X-Plane12: Stock Baron 58 + REP vs Aerobask Diamond DA62

G

GeorgiaPilot1021

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Mar 30, 2022
Messages
26
Display Name
Display name:
GeorgiaPilot1021
Hey everyone,

Going to be upgrading to XP 12 once the full version comes out shortly, looking for a twin to fly. I have the vFlyteAir Arrow G5 and plan to buy the EFM for the RV-10, but I'm trying to decide between the Aerobask DA62 and upgrading the stock Baron 58 with the Simcoders Reality Expansion Pack or X-Aero Enhanced Flight Model.

At the moment, the Baron would be half the cost (DA62 $40, REP and EFM $20 each for B58, but I only need one).

I'm just curious if anyone has flown both and has a recommendation? Even if you've only flown them in XP11, it might be helpful? I've dabbled with the stock and Double Trouble B58s in XP11 but haven't done the REP or EFM.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Huh?
Click to expand...

X-Plane 12, its a simulator for computers.

GeorgiaPilot1021 said:
Hey everyone,

Going to be upgrading to XP 12 once the full version comes out shortly, looking for a twin to fly. I have the vFlyteAir Arrow G5 and plan to buy the EFM for the RV-10, but I'm trying to decide between the Aerobask DA62 and upgrading the stock Baron 58 with the Simcoders Reality Expansion Pack or X-Aero Enhanced Flight Model.

At the moment, the Baron would be half the cost (DA62 $40, REP and EFM $20 each for B58, but I only need one).

I'm just curious if anyone has flown both and has a recommendation? Even if you've only flown them in XP11, it might be helpful? I've dabbled with the stock and Double Trouble B58s in XP11 but haven't done the REP or EFM.
Click to expand...

This is probably not the best forum for these types of questions, as the audience here is mostly real world pilots with a handful that use sims.
 
Yeah, I figured it wouldn't be ideal but thought it was worth a shot! I have my PPL and am working on my instrument, and I have a homebuilt sim. As such, I was just curious if anyone else might be in a similar boat. Thanks for the response!

Edited for clarity
 
Last edited:
GeorgiaPilot1021 said:
Yeah, I figured it wouldn't be ideal but thought it was worth a shot! I'm a PPL/Instrument Student that has a homebuilt sim, was just curious if anyone else might be in a similar boat. Thanks for the response!
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately, we don't have a dedicated sim forum. But we do have people here who a pretty adept with X-Plane, so hang. in there. I only dabble and don't really care much for any of the addons, but someone might be along.

Have you tried the X-Plane forums?
 
midlifeflyer said:
Yeah, unfortunately, we don't have a dedicated sim forum. But we do have people here who a pretty adept with X-Plane, so hang. in there. I only dabble and don't really care much for any of the addons, but someone might be along.

Have you tried the X-Plane forums?
Click to expand...

I posted over there about the same time I added this one! My only thought with that is that the XP forums are probably more geared towards non-pilot simmers, and I wanted to try and get a pilot-simmer's thoughts!
 
IIRC I use the 58 and the King Air in XP11. Never saw a need to buy added plane packs. The 58 isn't like my 55, so not "great" but I'm mainly interested in procedures; The king air was close enough to the Be99 I was flying last time I fired it up.

Out of curiousity, what do the added plane packs provide over the standard planes? Specifically in the case of Stock 58 vs Expansion 58?
 
So, from my research over the last few days, I've determined that the REP and EFM do similar things; however, while the EFM is focused exclusively on flight mechanics, the REP also has new sounds, procedures, etc. I haven't figured out how accurate the REP is, but the developer behind the EFM has some pretty impressive data showing how much closer they are to the real life book numbers vs the stock, unmodified B58.

In short, they make the sim plane fly closer to the real plane. In theory.

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.ph...-flight-model-for-stock-beechcraft-b58-baron/
 
Gotcha, thanks!

I usually admonish my students to avoid sims when they are training for Private level, and tell them to absolutely add them in for Instrument training. I am awaiting some hardware+software combo that will let me relax the first admonition a bit.. but I don't think it's there yet. :)

I'd love to have a student rock up to the actual plane, having only flown some awesome simulator, and have it translate near 1:1. To date, though, I've gotten a lot of (really) bad rudder habits and general over-control tendencies from sim students I've flown with.
 
schmookeeg said:
Gotcha, thanks!

I usually admonish my students to avoid sims when they are training for Private level, and tell them to absolutely add them in for Instrument training. I am awaiting some hardware+software combo that will let me relax the first admonition a bit.. but I don't think it's there yet. :)

I'd love to have a student rock up to the actual plane, having only flown some awesome simulator, and have it translate near 1:1. To date, though, I've gotten a lot of (really) bad rudder habits and general over-control tendencies from sim students I've flown with.
Click to expand...

Where I would think a sim comes in handy at the PPL level is towered airport ops, navigation, divert/lost procedures. Even then I see it more as a training aid than a trainer.
 
