Friday, July 12, 2013

Flight1 B200 released!

FSX. In what is likely to be the most advanced KingAir to ever hit the virtual shelves, Flight1 has just released their KingAir B200 for FSX. This baby is packed with hardcore features and as such, is only meant for hardcore simmers! It's also only meant for FSX but if you attempt to install into P3D, please advise us your experiences! I am not running FSX and Dom is on vacation thus I am unsure if we can provide a FirstLook at this time. Get your copy now and tell us about it!

Get it here:
Follow us on Twitter! / Like us on Facebook!
AirDailyX -We do things differently! 


automized said...

It's much pricier than the carenado one so I sure hope it lives up to expectations such as detailed and realistic systems.

Tmilitairke said...

downloading now!

INFORMER said...

yes im lokking forward to se how people mean it is whit systems and how it hits FPS

ScudRunner said...

No TAWS if anyone cares. For me flying in the mountainous West Coast that's a must. So will stick with the Carenado releases which do, and supplement with Foreflight and WingX Pro which I use in my rw aviation, and the Simionic G1000 for the ipad which has a ND on the way.

INFORMER said...

Terrain Awareness System (TAWS) is part of the annuncement on the flight 1 page so i dont understand as they say it is included

cloudswimmer said...

I asked today if the new King's G1000 had TAWS as their T182T does not, and I've not seen any screens with it on the new bird.This is the reply by Jim Rhodes:

"Not in an entertainment release. There is a reason why the student costs more."

Ohh well such is life.

Anders Halstæd said...

I just installed it and there is no virtual cockpit visible? I uninstalled and reinstalled 3 times and no matter what I try, I only see the engine shadows on the tarmac, as if the cockpit didn't exist. Anyone else had this problem?

Adam Preston said...

Same here, I just installed the plane into FSX and have no virtual cockpit? Well I hope Flight1 come up with a solution to fix this.

JamesDT said...

Initial Report

Performance : Sitting on the runway at EGLL MegaHeathrow X with UT2 AI medium OPUS and EZCA and LINDA - steady 25 FPS. Outside VC locked at 30 FPS.

JamesDT said...

Run your EZCA configurator

Graeme said...

Hi Anders,

Haven't got to testing mine just yet, but are you running in FSX or trying to run in P3D? I know the G1000 Flight1 birds will do this if you put them into P3D as it's a software lockout from that platfor. If it does it in FSX though then probably worth heading over to the B200 forum and asking.

Anders Halstæd said...

Thanks for the advice guys. This is in FSX and JamesDT I don't use EZDOK. So it seems I'm locked out of my cockpit in FSX, great.

Maybe I should try it in P3D too, see if it's different. Graeme have you tried it in both yet?

Frederik Hagedorn said...

First impressions:

Install is straightforward. Aircraft looks pretty good, but not up to par with Carenado B200 though. Idle sound of engine on ground has a loop problem, and needs fixing, it's very bad. The propellers are paper thin when viewed from the side, seem unrealistic. Frame rates are okay, but not amazing in DX9, in DX10 it seem more fluid.

Haven't had an in-depth look at systems yet, the Garmin in-cockpit modeling looks amazing and beautifully crisp, way better than the Carenado B200's G1000.

General inertial modeling of braking and turning seems spot on, the outside nav lighting looks fantastic. Gear retraction modeling seems spot on too.

All in all pretty happy right now, just the sounds are underwhelming. As I said the engine idle sound needs fixing and in general the sounds seem to be a weak area, they don't seem of high quality and seem poorly implemented.

Anyway that's all I have to report right now.

Flying Squirrel said...

I can confirm that the sounds to me at present are the weakest area too. Here and there the graphics could be better, particularly in the are of propeller modeling and texture baking, but first impressions are pretty good.

ScudRunner said...

Yep the Flight1 T182T has the same annoying loop in the engine .wav. It never did get fixed to my knowledge, so I replaced it with Carenado's .wav of the same ac lol

Graeme said...

I hadn't even tried with P3D, since Flight1 is pretty direct about the aircraft not being used in it, and actually make sure they can't be.

I noted on the forums Jim mentioned something about camera definitions in relation to problems like you have mentioned, so it's definitely been raised and being looked into, since there was a couple of others without EzDok as well which seemed to be having issues.

cloudswimmer said...

