Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Alabeo's next proje... wait... WHAT??

FSX. Well what the heck do we have here? Yes you guessed correct. It's definitely a R66 but this is not what Alabeo set out to do when they started up shop. I'll admit, I was very surprised when they rolled out the first set of previews of the Traumahawk (can't wait to spin that bad boy) But now a light helicopter? Alabeo is clearly making a statement and it seems to say: "we can and will make whatever we want" well, all I have to say to that is well done Alabeo. Well done... ...and... WANT!
-



https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.517558791635532.1073741834.222192937838787&type=1


_______________________________________
Follow us on Twitter! / Like us on Facebook!
AirDailyX -We do things differently!

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why not??

Anonymous said...

I always thought Alabeo is just a Carenado spinoff for oddball projects. A bit like "Hey I just got real-world access to this XYZ aircraft, so let's do it!"

Anonymous said...

Oh man! I can't wait for this one, it's fantastic to see a top-notch developer look at the light helicopter market - something that has been sorely lacking for the last few years. If Carenado started on small jets (I'm thinking Citation II or Learjet 35), that'd just be the icing on the cake.

Anonymous said...

Never tried an Alabeo product before. I see the texturing/modeling is fantastic but what abut the systems/FDE?

Anonymous said...

Gave two Alabeo a chance to show what is behind that blending nice textures.

The result is as it is with carenado products: These are cheap products for "gamers ans screenshot maker" - nothing for real aviators and simmers - and there is no improvement in FDE and system modeling quality over the years. And now a helo??

Nice textures but continuous waste of money for "flight simulation" customers.

PIO

Mark Hrycenko said...

I disagree...what is your definition of real simmers? Must all people spend hours on checklists to be considered a "real" or serious simmer?

Anonymous said...

Hi Mark,
we have different opinions of what is a "well done addon". What i want to say is that there are a lot of customers behind the computer who bought the FSX "Flight Simulator" which maybe is one of the last "simulator" software for the moment. They decide to invest in a payware addon. There are some real world aviation personal and young/old enthusiasts who want to learn about the product or fly proccedures or having a spectal look into performing theoretical learned stuff "within" this plane. These customers will not get happy. The realos decide to completely stop using "flight simulation" home software due to low realism within minutes. They will never touch again such payware products.

Customers who are happy to have a flying texture of an R66 because fathers friend does fly a real one are happy about the textures - they do not want to have a look to the "needles and displays". But think about - there are more than enough aviation games with newer graphics quality to use. I think developing for FSX should give the developer a self made level of simulation quality do give customer the chance to get access to understand and learn about the real model.

If you have a chance to understand aerodynamics,physics and airplane systems - you can use that high quality addon without reading the manuals for hours. If there are massive missing and foulty system basics programmed within the addon product, the customer gets comfused although his theoretical training was correct.

From cold and dark condition until takeoff with A2A accusim P51D it takes 10 minutes. And these systems are simulated deep into details. To have high quality simulated systems does not mean i cost a lot of time - it saves time becaus you can read and understand the plane due to the feedback you get.

PIO

Anonymous said...

High quality helo developer is Dodosim. As a developer making a helo you have to program outside of FSX to bypass FSX internal limitations. The basic helo engine of FSX is less favorable than fixed wings. It is absolutely necessary to bypass FSX engine.

Mark Hrycenko said...

I appreciate that there is a market for highly advanced aircraft renditions, be it commercial or general aviation. Back in the day, I only flew advanced commercial aircraft simulations myself. Over time however, I have become increasingly fond of simpler aerobatic aircraft as I find them fun to fly.

Remember, many of these Alabeo type aircraft are very simple and lack advanced systems in the real world as well - a Robinson helicopter or Pitts biplane can only get so advanced. I like this though; I can select my favourite scenery, load up my Alabeo aircraft, get it started in minutes, and go flying. I don’t know if this qualifies me as a “non serious” simmer… In fact, every once in a while I do take out something a little more advanced. To me, flight simulation is not necessarily about recreating the real world as no matter how far we go this will never be possible. It is about enjoying the experience in whatever capacity we choose.

Any advanced simulator pilot will know just by the aircraft types that Alabeo products are not going to be in depth systems simulations. That’s fine of course, but to suggest that any serious simmer will look away is incorrect in my opinion. I consider myself a very serious simmer, the only difference is that serious can mean different things to different people. Personally, I am a serious simmer, but not necessarily serious about systems complexity. The market is huge a varied, there is a place for everything but I assure you, Alabeo aircraft are not just for gamers and screenshot artists.

Anonymous said...

I most of the time make fun flights and aerobatics. But means fun flying is only able using less simulation quality addons?

The better the addon FDE the higher the fun factor. You know about the situational control inputs the aircraft wants to have - and the planes reaction is what that input describes. If i ride to hard in manifold pressure at too low effective radiator airflow up to the environmental conditions, i have a feedback in CHT, coolant temp, OilT/OilP. That also gives me a feeling about internal mechanical torque situation. The plane gives me all informations so i can read, understand and react changing performance settings, choosing aerobatic manuvers that gives me some temperature gap for the next hard manuveres afterwards.

Here are benefits for every simmer wants to have that kind of fun on real world conditions and reactions.

Mark Hrycenko said...

The thing is, I don't think these attributes are necessarily important to all simmers, including me. Although this all sounds fantastic, I enjoy having the option of selecting third party aircraft without such in depth dynamics. Personally, I don’t enjoy learning this stuff. I spent several years in aircraft maintenance studying the internal intricacies of aircraft and I left that profession for a reason. I love flying, not engine management during flight. To me, my surroundings are as important as advanced systems accuracy if not more, that’s why I often favour more simple aircraft selections.

As far as I see it, you’re incorrect in assuming all simmers want this type of accuracy, Further, your assertion that those who do not prefer this type of accuracy should perhaps explore other flight simulations is ludicrous. The great thing about FSX is it truly can be all things to all people. I am a big fan of Alabeo and will continue to support their products. I just think that you need to let others enjoy FSX in their own way and not assume that anything that does not fit into your niche design preference is garbage.

Anonymous said...

Mark, if you want to understand my oppinion you will do so.

Me and many i know gets shown a simulation standard by several developers. State of the art simulation is improved by A2A accusim, PMDG, Majestic, Marcel Felde..
This is the smalles part of availabe products. High standard simulation addons let both customers benefit - the gamers, the simmers, the hardcore simmers, the system training users, the fun flyers -> every kind of user. Why is it better to simulate systems and behaviors wrong instead of correct? Is there a reason for? Do you have to fly a well done simulated R66 another way than a bad simulated one?

Regards

PIO

Post a Comment

Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website: AirDailyX.net

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.