Hmm interesting thought! Maybe in the longer term, one idea is for Asobo or a mod developer to add a competition mode to the simulator that locks out certain options, kind of like the bush trip activities do.
I wonder if third party software can detect an AI pilot somehow?
Hey folks,
Iām really going back and forth on whether the Extra 330 should be allowed or not. Some posters have made compelling cases to ban it based on its faster cruising speed than the other available planes and have noted that the lack of an autopilot is less of a drawback for anyone competing in a team of two where they can trade off the flying duties.
What if we added an additional rule: no aircraft can be flown above its rated Max Altitude (as listed in MSFS) regardless of the actual flying dynamics in the sim and any performance you can coax from the plane? We can validate everyone flew below their chosen planeās ceiling in simair.io, and anyone caught breaking this rule will be disqualified. This presents an interesting conundrum: the Extra has a max altitude of 10,000 feet, but the direct path from JFK to LAX requires flying over mountains 11,480 feet high. Does both the lack of an autopilot and having to divert and find an alternate route across the Rockies present enough of a disadvantage to the Extra to make up for its faster cruising speed, or should we simply ban it from the competition along with the Bonanza and SR22?
ive checked the charts for my planning and so many spots are under 10000 feet
This sounds great. Just need clarification of fueling for the event. I have not tried in a bit but I have not had any luck or have seen any fuel come in while calling a truck or even at a fuel box. What is the drill here?
Yes, thatās been my experience as well. To get around this, the process for refueling is as follows:
You are free to taxi and reposition your plane if you wish. After coming to a complete stop, you just cannot exceed 50 knots again until 10 minutes have passed.
Thanks Seedy, perfect
The max speed difference between the fastest and 2nd fastest plane is 15 knt, so on a total durance of 15 hours thats 225 nm advantage (15x15). The difference in nm if you have to deviate to fly under 10000 ft is 44 nm. So you still have a big advantage in the 330.
And might there be a possibility that people mess around with their Altimeter settings so it looks like their flying lower than in reality?
It would be cool if there could be some way to exclude certain settings, like Microsoft does in the Bush Flights. a specific part in the menu where you can join the race, make your choice of plane, and start! That way you wont even have to start all together, but within a certain timeframe, as itās not important who arrives first but who took the least time to get there. Then you can join the race at a normal time, regardless to wich timezone you live in. But starting together is more Cannonball Run Like 
I would say ban the Extra because of the AI Co-Pilot if that works. Limiting the height wonāt do the job I am afraid.
Started a flight from KJFK, bad weather, overcast, rain, wind 230 30 knots.
Started one an hour later, clear blue sky, wind 210 4 knots. As long as the live weather is not fixed you have to many differences and therefore not a fair race.
Funny, I havent had working live weather anywhere in the USA since the world update. Itās clear blues skies all the way from JFK to LAX for me right now. Everywhere else Iāve tried it works.
I agree, I think should be better to set manually the same weather before the flightā¦ But must be Clear Sky because the cheaters and the impossibility to trace the weather choosed. 
Part of the challenge of live weather is that you may have to divert from your plan to avoid a storm. Having everyone manually set the weather to clear skies is boring.
Agreed, live weather would be way more fun, as long as everyone has the same conditions (more or less)
I would definitely not allow the 330LT. MSFS stats say a 150 KTAS cruise, but the POH lists cruise speeds in excess of 175KTAS. Even though the fuel quantity in the game is inaccurate (40 US gal vs 55 in the POH), 10 minute fuel turns really make it the only viable plane to win. The detour to sub 10k peaks over the Rockies is only an 18nm add on (KJFK>KLVS>KLAX).
The Cap10 and the VL-3 POHs donāt have good/usable cruise data (at least what Iāve found looking online), so they both really lean on user experience to fly both fast and far.
The Cap10 only has a G530, so no fancy moving map like the 330. Still no AP, but a lot more systems knowledge and pilotage is required.
I think with those handicaps, the Cap10 and the VL-3 make for a strategic choice, since both require either manual flight (Cap10) or seat-of-your-pants cruise calculations (both). The 10 and 5 knot advertised cruise speeds advantages over the 125/124 KTAS A/C feels a lot more fair to other competitors who might want the security of known cruise data.
Of course all of this fuel calculation data is slightly irrelevant since the game doesnāt model mixture correctly, but it might be fixed by then.
Really this race will come down to who avoids ice and balances speed vs fuel flow. I can say if the 330LT is allowed, I guarantee the winner will be using one. Intuition says without it, a Cap10 will win, but itāll be a much harder earned victory, and Iām not nearly as certain.
Iām my experience regarding weather, it seems close enough during 2 hour XCountry flights, but Iāve yet to hold the game open for 12+ hours.
@CaptGrogbeard makes some very good points above. As much as it pains me to remove the Extra from the pool because I think it would be absolutely hilariously to see someone use it for the Cannonball Run, Iām leaning towards banning it for the same reasons as I banned the Bonanza and SR22.
That is, unless anyone can post a convincing rebuttal to CaptGrogbeard and make the case to keep the 330LT in the competitionā¦
I think this run is at the moment on couse to be about 90% Competition / 10%Fun. To get back to fun, I would suggest allowing every plane in the single-piston category. The overall winner and the giveaway could then be drawn in an official MS Twitch Event, or even better in a surprise challenge between all winners of each plane. Want to go crazy? Go Fast and Extra. Want to take a plane that you know? Go DA40 and hit the autopilot while still having a chance of winning. As a solo player in europe I would not be able to keep me awake through all the night with manually flying the extraā¦
I agree with Grogbeard.
I feel that allowing the Extra would give anyone with a two pilot team an unfair advantage over anyone who is unable to have a co-pilot and flies solo. An alternative could be allowing the Extra, but also allowing the Bonanza and possibly the SR22.
If we allow the Bonanza (and to a lesser extent the SR22), everyone would take it as it has such a significant cruise speed advantage over the other available GA options. Iād like to see some variety in the planes people choose for this challenge, hence the rule to exclude the two obvious far-and-away best choices.
The Extra is really the only borderline case where its disadvantages may or may not make up for its faster cruise speed. Based on the comments posted in this thread so far, Iām leaning toward adding the Extra to the banlist along with the Bonanza and SR22. That still leaves plenty of other viable options and interesting decisions: the Cessna 172 (G1000 version) and DA40 seem like the two top candidates, but I could see some participants opting for the VL-3, X Cub, CTSL, either of the two Robin planes, and possibly even the SW 121 as well after its cruise speed was increased in this weekās MSFS update. Iād also really love to see if anyone is crazy enough to attempt this challenge in a Pitts Special. 
Since the numbers for cruise speed in MSFS are the same you would find in the POH of that plane and we all know that there is a LOT to do until actually flying in that plane would result in the same numbersā¦ i did a quick check with four different planes of your list. Flying at max. altitude with the best power setting I could find and measuring TAS and GPH to get actual range numbers and then factoring in how fast and efficient the plane could get to max. altitude the overall results were 16h, 19h, 23h and 23h for the total flight time. Guess who was the winnerā¦ In addition to @CaptGrogbeard s points it is totally pointless to fly efficient in the extra, because it climbs to max altitude in a fraction of i.e. the DA40NG.
I clearly vote against the Extra - but I would much prefer my suggestion from above, where each plane would have itās own winner and they have to compete against each other in another event.