Can you turn the G1000 off, do a cold and dark start?

JamesHongKong said...

Since getting back into flight simming in the last year or so the only thing that has been a total disappoint to me is the developer Flight 1. I came back and decided to use P3D as my choice of sim. Their deliberate update to GEX to stop it from working in P3D was just ridiculous - I paid for it, used FSX2Prepar3d migration tool and it worked for all of about 5 days before the update was pushed through. As a newbie, it didn't cross my mind (and from sound of it many others) that Flight 1 was that concerned about the legal implications of their software being used in P3D - after all their product pages (including this B200) don't mention implicitly that P3D users CANNOT use the software. The reasoning behind this decision on the P3D side is shaky at best as is evident across all the FS forums. Not only that, they were unmasked as underhand and deliberately trying to sabotage people's efforts to use the FSX2Prepar3d migration tool earlier this year (
As such I will be sticking to the developers who support their buyers. Carenado's B200 sounds like it may even be superior according to some above and the likes of Orbx and Carenado and those that support those who fork out for their software are to be applauded. I would encourage those tempted by Flight 1 to look at the other options first.

Graeme said...

Hi cloudswimmer. If you go into the addons menu in FSX (after you've loaded the aircraft) and then under the B200 item choose options you get a maintenance screen for the aircraft where you can set all your persistent damage options and repairs etc, but also under this you'll find a cold and dark start-up option. This sets the cockpit and G1000 displays to off.

Haven't tried saving a default flight from this myself, but some of these more complex glass cockpit aircraft don't always have options for the standby power etc saved within the FSX saved flight file, and get mean you'll start off with your MFDs powered up. You could certainly try though, set it to cold and dark via menu for the B200, then save the flight, and let us how you go.

Flightdeck1 said...

Well I bought it and an hour later submitted a ticket for refund. On my system that renders a smooth flight with their T182T and the PMDG 737, I get unacceptable smoothness. Also I find the lack of adjustable screen brightness and the 'glare effect' on the screens annoying. Also from their front page:

"The G1000 system includes a digital, dual-channel Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS), Global Position System (GPS), Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), mapping, Terrain Awareness System (TAWS), traffic monitoring, and SafeTaxiTM. Should you want to fly that high, a G1000-equipped Super King Air B200 is Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums (RVSM) capable."

That 6th line down says it has (TAWS), there is in fact none! So I'm a little disappointed there :(

On the plus side the black panel layout and textures look great to me, the exterior too, and the other systems seem modeled well. Also the sound loop others complained about is really barely noticeable me. The sound I actually find very relaxing.

So its kind of a love hate relationship thus far. But for sixty bucks I'm gonna pass at this point.

HenryS said...

One last P3D comment than I am done with this line of discussion...

When P3D becomes 64bit, don't expect a lot of backward compatibility with your older purchases. When this happens and someone is "bending" the EULA, they have no standing for complaint or support.

Sim_slip said...

Every developer has the right to develop their software as they see fit. You as the buyer has the option to purchase or not purchase. No one is forcing you to buy.

As I have said in previews posts some flight simmers can be thankless SOBs, in which it is good to see when a developer makes a decision and sticks to it. Deal with it!!!

Can't please everyone. Hopefully when the new P3D is released some of their verbiage changes. Its that simple, and you guys need to respect this!!!

Simon Montgomery said...

Just bought it and had a few minutes of use so far. First impressions are good, the G1000 looks promising from what I've seen so far.

The one thing that really stands out though, and I'm really disappointed about this, is the very poor implementation of realistic sounds. The engine idle loop is completely buggered and the aircraft should not have made out of beta with such a grave error. When I hit Q to mute all sounds, the engine idle sound keeps playing!

I hope Flight1 will do something about the sounds, they don't seem of high quality are partly broken, not what I would have expected for almost US$ 60!

INFORMER said...

Im looking forward to more, about the smoothness (FPS) if it is that bad as some say as themn im out

Stefan Schwarz said...

I just spent about 3 hours flying around Greece.

