Does anyone (ideally RWP with knowledge of DC3) have an opinion on which is better, the Duckworks mod or McGouge’s mod for the DC3?
1 Like
I’m a fan of the Duckworks, because it’s being worked on continually.
1 Like
McGouge is about flight dynamic mostly, Duckworks is not mush about flight model currently, but planning.
Some people combine - they use Duckwork with flight_model.cfg from McGouge:)
1 Like
And of course, get the 40th anniverary: Expansion pack by Jonx / GotFriends as well.
It’s got stuff for the Beaver too, but for the DC-3 (doesn’t conflict with the Duckworth mod etc);
- Douglas DC-3: Added New Amphibious Float Variant (Includes 2 Liveries)
- Douglas DC-3: Added Custom Flight Model, Weight Limits, Drag Limits, and Additional Float / Fuel Tanks
- Douglas DC-3: Added Water Spray Effect to Amphibious Variant
- Douglas DC-3: Added Start-Up Combustion Smoke Effect to All Variants
- Douglas DC-3: Added Wheel Landing Effects to All Surface Types on All Variants
- Douglas DC-3: Added Water Rudder Switch (Replaces External Power Switch on Amphibious Variant)
Because… c’mon 
4 Likes
I’m curious how these guys determine their mod is closer to reality without actually flying them IRL. For example (and no offense intended) but how is McGouge able to come out with a mod for so many of the default aircraft? Is Asobo that shallow on their research? It would be interesting to see a tutorial that demonstrates this.
7 Likes
Not speaking of the DC3, but having been curious, and tried the Cirrus SR22 and DA40TDI “realism mod” of McGouge once. All it did for me was to make the planes feel more sluggish with reduced elevator/aileron authority.
So not to be that one guy, but some of these “realism” or “enhancemants” mods might actually be making the default planes worse maybe
3 Likes
I think I may agree with you. I wish when they introduce these mods there’s more of a convincing introduction. If I’m not mistaken, none of McGouge’s or this recent one of Duckworks say they’ve been based on feedback from real world pilots of any aircraft, let alone the one they are doing the mod for… So why would we buy into one guy’s (the mod author) opinion that it’s more realistic or an enhancement. I wish there was some sort of audit or control over these, in which case, you’d think Asobo would just implement those same updates…wouldn’t they? …so why don’t they out of interest for making their own sim better. Does Asobo ever test and use these mods during Beta testing? I’d just like to know I’m moving towards making my sim experience of each plane more realistic opposed to not. Never being able to fly these planes IRL myself, I’ll never know. But getting feedback from those that do, would be validating that the time we spend is actually as close of a simulation we can get to the real thing. A stamp of approval on these mods before they are released by a real-world pilot of that aircraft should be somewhat of a requirement. And before you say it…I get it, it’s free, and that if I don’t like it, I don’t have to apply it.
3 Likes
I read you well,… I had similar thoughts with regards to these modifications. We’re all in the same boat really.
My take with MSFS so far is, that the default planes seem to be much, much better then probaly 80% of what is out there in the wild, be it modifications or new planes alltogether. I’m still kind of in the process of getting to grips with this paradigm shift in flight simming myself, but with every default plane I’ve spent some time with so far, I’ve always arrived at the conclusion that it is an extremly well done package, with superb visuals, good sounds, and believable flight model.
So given my experience with the few mods I’ve tried, and with the upcoming AAUs (Aircraft & Avionics Updates) in 2023 in mind, I decided not to waste my time with questionable mods,…until curiousity gets the better of me again 
2 Likes
I have 1,600 hours on DC3’s (Both Pratt & Cyclone Engines, mainly the latter) 50 odd years ago & went strait from Bi-Planes & Cessna’s etc with no twin engine, Constant Speed Props or Retractable Gear as did all the trainees.
Starting it was nothing like the MSFS Check list with Mags on & Mixture Rich but maybe all DC3’s I ever flew had Electric Starters & 30 feet of Flame out of the Carbi if you got it wrong.
All DC3’s in Australia had Fixed Cowl Flaps & no Blower (Apart from one Survey Aircraft) .
While I am on the Soap Box I find that a lot treat it in flight sim more like a Space Shuttle. It was an Art learning how to start them & learning how to taxi, but once airborne it was a docile heavy Cessna with no vices I knew about.
I am busy with my first Mod setting up my controls for the Duckworks Mod & haven’t seen McGouge"s yet & trying to get the whole thing back to the very simple procedures we used.
(I still have my Ops Manual & Training Notes)
- Please don’t open the Storm Windows as we spent lots of time with Chewing Gum trying to stop them leaking.
- A flying hint - in poring rain if the Chewing gum doesn’t work on reaching cruise altitude as you gently push the stick forward to level of spread your legs apart or you will get them wet.
(BTW I ended up flying the A310-300)
17 Likes
So SU11 was basically made for you. Fun! 
