New Release: FlySimWare's Grumman G-44A Widgeon Seaplane

It’s not just you. I love those old seaplanes. It would be great to have a high-quality made-for-MSFS2020 Sunderland, for instance, but I doubt it’s ever gonna happen. So, this will have to do. Not so bad.

1 Like

i wouldve been fine iif the price was lower and the quality was a bit higher on this one. and to be clear: system depth isnt really all that important to me. theres not much for systems in the general aviation aircraft and i fly msfs when i dont particularly want to think a whole lot, i just want to fly from point a to b and enjoy the world. ive flown point to point all the way down the west coast in an extended “road trip” starting at orcas island…i just passed managua over the weekend.
thats not to say msfs is dumbed down, or that it should be- i certainly hope all those airliner pilots get all the complication they want out of their modules, but i choose to fly DCS for systems depth, and MSFS for relaxation

to be fair, i have heard good things about this dev’s work in P3D and i hope this is an anomaly, id like them to do as well by MSFS standards as they did in older sims, but at the same time nobody likes being sold poorly finished goods, and the vendor seems to have thought that should be good enough as-is

So with this aircraft… problem is FSW’s model (I have it on P3D) was done a WHILE ago. And it’s an FSX model, so it predates even P3D… Thing is, when you fire it up in P3D it doesn’t look out of place THAT much because everything is pretty ugly to begin with. And a lot of GA aircraft in P3D aren’t really AMAZING looking to begin with. So whereas in P3D it may be fine, it just doesn’t look right in MSFS because everything ELSE looks great! So that graphical implementation sticks out way more in MSFS.

2 Likes

FSW has never been known for their Visual quality. But their systems and FDE are top notch (P3D examples). But for their P3D Falcon 50 and Learjet 35A, they contracted a 3rd party to make the 3D models and texturing and they are definitely atleast at Carenado level or better. Granted, this Grumman seaplane is one of their oldest model which they did on their own, so the visuals are surely looking dated.
If you want visual quality, wait for their Falcon 50 or Learjet to make it to MSFS.

One thing though, with all of their planes, you can always expect accurate systems and FDE (once out of beta)

2 Likes

Is there a paint kit for this aircraft?

For that visual quality, $15, maybe $20… $30… no, I’ll wait. I’ve got a lot of very nice, accurate looking planes to fly now. I’d love a nice Widgeon, but, I wouldn’t fly this with all the other choices I have.

2 Likes

You never know, Aerosoft may make a 2020 version of their excellent Catalina (we can hope!) which would do as a second best to the Porcupine.

1 Like

Nah, I disagree with that metric. A1R Design Bureau’s aircraft is great and they aren’t here. I am pretty sure Randazzo from PMDG won’t be a frequent visitor too. But their stuff is always rock solid.

The guy from FSW is active on Avsim.

1 Like

I thought the A1R guy poked his head in the other day? Maybe I’m thinking of another plane… getting to be a lot now.

I have no issue at all with devs converting P3D plans to MSFS and reselling them provided they work correctly. However I would have an issue with them expecting full price. Want to convert your P3D planes and sell them at 50% off the P3D price? Not a bad idea. There are some great planes that I wouldn’t hesitate to buy. But converting them as buggy messes and then charging full price is just sleazy.

OR, if you want to convert and charge full price, at least take the time to bring the textures and effects up closer to MSFS standards.

2 Likes

im not even a big fan of this forum, so i dont care if devs show up here. its nice- just look at ORBXs level of engagement regarding their Optica…but its not a deal killer. I look to the quality of their work, whether they respond to requests&calls for help (like lionheart creations has with the trinidad…kudos to Bill @LHC )

I look to how theyve responded to critique in the past, and how their aircraft fit gaps in my hangar…or whether it is too similar to something i already have, or even fits the flying that tend to do

my point is, theres a lot of guidelines to take into consideration when you make a purchase decision, participation on this forum shouldnt be the make-or-break one

1 Like

Update 1.4 is out… gotta say, I LOVE the way it flies when trimmed out. One annoyance is that the mixture percentage on the starboard engine is tied to the one on the right… in other words, you can adjust them separately, but visually if you want to see the indicated mixture percentage, you gotta adjust the port one and then eyeball the left one because THAT percentage doesn’t change.

well, thats correct. when facing forward, starboard is to the right. Port is to the left.

What I am saying is that the tooltip for the starboard mixture isn’t working properly. It only works for the port one… the starboard one has to be adjusted by “eyeballing it” visually because the tooltip percentage for that one doesn’t change. I also posted this on Avsim so that the developer sees it.

2 Likes

i see. your prior post made it sound like you had confused port, starboard, left and right:

“that the mixture percentage on the starboard engine is tied to the one on the right”
“you gotta adjust the port one and then eyeball the left one”

both sound like the what you would normally anticipate. perhaps i misread the intent behind it

1 Like

Yeah, that was a mis-type on my part. Brain didn’t function for a second. :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Yes, the developer is very active on avsim and in discussion with the community.
I suppose he will fix the problems mentioned in this thread.
My only concerns regard the outdated model, at least what is shown on the pictures here.

1 Like

Version 1.5 is out! My mixture issue has been fixed as well as bunch of other things.

1 Like

I may have to grab it now that the bugs are being addressed. One cannot have too many floaters, can one?

2 Likes

So I am engaging in a very productive conversation with the developer of this aircraft and he is gonna see what he can do to make it look better. He knows that the interior needs work. He is actually a very cool dude and is listening to my gripes on some specifics in terms of the interior textures etc… We were talking about those wooden beams, the frames of the seats, and the ceiling.

I am really starting to like this cat and the work he does. I think this will all turn out well.

5 Likes