- Cockpit fidelity
- G1000 simulation
- Overall system depth
- Aircraft performance
- Smooth framerates
- Feeling of being in a real B200
- Blackhawk XP52 climb and cruise fidelity

Very poor sound implementation
- Low sound quality
- Prop animation no depth (when props are viewed from the side they are paper thin)
- No way to switch off cockpit main window glass reflections ( I find them too strong)
- Lack of repaints (only 4, what the heck?)
- Inertial brake motion seems a bit too strong (nose dip seems exaggerated)
- Nosewheel light doesn't work properly in DX10

TechWhizz said...

I find it amazing that for the general quality of the aircraft and seeing the above comments, Flight1 seem to have messed up on delivering an aircraft with decent sound. There are so many decent sound artists, like TSS and ArezOne, why did they not ask their help if they cannot manage it inhouse? And are there really only 4 liveries?

SeaGoblin said...

its funny to see all the people that supposedly bought it raving around issues they have here instead of posting them in the support forum where help can be expected...oh flightsim community..when has thy become so..crap

DAndre Newman said...

I believe we asked users to share their experiences, and that's exactly what they are doing. I don't see anyone asking for product support here.

Usually we would do our own FirstLook but as I said, im only running FS9 and P3D and Dom is on vacation with no access to his simulatior.

Xavier Bougainville said...

I'm happy to see others reporting their experiences here. It has helped me decide that I will wait until certain issues are fixed before I buy it.

If you don't like what is posted here, then don't read it, simple really.

Ho Lee Fuk said...

Has anyone tried this yet in P3D directly or with the Migration Tool?

Darren Hamilton said...

It's hard to respect a developer who hasn't earned respect. Jim Rhoads has publicly bashed P3D users in the LM forum and one of the Flight1 developers purposely infiltrated the Flightsim Estonia forum, so that he could learn how they were circumventing their software, so that he in turn could then cripple it in P3D.

If a developer wants to just develop for FSX and not have to deal with FP3D fair enough. But to actually spend development time to purposely cripple your software so that it doesn't function in P3D is a whole different kettle of fish.

JamesHongKong said...

I agree that it's up to us what we buy but when a product (GEX at the time) worked fine then was deliberately updated in order NOT to work by the developer then I have an issue. Particular when that developer set up a false identity on a forum for a product that helps FSX users migrate software to P3D in order to try and find out how the software worked and then cut out customers who have paid for the software - why not offer a refund if the policy has become that important to them? That behaviour is not the normal developer/consumer relationship which warrants respect and choice. Flight 1 are the exception I may add and I would not class myself as one of the "thankless SOBs" as I am very happy with EVERY other developer who I have purchased add ons from. Flight 1's behaviour was highly questionable in my opinion and I choose not buy from them having already paid for something which was deliberately broken and now sits useless

JamesHongKong said...

I agree totally. And there was nothing implicit on Flight 1's product pages at anytime that highlighted the seriousness of the EULA that Jim has subsequently so strongly fought to highlight. Maybe not taking people's money and then crippling software saying we are in violation of agreements would be a better step.

INFORMER said...

well i would agree if you seriusly work on blocking a project to work in another sim i would say, things start to get of the track..

you are the cosumer pay for it and you have the right to use it, if you want to use it whit P3D fine you should have the right to do so. It´s on your mashine and if not published to others no problem, a case other developers say is up to you, they just don´t support it and thats it..

You pay and it´s up to you.. It´s quite funny how this looks like whit games in reality for some years back you had cheat´s for games today you nearly cant find them. and then im sayeing you pay isent it then up to you, as we all know some point you could get stuck and perhaps stop playeing if we just cant get throu.. whats then the meaning whit a game do the creators think the buyer loves to pay the money to get stuck..

Frederik Hagedorn said...

An update from me. The more I fly this plane, the more I am disappointed with the sounds.

The biggest disappointment though is the lack of VNAV!

How can Flight1 say that they model the avionics realistically when there is no VNAV?

Xavier Bougainville said...

Merde, I had assumed that VNAV was included, especially after everybody seemed to complain about the Carenado TBM 850 not having this. Is this so hard to implement or why are these developers all leaving out VNAV functionality? And if the VNAV is not there, why does Flight1 position its product with so much higher pricing?

Todd said...

So, for TAWS, good sound, fully functional G1000, and a VC that works, you need the student edition, right? Haha.

chino said...

+1 He is a poor example thats for sure. I see his bashes in many forums.

Post a Comment

Comments are now deactivated. Please visit our new website:

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