Hello there thanks for your extensive review, I am the developer of the aircraft and I would like to clarify something, the bumping you experienced during your flight is caused by SU9 convection thermal depiction. The S4 is already CFD enabled + new prop physics enabled and it is reacting to the environment in accordance with it's class, it is a very light aircraft and as such it does get more affected by turbulence / thermals than a Cessna for example, Asobo is addressing the convection depiction on SU10, since it is a bit overdone. Regarding the stalls, the Sting S4 in real life is very hard to stall into a spin, the aerodynamics always makes it stall forward, this is why you were not successful to spin it. It took me a long time being able to replicate this behavior since MSFS always like to stall one wing first, with the arrival of SU9 we had more tools to tweak stalls and I was able to replicate the stall behavior of this aircraft as per real world. We had real Sting S4 pilots as part of the beta team which confirmed the flight model and stall behavior as very accurate. Thanks again for taking the time to showcase the products. Kind Regards, Raul
Fantastic airplane, and I'm really glad that you have gone all in on the CFD / Prop effects. I feel like as the sim evolves that will only make the plane better. And also not enough praise for giving us a plane with such deep systems at such a reasonable price. One question though: I've seen a lot of people complaining about the sounds and I can see why they are, but I also think I see what's going on. It felt to me the engine sounded rough, especially without the choke, until I really got the CHT up to the 110 F that they ask for in the POH and then it seemed to smooth out. Is that because the sound package has been created to emulate not simply the sound of an engine, but the real time function and condition of the engine in the plane? I personally would rather have engine sounds that contribute to my knowledge of the plane's condition and performance over pleasant sounding ones. I didn't see any details on it in the product description, but if this is the case, I think it's a great direction to go. I appreciate for similar reasons the way the airplane communicates so much to you when stalls are incipient, so they don't strike out of nowhere as they do in many other MSFS aircraft.
Hello Raul, Thank you very much for getting in touch. I have pinned your post, to hopefully make clear the points you bring up. That's all noted and I did wonder whether it might be a turbulence issue. When I make such comments during a video, it's not to point blame at yourself or anyone else, merely to describe what I am experiencing at the time. I am sure that LSA's are generally rather susceptible to turbulence etc, I just thought the way the aircraft handled the bumps felt a little odd - but again I'm happy to acknowledge that it was pure conjecture on my part. I know I speak for most of us when I say, it's really great that you took the time and effort to make use of the sim's new flight modelling options; hopefully Asobo will continue to tweak things a little more on their end. At any rate, please don't misunderstand me; there may have been one or two point I brought up about the aircraft (erroneous or otherwise), but I really enjoyed the S4 overall and was very impressed with you efforts! : ) Thanks again and all the best!
I thought the sounds were really great, so was quite surprised to hear people saying otherwise haha (my headphones are not the best though to be fair). Is some of that "roughness" not "vibration" in the panel? That's what I took it to be at the time anyway. . . Cheers Austin : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Hi Austin, I discovered a sound bug after release, the wind sound is excessive. I thought this was MSFS wind sound and that I could not tweak it down. However Asobo helped me to track this down and the issue is I forgot about the gears drag sound, which in this case I set it too loud, this is causing at high speed to feel too much wind, which can be tiring. I have pushed an update to market place which address this issue and some other sound improvements this week (13th- May-2022), my understanding is the update will be released to the market place this upcoming Thursday 16th of May. The update will also include other fixes and a new feature which allows user to switch their altimeter from IN to hPa as requested via my discord channel. I continue to improve the aircraft pretty much weekly, mostly via feedback from customers. But there are things that will be implemented when SU10 comes out since I will get the opportunity to implement even more nice things I had on my road map that were not possible with SU9. Thanks for everything, Raul
Looks like a fun plane fly and to "pull the chute" every now and again and again. I do like the tablet and all the settings so as we progress in our flight capabilities we can add more and more realism. Like the Milviz 310, these two planes throw down the gauntlet for other developeers. Well done! !! !!!
Yeah, the S4 was good fun overall Mark. The chute might be too tempting to pull on occasion though haha. It's great that we're seeing more and more aircraft with a persistent state / failure modelling, it really does drastically change the experience of the sim. A very impressive effort from FSReborn overall! Thanks as always : )
Regarding the parachute : at least for German market every ultralight has to be equipped with this safety feature, independent of its stall characteristics
I'm still trying to figure out in what situation a parachute would be helpful. I guess only then when you are over terrain where you can't find a spot to put her down in a glide.