4 Likes
Thanks for responding U-Chief88! I would love to see a Mod that comes out to get your “stamp of approval”, saying “yup! That’s pretty much what it’s like!!” DC3 or A310-300 for that matter! Any livery for the DC3 that makes you feel at home? I’d be interested in whatever mod you come up with.
A few years ago, my neighbor friend, who flew A319s and A320s for Spirit, and another friend of his who flew the DC9 for a fire fighting outfit here at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway came over to check out my simulator. At the time I was running XP11 with some add-on software for the A320. I was almost afraid they were going to laugh at the quality of the sim, but as it turned out, both were very impressed, and started getting consumed in practicing emergency procedures and then fire fighting strategies. They only found a few minor inaccuracies with the FMC (MCDU), and a few other things. Boy I got to tell you (as my wife would certainly verify) I was smiling with a huge grin, ear to ear!..lol. Brad even told me that with the set up I had, it would be a great way for a guy to prepare to level up. Anyway, I don’t know if you’d agree with him, but it was a good feeling to have an IRL pilot validate that you’re not just wasting your time with “a game”. I have only 145 hrs spread between the 152, 172 and Piper Archer and Cherokee, but I think its enough to say these sims do a pretty good job as a training tool to run through procedures, and now with MSFS w/ Bing to help identify those land marks before you go flying., Thanks again for your response. I’d be interested in any other perspectives you have on the above. Does Duckworks Mod get your stamp of approval? Dave
1 Like
From what I’ve seen most of these people use the published numbers. The dev from AH who did the flight model used an extensive set of published numbers that were recorded when the real aircraft it was going through initial flight testing. These are very comprehensive reports, regarding aircraft behaviour at different trims, power, and rpm, etc…
For most freeware modders, I believe they use whatever is published in the POH.
And yeah, Asobo are shallow. Many of the default planes don’t even match what is in the POH.
1 Like
That’s crazy…isn’t it? You’d think Asobo or Microsoft could hire the experts that can do this for their own sim. Or maybe that’s just it…why when people will do the work for free?! lol…anyway, I suppose we shouldn’t care as long as the end result flies like the real deal. I don’t mean to sound combative. I just like to know that the efforts in these enhancements are making our sims more realistic and not moving further away from the true characteristic of the aircraft. And that’s why, for me, to get validation from IRL pilots means a lot to me.
Well that’s the problem. They don’t fly like the real deal if they can’t even hit the published numbers, let alone getting the nuances right. I guess the question is, do people care? So long as it feels believable. Those of us looking for extra realism will buy 3rd party anyway.
2 Likes
most of us have little to no real flight experience - and those who do are not likely to have it in more than a couple of types of aircraft. All we can do is compare to other flight sim experiences and what we ‘believe’ each aircraft should behave like. Occassionally, as here, we actually hear from someone with first hand experience and that is extremely helpful in informing our opinions…and it leaves us wondering if developers would benefit from having an index of real world pilots available - something like a discord hub of actual aviators who either use flight sims for fun or would just be willing to review flight models and cockpit functionality - in exchange for a copy of the product or other equal compensation.
Some developers claim to have real world pilot input during testing and that’s fine - but it just makes it more evident that ALL developers should be able to readily access experienced flight testing from that quarter. Just a thought
4 Likes
It’s been said that many of the aircraft in the Base through Premium packages were developed by 3rd parties. So there’s that.
I’m pretty sure at least some of the planes, however, were developed by Asobo straight out, like the C172, which, if you go through the Dev Q&A’s, will find they instrumented themselves and tried to match the performance of it to their measurements in several flight regimes, not just to the POH numbers.
Has anyone come across this livery for the DC3? It was in the original Aeroplane Heaven press release, but hasn’t made it into Marketplace or ORBX yet.
2 Likes
Not yet. Have you checked whether there’s already a request out at flightsim.to? Otherwise you might want to put in a request yourself
Hi there, flying the latest Duckworks mod of the Asobo DC-3.
Can’t get this sim model to land nicely in a moderate steady crosswind. (approx. 10kt, no gusts)
Approach with a mix of slip and crabbing.
After touch down there is no lateral control with rudder it seems.
The thing just weathercocks into the wind like a piece of paper, the rudder feels inoperative, even if you smash it fully to counter the weathercocking.
I have not mastered a single landing in crosswind yet, that didn’t end up in the grass.
What am I doing wrong? (yes, tailwheel is locked. this behaviour is before the tail wheel even touches down. payload is usually between 30-50% in my flights, tanks usually far below 50% main and 10% aux)
I read the taildraggers are harder to control in the landing roll, center of gravity behind the front wheels, all that… but no effect of a full counter rudder input just after touch down, still going 60-70 kt forward? Is that really so?
1 Like
I saw a thread at the ‘Dusty Old Man’s’ forum where the original developer (AH) stated many improvements and extras are coming after the SU12 update…
see Post #469 below
AH DC-3 Releasing March, 2022? - Page 19 (sim-outhouse.com)
1 Like