Wellington for FSX ?

[DaveB]

Yep.. cheers Mickey

Right.. someone buy it and let us know what they think

ATB

DaveB :tab:

[Rick Piper]

Can't mate as it's boxed only for now.

anyone know if simmarket etc will be soing it via download ?

Regards
Rick

[DogTailRed2]

Hi,

a Wellington bomber sounds nice. Anyone got it and can post how well it flies.
As to wear on the VC cockpit. Sadly as these aircraft rolled off the production line they would be brand new and maybe never lasted long
enougth to hve any wear. Personally I like factory fresh as a rebuilt warbird woud be.
Appologies for bad spelling, it's crimbo and I've already cracked open the alcohol.

Dog.

[Paul K]

Must revive this thread and ask once more whether anyone bought it or if there are repaints available ? It looks terrific, and with some better engine sounds and correction of that wood grain effect, it really would tempt me. The VC is excellent, from what I can see.

Anyone ?

[DogTailRed2]

I didn't buy it as opinions were it wasn't very good, didn't fly very well.
I'm going that way on the new Lanc that's about to come out. Just doesn't look right.

[Paul K]

Ah well, thanks for that Dogtail. Had a PM to the same effect, so I probably won't get it. I'm no Wellington expert, but it looks great in the various screenshots and video. What a shame.

[Roger]

I only use FsX these days and Dan's Wellington in my opinion is a very good attempt at a difficult subject. On the strength of this I will also be buying the Lanc when it's available for download.

[Paul K]

Roger, thats the first screenshot I've seen of it, other than the publicity ones. Have you got any more, from different angles ? And, is that a default paint or someone else's ?

[TSR2]

I can't really comment on these models, but I do find it odd how we can sit here in 2009 in Flight Simulator as say that such and such a model doesn't fly very well. I appreciate it might not fly very well... but for all we know it may have been a pig to fly in real world. I know our guys spend a great amount of time pouring over the PN's to make the models fly as near as possible on the money, but even then it may not be accurate. DM and DG where very lucky to have had Peter Mac's input on the Trident and Hunter respectively, and I know how close the VC10 is as DM and DB flew the real sim at Brize and the numbers where within a beagal's gowl, but its not always possible to get them right on the money. I have to agree that the canopy on the Lanc doesn't look right, but very often, most of us FS'ers are relying on the modeler to tell us how the aircraft should fly (and in some cases look - e.g the emails del had when he realeased the Dove to say he'd modeled it wrong as one elevator was a different shape to the other )

I guess what I'm saying is its all about research, sometimes its done well, sometimes its done badly (e.g. square winged hunters ) but for many of us, the only way we can really give accurate opinions on how an aircraft flies, is if we have independantly gone and got the PN's ourselves and tried to recreate a known flight... and theres not many of us that will be arsed to do that.

[Garry Russell]

Exactly Ben

I see too many almost immediate improved dynamics put out for just released models when the issue mentioned were a part of real life. This includes adding instrments that were never there and tail floodlights that were not on the type.

I read a post somewher a whileback about models varying in accuracy and under a piece about Boing 727s that were freeware was the mentin of a British guy that did one with a brilliant VC but the outside model didn't look much like one.

Garry