Ahh, thanks very much for the information Pemigris! I did wonder if that might also have something to do with it (never actually knew that though to be fair). . . The only aircraft I actually knew to be fitted with a parachute is the SR22 and I believe that is for spin recovery reasons. Cheers and all the best : )
I gather some of these aircraft also aren't certified for IFR conditions. Someone else commented that it may be a requirement to pull the chute, in the event of an inadvertent entry into such conditions. . . All the best! : )
So, I took the S4 over to my usual testing grounds of Goldendale, Washington, which is a great airport for winds and soaring IRL and has a complex variety of terrain close at hand (gorges, mountains, prairie). I found that it is a very jittery plane with turbulence, and part of that may be the actual airplane (I wouldn't know) but part of it I think is that it is making full use of the new MSFS CFD model, because I got very similar behavior in the 172 that ASOBO updated. This is combined with the fact that MSFS has been tinkering with winds and turbulence a LOT. For example, they definitely dialed up turbulence after it was gone for a while, and they introduced updrafts and downdrafts in valleys for the ICON bush flying tutorials. But also I've noticed they've been trying to add other behaviors, like the turbulence you'll get flying low over trees. (Goldendale is a good place to test this, as the approach is normally about half over forests and half over open fields, and you'll notice the difference immediately in a light aircraft) So I tested the S4 on some of this. First I went into the Columbia River gorge and tried drifting between calmer air in the middle and turbulent air on the updraft side. Then I tried flying over a series of ridges in the Cascade Foothills to get a feel for the wave compression. Then I climbed up to a higher altitude to try out some stalls. The result each time was that the plane dramatically mellowed out every time I moved into calm air. I also did some crosswind landings that were shall we say "marginal" according to the POH and it did not go particularly well. This may be the way the real airplane handles, but I am more inclined to think that it is more of an issue with the MSFS CFD model being young and still being dialed in, while interacting with a new turbulence model that is also young and still being dialed in. I feel many aircraft are too sedate even in what should be rough air, so it is refreshing that this doesn't have that problem, but I'm inclined to suspect the pendulum has swung too far the other way. On the stalls it was honestly disappointing. Given the depth they put into the systems, the flight model doesn't seem as sophisticated as some of the others coming out. Key examples of MSFS behavior present in the S4: First, I was able to get it into a spin, but it was an MSFS one, where you get the lack of aileron authority of a true spin, but the acceleration in airspeed of a spiral dive (this is because MSFS in general tends to exaggerate lift and struggles to simulate the loss of lift that causes a true spin) This means the plane recovers from a spin even if I'm intentionally doing all the wrong things, and I'm unable to induce a flat spin because at any time I can just pull back on the stick and fly out of the spin. Given the warnings in the POH about needing to use the parachute to escape a spin, I kind of suspect that this plane has much more aggressive spin characteristics than MSFS. Second, it won't perform an accelerated stall. You can cut the power to idle, set the bank to 90 degrees and yank back the stick as hard as you want, and you will get a stall warning horn, but the airplane will oscillate around the horizon without dropping or even losing much altitude. This, once again, seems to be standard MSFS behavior with variation in wing loading not being terribly well simulated, and is probably related why you can't realistically fly on "knife edge" in the Sim. Related to this, when I was testing dynamic stability for Dutch Roll, the rudder singlet really just skidded me a bit without getting any wing dip, and when i held the rudder long enough to get more bank, it didn't right itself. The former could be due to aircraft design, low wings that aren't swept won't manifest full dutch roll, but the later problem of not righting itself from a rudder bank is reflective of the fact that MSFS doesn't allow extra lift surfaces beyond the wings and horizontal stabilizers, so the vertical stabilizer can't generate lift in the sim as it would in life when the angle of bank heels over too far. These three problems are all part of the sim and I don't really blame the dev for having them, but on the other hand, there are airplanes that actually have found ways to model them - the Black Box Cessna Birddog doesn't gain speed in a spin, the Carenado / Asobo Gee Bee will perform an accelerated stall, and quite a few aircraft, even some of the default aircraft, will demonstrate the self-righting behavior of tailplane lift in dutch roll. On the other hand, I'm a pretty forgiving guy when it comes to flaws where other areas are excellent. Some planes seem to have fewer default MSFS flight model quirks, but none of them have a working BPRS, and I don't ding them for that. I feel like if an advanced plane covers most of the bases and then does something interesting, that's enough for me. It's a WILD improvement over the other Ultralight / LSA aircraft in the Sim, and I had been feeling like that was an area getting neglected with a lot of mods coming out that were just minor improvements on default aircraft, compared to the "in depth" planes coming out for GA and commercial.
Also, I've got to say, thanks for being one of the few IRL tubeliner pilots whose channel actually devotes a lot of time to the smaller and older planes in the sim. As someone who mainly likes GA and Vintage planes, it's great to have a place to see those planes get evaluated with the same technical and methodical precision that is normally given mostly to the airliners.
