more work on the flight model. I did same flight IRL and the same weather, W&B, the real world one stalled at 62 knots, but the AFL refused to stall till 45 knots. REP C172 however, did stall at 62
That's normal with flaps up.
This was slow flight configuration, showing off power off stalls, so flaps down
@@frankbyte it obviously is since we saw it IRL, more than one of us in the plane. Depends on DA, W&B and winds. That's why I made sure the sim matched, only thing that didn't was the result of the AFL model. REP performed exactly as it did IRL
@@frankbyte I agree, stall speed full flaps out is at 43-44kts IAS (with max. weight)
FS2024 needs to take some notes 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thank for this well done stream. However I must disagree that the Airfoillabs C172 NG is the most realistic Cessna 172 when it comes to flight model.,
This morning I flew traffic patterns in a real C172 Skylane in VFR condition with slight crosswind on the runway (up to 10 kts.).
Immediately after the flight I tested the same traffic patterns at the same airport with real weather conditions in X plane 12 and MSFS 2020. Simulated weather conditions were very near to the real conditions. My expressions were as follows:
1. The Airfoillabs is far too sensitive on all flight controls. It is extremely difficult to level the airplane stable at an altitude of the traffic pattern. The slip coordinator reacts much too sensitive on rudder input and frequently in nonpredictable way. The landing behaviour is far away from realism. Using full flaps (as in the real flight) you have to pitch down the nose heavily even with thrust at idle. It is impossible to simulate the real flight using just pitch and minimum of throttle to control speed. A 2-point landing with nose gear up is much to difficult to achieve. A slight amount of turbulence was not simulated at all, which may be a problem of X Plane 12.
2. The default X Plane 12 C172 with the reality expansion pack by Simcoders shows a flight model much nearer to reality as compared to the airfoillabs. Flight control sensitivity, reaction on thrust and flaps is very near to reality.
3. The default MSFS C172 Skylane with WB-Sim 172SP Classic Enhancement package feels extremely near to the real plane and somewhat better than the previous setting. Some gusts are very well simulated within MSFS.
My conclusions: When you use X Plane 12 try the default C172 with REP for a very good flight experience very close to reality. The flight model of the airfoillabs has to be tweaked in many aspects to reach this level. At present time, the MSFS C172 Skylane with the WB sim expansion package may be the best choice when you want to fly as real as possible.
Thank you for sharing your experience with the community, truly appreciate it!
I have both, and the MSFS20' flight physics and dynamics are FAR from realistic. I also am a real world pilot flying ~10 hours per month. I find the visual views in MSFS20 very pleasing, but the flight dynamics/physics are lacking horribly. The flight physics/dynamics in XP12 are excellent! They are the MOST realistic in the entire sim community, but the visuals leave a lot to be desired... And while the weather looks much better in XP12 than it did in 11, the clouds are STILL HORRIBLE!!!!
@@AquaStevae It is not a question of MSFS versus XPL - in general the XPL flight is significantly superior to MSFS IMO. It is more a problem of the airfoillabs C172 NG ...
Dude… Come on. Most realistic c172 for Flight simulation? Because of what? Maintenance? Wear and tear? Some pretty animations and models are enough for you to say that’s the best c172. You haven’t even checked basic performance data in POH for this aircraft. A2A is far ahead from any aircraft in XP when it comes to match real world data and maintenance data.
In XP even temperature doesn’t affect engine perf correctly or air density at all. P3D also does not, but a2a were able to create their own dynamics engine to simulate that.
You love XP “physics” but you can’t basically operate the aircraft. No appropriate engine check before take off, lack of correct take off briefing.
You try to pose as an expert but XP’s “physics” are not great for you because you’ve compared it to the real world data. It’s great cause you can feel aircraft bounce nicely.
You are of course entitled to your own opinion which I respect, but equally so, I am entitled to mine.
Of course you are, no doubts here. I just questioned the factors that built this particular opinion.
@@abarth3660 The factors on which my opinion was based are well found.
A2A got this beat hands down and have done it a decade ago. They seemed to move on from the consumer market and now targeting commercial work for customers on (P3D).
The developers of X-Plane must be the dumbest humans that have ever lived. "Hey guys let's wait til MS releases MSFS2020 before we start X-Plane 12, Im sure that is a great idea." Like two seconds ago X-Plane 11 was still full retail price, lol.
Most Realistic yeah that's a joke.
MSFS is better than this. Much better.
I would say different rather than better, aspects of it are far better but def not as a whole system i think different is how i would describe them
depends what you mean
They are very different simulators with their pros and cons, but I am yet to see anything this detailed in MSFS.
you think the msfs c172 is better? you must be joking...
Msfs is a fine sim, but there is no 172 for msfs which matches this level of fidelity
Hello, please tell me, is it possible to buy this aircraft in Russia?
Why is the cockpit instrument dash so dull & dark. can it be illuminated or brightened more ?
I see this in MSFS - It is awful for the interior of the Cessna 152
a shocking surprise after using FSX & the bright instruments
This has been fixed in the latest Beta for X-Plane 12. Some developers have fixed this for their aircraft as well.
Nice, but to be fair, the Cessna is really an kiddie plane ! 🤭😉
*Real TUFF pilots, fly the (zibo) B737 !* 😛
The Zibo has received its share of content on my channel and others.
This ain't xplane12, More like Xplane10 or 11.5
The ground scenery, clouds and cockpit shadows are Aweful.
I can't wait to see Xplane13 lol 😆 😆😆😆😆😆
I have a strong question. I have 4 computers running my simulator (1 master 3 slaves). I would like to know if I am running my sim do I need to purchase a MSFS 2020 license for each computer or can I purchase one license and just run it on my other slave computers?