Support overload. We are currently seeing 65% more demand for support then we normally see. We can only assume this is because more people are at home due to the corona crises. Our complete support staff is online and they are working flat out, but it will take some days before we can scale up resources. Please be patient.

Jump to content
MarcelFelde

Diamond DA20-100 'Katana' 4X Preview

Recommended Posts

Really nice, Marcel! :D

But to me it looks as flying is hard 'cause of the limited visibility when the window is opended.

What about adjustable transparency or at least a less dark window? So you can see through it.

Max

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Marcel

Ths KatanaX keeps on getting better. Firstly it looks really good...more realistic than the real thing :)

hopefully it will fly on the numbers too!

and now this instructor station allowing failures to be simulated! plus it seems like you are making this as in depth as possible as simulation. For that I am truly grateful....I have moved away from airliner flying for the time being and really enjoy flying the seneca and archer2, and now it looks like I shall really enjoy flying the KatanaX

good job, really good job!

paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the book on top of the dash in the above shots be removable?

Yes. You can move it between the two seats. Normaly I should place it on another annoying position where you have to move it back to, for example, reach the trim switches. Just to simulate the narrow cockpit. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about adjustable transparency or at least a less dark window? So you can see through it.

The transparency is adjustable in the textures, so it should be no problem make it lighter.

hopefully it will fly on the numbers too!

Alexander Metzger - do I have to say more? :-) He is great in doing airfiles always on the hunt for perfection.

BTW - thanks for all the nice statements on the Katana! :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you consider doing an Xtreme variation as well, or is it too different than the regular Katana?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This looks just fantastic! Just so you know, I hope you guys don't mind, but I featured this aircraft on my show.

I hope I did you all proud, and I can't wait for it's release.

The links are in my sig if you want to check em out.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Marcel,

What speeds does your Katana cruise at and max out at? Also, in performance how does the Katana differ to the Eclipse?

This is looking good! it is definitely on my buy now list.

Cheers,

Craig Tatley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Marcel,

What speeds does your Katana cruise at and max out at? Also, in performance how does the Katana differ to the Eclipse?

This is looking good! it is definitely on my buy now list.

Cheers,

Craig Tatley

http://www.pilotfriend.com/aircraft%20performance/Diamond/1.htm

That's the 80-horse version, click on the Katana 100 link for the Rotax 912S variant

Expect about 95-98 kts for the 80, 105-110 for the 100. It ain't fast, but it certainly is frugal!

The Continental-powered Eclipse is slightly heavier, particularly in pitch, slightly less prone to float IGE (both due to the extra weight of the engine and the change in CG and flaps) and obviously has more `aviation` like starting.

The Rotax is truly like a car with a start procedure as simple as:

1: Fuel pump on

2: choke if engine is cold

3: crack throttle

4: Turn start key/switch

It fires up like a car. (it would, as the Rotax runs at car engine speeds but with a final drive reduction box for the prop).

There are a lot of minor, yet cumulatively significant differences between the two types system-wise - the Katana has dual carbs feeding the four-cylinder part water-cooled block, but the carbs are automatically altitude-compensating. The Katana uses a constant-speed prop, so you have a two-control system for the engine - throttle and prop.

The Eclipse has a fuel-injected, air-cooled Continental flat-four in typical `aviation` style, uses a fixed-pitch prop and has mixture control performed by the pilot in the conventional manner, so it's two-control system is throttle and mixture.

The Eclipse slotted flaps to counter the extra weight of the engine, and the empty and gross-weights are higher. The Eclipse makes good use of the extra power and can cruise easily at 135 kts, but uses quite a bit more fuel than the Katana to do so, and is a bit noisier (although opinion is divided as to whether it actually is noisier, or just seems so because of the greater low-frequency noise of the slow-turning GA motor compared to the buzzier Rotax. Personally, I use ANR headset and think the threshold is about the same, but you are more aware of the Conti than the Rotax at cruise, but that might just be the vibration and the higher prop speed).

Hope this helps.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MF_DA20_100601_0001_prev.jpg

MF_DA20_100601_0002_prev.jpg

Comment needed? :D

Hello Marcel,

I was looking at your website, which says there is a pc6 porter in the works. Will this be released in the same vicinity of the Katana on aerosoft? Or is it a completely different project that will be released elsewhere? Either way I would love to know more about this, as it looks great, and there are few porters simulated in this detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the late answer, last days where busy and I am about to travel for 4 days. So only two short answers for now:

This looks just fantastic! Just so you know, I hope you guys don't mind, but I featured this aircraft on my show.

I hope I did you all proud, and I can't wait for it's release.

I am proud, yes. Thank you very much! :-)

Hello Marcel,

I was looking at your website, which says there is a pc6 porter in the works. Will this be released in the same vicinity of the Katana on aerosoft? Or is it a completely different project that will be released elsewhere? Either way I would love to know more about this, as it looks great, and there are few porters simulated in this detail.

It will be released as 4X product in the same style and realism as the Katana. I would like to have all my "products under one roof" (I don't know if this expression exist in english...). More to information to come later.

I hope to give you more information on the status of the Katana next week.

Thanks for the patience... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to have all my "products under one roof" (I don't know if this expression exist in english...)