Wow, well you've obviously been doing your homework Austin! ; ) I pretty much agree with all you have said there. I still have some questions regarding the flight model, but the issues clearly aren't there through a lack of effort (going off the quality of the rest of the aircraft). It must be incredibly hard for devs to get these sorts of things right, especially with the goalposts constantly moving (the tweaking if the turbulence modelling for example). It may not be perfect, but I for one am a big fan of what Asobo is trying to do with the atmospheric effects modelling; MSFS does to tend fall apart a bit at the extremes of the flight envelope (as you mention above), but it "feels" (there's that word again haha) better than most sims when cruising around. I'm sure the dev will continue to work on the aircraft and hats off to him for making the effort and using the new prop physics etc (I pinned a post he made on this video, if that's of any interest to you). I couldn't agree with you more, that a product need not be perfect in every respect to be enjoyable; a lot of people seem to conflate accuracy with quality and of course the two are not necessarily always mutual. I still think the S4 feels a little bit odd to fly at times (great at others though to be fair), but it is a quality product in almost every other respect and certainly a very enjoyable one either way! Cheers : )
My absolute pleasure Austin! It was always my dream to fly "the big jets", but I often wonder to myself why haha - I do miss the "real" flying. I'm not currently in the position to go off and enjoy what the GA world has to offer, so ironically (where once I used to spend all my time flying "study level" airlines in FSX etc) I continue to live vicariously through the sim haha. Thanks as always! : )
A fantastic review and what a view of the sim from inside the cockpit of the Sting S4 lovely ickle plane x (oh and what a change from flying the Darkstar ha ha) Artful
Thanks very much Artful, glad you enjoyed it! Yes, the view is definitely one of the big advantages of the S4 - a great little aircraft for sightseeing and a very nice effort from FSReborn overall. The little Sting is not quite the Darkstar. but it tries it's best : P All the best! : )
I used to fly and maintain Stings, very fun aircraft to fly. We had a couple in our fleet and they both suffered nose gear to fuselage separations which sucked but they weren't really meant for the abuse as a daily trainer. We handled the U.S. Navy's initial flight screenings. Those young bucks could tear up some airplanes lol. As always, great video and review. Thank you.
Haha, was it a straight pass if the student managed to separate the nosewheel then Lance - carrier landings and all that? XD Yeah, the Sting doesn't look like it would hold up well to training (it does indeed look like good fun though). I had a similar experience at one of the flight schools I went to: The school ran trials on various aircraft to renew its fleet, all of the instructors said to go for the PA28 or the C172, but instead the school went for the DV20 (if memory serves me correctly). I don't think many of those airframes lasted nearly as long as they should have haha. Glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks for sharing and all the best : )
Looks like another fun aircraft. Thr chute would probably keep me occupied for some amount of time! Thanks for another very enjoyable and informative prese!
Indeed Art, the S4 is good fun (albeit I’m not a massive fan of glass cockpits) and modelled very nicely by FSReborn. The parachute is a laugh and always there to get one out of trouble haha : P Many thanks once again! : )
Thank for another great review! I have about 200 hrs in the Sting S3 and was very excited to see this model. Flight behavior was pretty realistic. LSA/ultralight aircraft air usually flown with two fingers on the stick and light rudder inputs. The stall buffet is dead on. The AC will spin. Recovery is a non event. The Gross weight for a US LSA is 1320 lbs, so convective turbulence will induce a little more bounce than a C172/PA28 below 2000ft AGL. XW landings require attention, but are not difficult. The only con, for me, is that the in-flight engine sounds are HORRIBLE. I wouldn’t fly a Rotax 912 powered AC if the engine sounded like that. Finally the wing tanks are missing the fuel fill ports.
Thanks very much for the info sir! Always good to get an opinion from someone "in the know". I can imagine that an ultralight would indeed be quite sensitive to turbulence etc, but the way the aircraft responded to the bumps felt a little bit odd to me? Haha, never flown anything with a Rotax myself. Was it just the internal sounds you didn't like, or the external sounds as well? All the best : )
Very nice video, I was eagerly waiting for your review! Last year I flew as a passenger in a Pioneer 200, which seems quite similar to the Sting 4. The pilot allowed me to take the stick for most of our flight, and it was not twitchy at all. Being a very light plane, it was of course sensitive to movements of the air, but that moved the whole plane up or down but did not influence pitch very much. The Pioneer 200 also had a BRS, I think they are quite common in ultralights nowadays.
Thanks Volker! Yes, I've never flown an ultralight myself, but what you're describing is more or less what I would have imagined. I have no issue with the aircraft moving around per se, but the movement didn't "feel" natural. Again, my opinions are purely conjecture regarding the flight model though. All things considered, the S4 is still a very nice effort from FSReborn! An aircraft that I'm sure I will continue to enjoy flying : ) Enjoy the rest of your holiday!
