Quality Payware C172 for X-Plane

[arb65912]

Yes, I just realized that it is not for X-Plane. Thank you anyway. Cheers, AJ

[Kyle Rodgers]

I guess it would help if I read to the end of the title, eh?

[arb65912]

Yes, Kyle, that would work.. I still value your attempt to help. Sometimes intentions mean more than actual; actions.

[JN_]

This is a very timely thread for me, as I very recently acquired my first copy of x-plane (specifically, v10), and I'm looking to buy something better than the stock C172 as well. Any additional product opinions would be most welcome, especially (but certainly not exclusively) from people who have real-world experience in C172s. I care most about flight model realism.

Also, I assume a v9 airplane will run fine in v10? And if yes, do they also handle the same in v10?

Thanks!
Jim

[Keith Smith]

I have around 100 hours in 172's, however, I haven't tried the payware 172's for X-Plane yet. Jason Chandler has a history of building aircraft with excellent flight dynamics using data directly from the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS). I've enjoyed his Piper series for many years and have little doubt that his 172 would have excellent fidelity.

Some of the other payware manufacturers who recently moved from the MSFS franchise are not likely to have the years of experience that Jason has with X-Plane. They sure make some pretty panels, but I've heard (second hand) that the flight dynamics are often not quite as accurate.

Jason's site is http://air.c74.net

[Christian Mears]

I have both Jason's and the Carenado, plus 55 hours in 172N/172SP. Honestly, the differences between real world 172's of the same model has been as much or more than the handling characteristics that I've experienced with sim versions. There were definitely the ones sought after for rental, and others that folks saved as a last resort.

I enjoy flying them both (plus have a modified version 9 172SP that somebody tweaked on X-Plane.org), but keep in mind that the overall performance is going to be considerably different between the 172N and the 172S, regardless of who you buy it from. My only real gripe about the Carenado version is the radio stack; I would love to have the ability to update that to something a little more recent.

The Piper package from Jason has been a lot of fun for me and one of the best bang-for-your-buck deals I've ever seen among payware.

-Chris

[Steven Winslow]

Yep, at a buck a plane, Jason's Pipers are the best X-Plane deal around!

[c.b.powell]

I published a freeware 172SP that you might enjoy, based shamelessly on the stock XP 172. I found the stock X-Plane 172 flight model to be extraordinarily twitchy and sought to rectify it, as well as making the panel more closely resemble the real-world 172s that I did my IFR training in. (For me X-Plane has been and remains an IFR skillset tool.)

People seem to favor mine over the stock one after trying it. Take a look, it doesn't cost you anything other than time.

https://cbpowell.wordpress.com/2010/09/ ... r-x-plane/

Regards,
Chris

[Keith Smith]

I'd forgotten about this, thanks for posting it, Chris! I will take a look myself, too.

[Steven Winslow]

If anyone wants a custom livery for Chris's modified 172SP, I'd be happy to do it for you. Find a real world 172 paint job and tail number you like and PM me here or e-mail me direct at winslowphoto@yahoo.com and I'll do one up for you. Make sure to send me the pics and tail number you wish to use.

I can do the same for any of Jason Chandler's planes and Carenado's planes, too.