It does indeed and I think we're all looking forward to the additional information. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is simply going to be one of THE best planes ever created for fsx. this project can easily compete with pmdgs md11, the love for details seems to be as big in marcel as it is in pmdgs developers hearts :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is simply going to be one of THE best planes ever created for fsx. this project can easily compete with pmdgs md11, the love for details seems to be as big in marcel as it is in pmdgs developers hearts :)

It´s even a higher level than PMDG! :-)

PMDG doesn´t simulates "on condition"- failures, no wear and Maintenance modes. You only can preselect failures depending on time, not on condition and misuse of the whole plane. Only A2A Simulations is a player in this league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It´s even a higher level than PMDG! :-)

PMDG doesn´t simulates "on condition"- failures, no wear and Maintenance modes. You only can preselect failures depending on time, not on condition and misuse of the whole plane. Only A2A Simulations is a player in this league.

you can not compare a MD11 with a DA20 (; that´s not fair.

This is a great plane, it´s just awesome. But if PMDG would simulate every single circuit breaker of a 747 or MD11 they wouldn´t get ready for release. A Katana isn´t as complicated as a 747 or MD11. Not in Real-life and not in Flight Simulation.

But this is next level simulation. That´s the future of "as real as it gets" flight simulations.

Max

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can not compare a MD11 with a DA20 (; that´s not fair.

This is a great plane, it´s just awesome. But if PMDG would simulate every single circuit breaker of a 747 or MD11 they wouldn´t get ready for release. A Katana isn´t as complicated as a 747 or MD11. Not in Real-life and not in Flight Simulation.

But this is next level simulation. That´s the future of "as real as it gets" flight simulations.

Max

You are absolutely right Max.

But, 100 switches in a PMDG are 100% simulated if all 100 switches work correctly. Katanas for example have maybe 5 switches. If 5 switches including their background works, it´s 100% simulated.

PMDG in the whole thing makes a perfect job with their big team. They apparently decided not to simulate "on condition"- failures, ware and maintenance options. I think they did right because this would be hard work for PMDG to do and heavy to manage for us "single" pilots in front of our desktop computers.

If you now understand what i wanted to say, you can see that the Katana simulates at an higher level of realism and also system realism including dirt effects etc. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of this it´s up to the developers which size or kind of airplane they want do create. If you would be an "as real as it gets"- developer and want to do a good product, you maybe decide to build a small or medium plane.;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can not compare a MD11 with a DA20 (; that´s not fair.

This is a great plane, it´s just awesome. But if PMDG would simulate every single circuit breaker of a 747 or MD11 they wouldn´t get ready for release. A Katana isn´t as complicated as a 747 or MD11. Not in Real-life and not in Flight Simulation.

But this is next level simulation. That´s the future of "as real as it gets" flight simulations.

Max

You are so, embarrassingly, wrong. In the sim the Katana could EASILY be as complex as any airliner. You simply have no basis on which to make that statement unless you know precisely what logic and processes are running behind the scenes to present the virtual aircraft to you and whether they are independently programmed or inter-related with existing sim processes.

A good example - which Alexander will no doubt confirm - is that the jet flight model in FSX has far, far fewer inter-related dependencies than the piston aircraft flight model. And that's even considering multiples of engines. Add in interactive functionality such as that already seen as being introduced in the Katana 4X and it is not only possible, it is extremely LIKELY based on what we have seen so far that the processing capacity required for the Katana is substantially greater than that of the 747 or MD11. The skill is in not letting it show - to the detriment of fps or display smoothness.

Not only that, in the real world the processing power of say a Garmin PFD/MFD combination in even the average light aircraft is substantially greater than for almost all airliners (at least the ones that don't have `...bus` in their titles!).

The Cessna Skycatcher 162 has four times the processing power compared to the latest Boeing 747 variant.

"Better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt..."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can not compare a MD11 with a DA20 (; that´s not fair.

That is true. The systems of the MD11 are very complex and I don't want nor do I need to compete with that great product. There is no need to argue about the complexity of add-ons. But there is need to respect developers and customers with different preferences. I understood the remarks of RYR345 and Pascal as nice compliments for my/our work and not as offense on PMDG. So please no for further discussion on this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey marcel,

I´m sorry, I think you misunderstood.

You should not get me wrong. In my opinion, this aircraft is the best of all done aircraft for flight simulation at this time. And I didn´t want to decry your work, just to bring the message home.

In my opinion, a MD11, with loads of system, which can be operated in different ways (means automated, manually, ... and with consequential errors if failures are not handled the right way) is very complicated and we should be happy to see this in big birds like PMDG planes. There aren´t many other developers which simulate that in their products.

Of course, the Katana is the most complicated aircraft in flight simulation because of it´s extreme system-depth, but it´s not fair to expect the same from PMDG.

But never mind. I´m looking forward to fly this beauty and I will learn to use each of this great simulated failures. I couldn´t believe that this kind of detail is possible in FSX.

cheers

Max

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to apologize Max, I agree with you. At least I think that is not fair to expect a "every circuitbreaker and relay" simulation for an airliner. The MD-11 is a great product, the Katana 4x may be not the worst product. And both have their right to exist. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understood the remarks of RYR345 and Pascal as nice compliments for my/our work and not as offense on PMDG. So please no for further discussion on this point.

Exactly, and nothing else i wanted to say.

I also love PMDG as perfect products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if we have the RXP GNS we won't get an AFD Indicator? In Australia a lot of NP Approaches are NDB. I would like to have an ADF for those, even with the RXP Guage in there you still require an ADF to fly IFR Approaches right? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...