The A2A Simulations Community

"Come share your passion for flight"
It is currently Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:23 pm 
Offline
Airman Basic

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:07 am
Posts: 4
Hi there, first off thank you for this awesome simulation, I've been enjoying it for a while now. I am currently doing my instrument rating and I fly G1000 skyhawks, are you guys planning on doing a G1000 version? That would be so great, I'm sure a lot of people would go for it being that it's so popular these days. Also is there a way to program failures in the simulation or is it only wear and tear time based? Thanks for your help.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 5:55 am 
Offline
A2A Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 11:22 pm
Posts: 26274
Location: Beccles, Suffolk, UK
Hello,

no plans for a G1000 C172 at this time.

thanks,
Lewis

_________________
A2A Facebook for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Youtube because a video can say a thousand screenshots,..
My twitter for my own twitter and random A2A insights
My Twitch for my own twitch live streaming


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:05 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:06 am
Posts: 313
Hi Folks,

As someone recently introduced to the G1000 and someone who has done light programming in the past - I can see why it’s been avoided in the sim... Wow - the myriad of screens and countless functions would be a PITA to program...

Some good news - I believe both F1 and RXP are working on G500/600 gauges that could be easily inserted into a host of aircraft if supported by the aircraft developer...

Regards,
Scott


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:29 am 
Offline
Chief Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 5:03 am
Posts: 3449
scottb613 wrote:
As someone recently introduced to the G1000 and someone who has done light programming in the past - I can see why it’s been avoided in the sim... Wow - the myriad of screens and countless functions would be a PITA to program...
On the other hand, it would be relatively re-usable - albeit simulating the proper configurations alone in between multiple airplanes would be PITA on its own.

I've only met G1000 personally several years back, as installed on Cessna 208. I was mainly doing some updates on it, so I hardly had a full picture of it. I had an okayish feeling about it. G1000 is obviously more GA-oriented, but for instance Primus Apex (PC-12/47E) rates higher on my scale, not to mention Primus Epic for instance (Gulfs, Falcons). Yet, G1000 is a true integrated solution and in that sense a step above retrofit glass cockpits.

-Esa


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:35 am 
Offline
Technical Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 12:53 pm
Posts: 655
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
scottb613 wrote:
Hi Folks,

As someone recently introduced to the G1000 and someone who has done light programming in the past - I can see why it’s been avoided in the sim... Wow - the myriad of screens and countless functions would be a PITA to program...

Some good news - I believe both F1 and RXP are working on G500/600 gauges that could be easily inserted into a host of aircraft if supported by the aircraft developer...

Regards,
Scott


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Why anyone would want to fly anything but the GTN series in a sim is beyond me. It does everything, and well.

_________________
P3D Version 3.4
ATC by VATSIM and PF3

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:35 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:06 am
Posts: 313
Hi Folks,

For GA - this is what’s captured my attention as an “affordable” glass solution - now that there is a way to drive an autopilot with the HSI - I believe they also do flush mount installs... It’s actually cheaper than my mechanical HSI that will fail eventually...

Garmin G5
Image

Regards,
Scott


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:02 am 
Offline
A2A Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 11:22 pm
Posts: 26274
Location: Beccles, Suffolk, UK
scottb613 wrote:
Hi Folks,

As someone recently introduced to the G1000 and someone who has done light programming in the past - I can see why it’s been avoided in the sim... Wow - the myriad of screens and countless functions would be a PITA to program...

Some good news - I believe both F1 and RXP are working on G500/600 gauges that could be easily inserted into a host of aircraft if supported by the aircraft developer...

Regards,
Scott


The question on the more advanced ones is actually more if the GPS supports the aircraft, as if your sticking with default values your gonna have to stick with relaxed realism aircraft. The entire Accu-sim fleet and now a fair few other simulations on the hobbyist market get over several 'relaxed realism' areas or simply areas that are not simulated at all in the base engine of the sim by coding externally, and creating the simulation to then put into the sim engine thanks to simconnect. If devs can plug variables into the GPS units then its a go, if not, it'll not work as it'll always read the incorrect default values, leaving the user with either the option for a realistic GPS sim or a realistic flight sim?

thanks,
Lewis

_________________
A2A Facebook for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Youtube because a video can say a thousand screenshots,..
My twitter for my own twitter and random A2A insights
My Twitch for my own twitch live streaming


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline
Chief Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 5:03 am
Posts: 3449
Lewis - A2A wrote:
The question on the more advanced ones is actually more if the GPS supports the aircraft, as if your sticking with default values your gonna have to stick with relaxed realism aircraft. The entire Accu-sim fleet and now a fair few other simulations on the hobbyist market get over several 'relaxed realism' areas or simply areas that are not simulated at all in the base engine of the sim by coding externally, and creating the simulation to then put into the sim engine thanks to simconnect. If devs can plug variables into the GPS units then its a go, if not, it'll not work as it'll always read the incorrect default values, leaving the user with either the option for a realistic GPS sim or a realistic flight sim?
This is something I've been wondering myself. In reality, the signal interfacing is modestly standard, while proprietary solutions do exist.

Why add-on avionics manufacturers don't simply replicate the real-life interfaces and document their solution?

-Esa


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group