Hello there,
Im looking for a new studylevel aircraft to get the to abroad airports and fields.
Maybe with an unpaved strip. Atm I think the cessna 414 is best for me but I wanted to look into the older birds. Especially because I value a good engine simulation.
So based on how good its implemented, which one would you take?
Hi @TB500Gamer, and welcome back to the forums. I salute your desire to try some of the older aircraft. Although I donât currently have the PMDC DC-6, I understand its engine modeling is quite good, but YMMV. And yes, a bit larger than the two you listed. I have no doubt youâll get some good suggestions.
Now that you are back, please take a few minutes to check out the Code of Conduct to reacquaint yourself with the rules of the road in the forums. There is also a Forum Guide where you can review the features available to you here.
Again, welcome back.
Only TL2 (Trust Level 2) Members of the community may create topics concerning a payware add-on. All others will be removed with a written (non-formal) warning. Further warnings will result in the following:
Did I break that rule?
Also thabnks for the warm welcome. I actually do own the Dc-6 and love it. Thing is tho as Im just getting back into flight simming Im looking for a smaller aircraft which is perhaps capable of approaching smaller airfields. Thats why Im suggesting the C414, C310 and the Ju52 and the Boeing 247.
So Im just wondering which one is better the Ju52 or the Boeing 247
While an absolutely lovely modeled aircraft to look at, The Ju 52 has no systems modeling. There are a number of controls that are placebos and have zero effect on the aircraftâs performance/behavior. Some of the ârequiredâ switches can even be left off and the engines will still start and operate. What is further disappointing is the radial engines are missing modeled supercharging.
The 247 has a rather sophisticated set of modeled behaviors and systems failures should SOP be mishandled. There are four grades of engine oil to chose from for operation in different ranges of ambient air temperatures.
There are modeled inercial starters for the twin radials and their starting procedures are modeled and can be difficult to start if deviated from.
The carb heat and oil shutters have a direct effect on on the engineâs operations and the engines can catch fire if not managed correctly.
The electrical system has failures and there are glass fuses that will blow and need to be replaced in two different fuse boxes.
On top of the realism aspects of its operation is the quite extraordinary early âA-Nâ radio navigational system modeled. There is an included list of radio stations to be utilized with this system that you can tune to and navigate the aircraft by. The developer even included radio stations that play 1930s music.
The flight brochures in the seat pockets even change depending upon the chosen livery.
Frankly, there really is no comparison between the two aircraft, in terms of âstudy levelâ other than their era of construction.
Absolutely not⊠youâre fine. Hope you find what you are looking for soon.
Seems like a clear winner then. But what about the documentation? I heard there is little to no information about how to operate the aircraft multiple systems. What about performance calculation. How much runway do I and how far will I climb? Is that included?
Also what bothers me with both of these elderly aircraft is the navigation equipment. I meam that radio stuff sounds cool but how useful is it? In the Dc-6 they modelled everything except the old radio equipment bcs they know its outdated and no one is gonna use it.
No wonder in real life all those âoldtimersâ get equiped with some modern navigation equipment.
No. In the DC6 itâs not modeled because it was inop in the real aircraft they built the model after. An airplane needs a certification to operate and to get it minimum requirements have to be met. Modern radio comms is one.
The B247, as modeled here, would not get a certification. However in my opinion itâs one of the best available but certainly no IFR trainer ^^
The C414 is early access with many updates coming all the time. It will take some time until itâs done.
You may have a look at the Milviz C310 though, it might be what you look for. Good systems modeling, good engine model, good 3d model. I donât know if itâs âstudy levelâ although many people call it so but itâs certainly on the right way.
Well, itâs actually useful in the 247 since the devs included a series of (USA only) radio stations that are suited for use with that early radio navigational system. They included original era documentation on how the system works along with theory. The hardest part about using it, of course, is listening to the constant âdit dahâ, âdah ditâ and/or continuous tone of them overlapping along with the interspersed Morse station identification, but thatâs how things were done in the day. Iâve used it to navigate California, thus far. The entire system is worthy of a stand alone add-on.
Iâd say the documentation for the aircraft is pretty good. On the 247 thread some folks have posted further documentation including a maintenance manual with further detail.
Radio navigation stations that come with the 247 are not USA only. They are all around the world allthough the network is not as dense as it is in the US. There is no problem anyway navigating with radio stations outside the US as they are very long range.
The 247 has a major problem with the oil system. The oil shutters instead of controlling the oil temperature, they control the oil pressure. Once you understand how to manage the engines this way there is no problem, if you donât, and try to do it the ânormal wayâ you will have engine failures/fires all the time. Unforunatelly there is no sign from the developer that will fix this and a few other minor bugs.
Not exactly. Oil pressure and oil temperature are linked. The shutters do control temperature, which in turn controls pressure. The problem is the oil temperature gauge is bugged and likely using a wrong scale or something. But its relationship with oil pressure exists and you can use the oil pressure gauge as a good way to manage oil temperature.
There is a fix for the oil temp gauge see here:
With this fix oil temp indication is very close to real world values.
But, the problem is that with the oil shutters you can adjust the oil temp no more than
a range of aprox 10 degrees and within this range the pressures go from very low to full scale damaging the engine. In the real world oil cinematic viscosity is almost steady once the oil reaches its working temperature, aprox 40C (100F) for 30W oil. Varying the oil temperature above 100F changes very little the oil pressure, something that is not what happens with the Wings B247, actually it is just the opposite.
There is a rumored update in the works. The oil âbugâ borders on making the aircraft a âhangar queen.â For me, once the novelty wore off, the 247D is a curiosity that was fun - albeit frustrating - for a few days.
At a similar price point is the Big Radials offering: the Grumman Goose. That model has an entire pack of âraving fansâ and tons of liveries, not to mention the incredible history of the type. Might want to check that one outâŠ
I also have to recommend the Goose considering your other mentioned planes. It is more high fidelity than the JU-52 and less than the 247D, but it is a wonderfully fun and unique plane. My sentimental favorite because it is well done and perhaps my favorite plane IRL.
ButâŠ
As mentioned above, the MilViz 310r is a remarkable GA craft. In spite of looking a bit similar to the 414, it is unique, and comes with some extra bells and whistles that end up being quite fun. It is a stunning, feature complete, fun GA craft. It is pretty much a must buy for anyone on PC who doesnât exclusively fly tubeliners.
The 247 is flawed. It is entirely charming and I want to love her but that temp management is not only annoying, it is not realistic. For me, the radio is a cool gimmick but I quickly want to return to modern creature comforts. In a patch, it might become what it is meant to be, but for now that glaring flaw makes it hard to suggest to anyone, even though I quite love the 247D.
If you only looking at the JU52 or B247 - Iâd go with the Boeing.
The JU52 is lovely in the air and esp in VR, but takeoff and landing feel like a total joke. It lifts off in 2 seconds.
I donât have the 247, but do have the DC-6, C414, C310 and theyâre all a lot of fun. I havenât had time to learn the systems on the DC-6, but the 414 and 310 are close to what Iâve flown IRL and pretty easy to get into.