TCABM said:
Where I would think a sim comes in handy at the PPL level is towered airport ops, navigation, divert/lost procedures. Even then I see it more as a training aid than a trainer.
Click to expand...
As @GeorgiaPilot mentioned, something like PilotEdge can go a long way to help with towered airport ops, flight following, and comfort with ATC communication.
 
schmookeeg said:
Gotcha, thanks!

I usually admonish my students to avoid sims when they are training for Private level, and tell them to absolutely add them in for Instrument training. I am awaiting some hardware+software combo that will let me relax the first admonition a bit.. but I don't think it's there yet. :)

I'd love to have a student rock up to the actual plane, having only flown some awesome simulator, and have it translate near 1:1. To date, though, I've gotten a lot of (really) bad rudder habits and general over-control tendencies from sim students I've flown with.
Click to expand...
It's difficult to have a PC-based trainer emulate the VFR cockpit. The control forces have no feedback. You can't feel yaw. Unless you have a really sophisticated setup, you might not have rudders and you cant use the same visual cues as in an airplane. But it works both ways. It took a long time for me to figure out how to fly a normal traffic pattern and land the PC without crashing.
 
schmookeeg said:
Gotcha, thanks!

I usually admonish my students to avoid sims when they are training for Private level, and tell them to absolutely add them in for Instrument training. I am awaiting some hardware+software combo that will let me relax the first admonition a bit.. but I don't think it's there yet. :)

I'd love to have a student rock up to the actual plane, having only flown some awesome simulator, and have it translate near 1:1. To date, though, I've gotten a lot of (really) bad rudder habits and general over-control tendencies from sim students I've flown with.
Click to expand...

Yeah so I had never flown a sim before beginning my PPL. My CFI primarily used it with me to work on cross country planning, simple procedures, and ATC operations through PilotEdge (which, if you check out their CAT ratings, are great for flight planning, navigating through complicated airspace, and working with ATC).

I absolutely agree that the sim is generally terrible with rudder coordination. There's no penalty in the sim the way there is in the real plane. I also had it cause me a few issues with landing, although I believe those can be avoided. The two fixes I made that helped me is I rarely landed without some sort of crosswind, generally gusting. That way you can see the nose moving about, and you're forced to use the rudders to land straight. The second is I changed my main view to be inside the cockpit, looking over the cowling. I think the base view of XP11 has no plane in sight, so when you're coming in to land, it looks nothing like it does IRL. When I move myself to sit in the cockpit, looking pretty much at my top row of instruments and over the cockpit, it's a little bit better of a simulation of real life.
 
GeorgiaPilot1021 said:
(which, if you check out their CAT ratings, are great for flight planning, navigating through complicated airspace, and working with ATC).
Click to expand...
When I do a (loggable) session with an instrument pilot or trainee who wants a challenge, I do one based on an I rating. I'm on the east coast so the TEC procedures and they way they are utilized often requires avionics skills that are not used very much elsewhere.
 
PilotEdge really is an amazing tool. I have no idea how they can be profitable -- I suspect it's a labor of love.
 
schmookeeg said:
PilotEdge really is an amazing tool. I have no idea how they can be profitable -- I suspect it's a labor of love.
Click to expand...
The site indicated there are 19 pilot actively flying PilotEdge right now. A Wednesday, mid-afternoon in the east, a few hours earlier in the west. How many more have annual subscriptions, how many more pay on a month-to-month basis, and how many flight schools have commercial subscriptions for their trainers, I have no idea.
 
As a data point, the PilotEdge FB page shows 5.1K followers. They point out 2,206 takeoffs & landings during SimVenture 2022.
 
GeorgiaPilot1021 said:
Yeah, I figured it wouldn't be ideal but thought it was worth a shot! I have my PPL and am working on my instrument, and I have a homebuilt sim. As such, I was just curious if anyone else might be in a similar boat. Thanks for the response!

Edited for clarity
Click to expand...
Reddit has a good flight sim forum
 
midlifeflyer said:
It's difficult to have a PC-based trainer emulate the VFR cockpit. The control forces have no feedback. You can't feel yaw. Unless you have a really sophisticated setup, you might not have rudders and you cant use the same visual cues as in an airplane. But it works both ways. It took a long time for me to figure out how to fly a normal traffic pattern and land the PC without crashing.
Click to expand...

Following up on that argument, the lack of feedback and motion is actually an asset when it comes to instrument training. Even in the Redbird FMX, students frequently say that it is harder to fly than the real thing because there is no control feedback and the motion feels wrong. I tell them that is exactly the point. If one is relying on feedback, sounds and G forces to fly, then they are not using their instrument flying skills correctly.
 
sarangan said:
Following up on that argument, the lack of feedback and motion is actually an asset when it comes to instrument training. Even in the Redbird FMX, students frequently say that it is harder to fly than the real thing because there is no control feedback and the motion feels wrong. I tell them that is exactly the point. If one is relying on feedback, sounds and G forces to fly, then they are not using their instrument flying skills correctly.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
 
benyflyguy said:
Reddit has a good flight sim forum
Click to expand...

I did post this on Reddit as well, but that is good advice! My only issue with the Reddit flight sim community is it's like 80% MSFS enthusiasts, which is fine, but they tend to hate X-Plane simply b/c it's not MSFS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top