I don't know to what extent MSFS models thermals. The S4 looks light enough to get buffeted flying over built-up areas on a hot day. Maybe that's what was happening. I've never been in an S4, maybe it has amazing sound proofing, but that Rotax sounds rather quiet! The twitchy flight could be realistic. Some ultralights are twitchy and not fantastically well harmonised. I can't tell if it's the "right" kind of twitchyness lol. Great review as usual. If this gets a polish and some avionics options it's a definite buy.
sim update 10 will have thermals updated. On calm days like this they dont want rising thermal air to be shaking around your airplane. So it'll be tweaked by wind speeds as well. So 0 wind = smooth thermals = less turbulence.
Haha, well that's the tricky thing Roland; not having flown the S4 myself, I can only pontificate. It wasn't so much the movement itself that I took any issue with (as you say, the S4 looks like it could easily be a leaf in the wind), but the way the movement "felt" - it just didn't feel quite natural. At the end of the day though, that's obviously a very subjective opinion; everything I looked at objectively on the S4, was very impressive I have to say! I gather FSReborn took the time to make full use of MSFS' new prop physics and CFD modelling (hats off to them for that), so it could just be a bit of a mismatch between the sim and its current turbulence modeling for sure. Either way a very nice effort from the dev and a great little platform with the GTN750 / GTNXi fitted. Cheers as always! : )
That's great to hear RRaven. The weather modelling in MSFS could still use some tweaking for sure, but it's already light years ahead of the competition and Asobo do seem to be finally ironing out some of the major creases. Thanks for the info and all the best! : )
Yeah, the S4 is a a nice little offering Steve - I'll be well impressed if you can manage to get one down on a helipad though haha! Sounds like quite a fun challenge, a bit like flour bombing XD All the best! : )
Hi Drew, Yeah, it’s a pretty great piece of kit and a big upgrade to the Sting overall. I’ve been making good use of the TDS GTNXi myself (in other aircraft) and intend to give it a go in the S4 at some point : ) Cheers and all the best!
I noticed the default DA40 likes to spin with full flaps, but not without. Easy to get into a spin by trying to lift the stalling wing with the ailerons that way. Maybe that's the case here as well?
Hi Leander, Thanks very much for the pointer. The FSReborn dev actually posted a comment on the video; apparently it is actually very hard to get the aircraft into a spin in real life also (and very easy to recover thereafter). So it seems on that front, the aircraft's behaviour is pretty true to life. Cheers and all the best! : )
Although I'm not a huge fan of the G1000, its implementation here looks a lot better and more customized compared to most or all of the default Asobo planes. The buttons are larger and better organized and easier to identify. And the plane in general looks super cute and fun, and the included maintenance features make it surprisingly "meaty" for a plane this size, as well as having a working parachute. 2022 has really been an amazing year for aircraft releases, I wish I could afford to support all of these talented developers. I'm especially looking forward to tomorrow's HondaJet release, which should be hitting the Marketplace at 10 am my time here in California.
Hi bwc, Yes, these types of G1000 LSA's usually do very little for me, but I have to say that FSReborn did more than enough to make the aircraft very enjoyable! A really nice effort from them overall. 2022 has indeed been a pivotal year for the sim and it's great to see how far MSFS has come in the last few months. Surprisingly, most of the quality addons that we have seen coming into the sim, have been from small / relatively unknown devs like FSReborn - which is awesome! Cheers and all the best : )
Looks like quite a decently modelled plane and the wear & tear and damage options are really cool. Ain't exactly keen on the aircraft itself though, I mean IRL. The virutal version does look like quite a splendid rendition of the real thing but these modern day ultra light/light sports planes all look very samey to me, same aerodynamic teardrop shape, same 3 glass panel layout, same or very similar Rotax engine and they all just merge into one for me and lack character. Still I might get this one down the road to see how often I burst the tyres on my usual heavy landings. I'm hoping we'll start seeing this kind of detail in older GA planes though sometime soon. Denham airfield looks quite nice though, well it's to be expected from Burning Blue. Although I was hoping that after Bodmin they'd do some more small airfields around the country outside of the south east. I do most my flying in the UK over to the west but most devs seem to focus on the south east for smaller airports which is a bit of a shame. Variety is the spice of life! Well ain't I Mr Negative today! Well your video was good! Also to be expected ;). Fancy giving BRSimDesigns Ercoupe a review? I'm interested in it but never bought a plane from them before so a bit wary. It's a vintage plane so should be right up my alley but money is a bit tight and I wanna buy a number of planes now! The real plane is quite interesting as they designed it to be extremely safe and almost impossible to stall and I'm wondering if BRSim managed to model that. But no pressure, you do what you do and I'll be sure to watch whatever you upload!. Cheers
I very much agree with you on the whole LSA thing, though credit to FSReborn, they actually did enough here to make me want to fly in again at some point (I'll just have to avoid the temptation of pulling the parachute XD) Denham is indeed another very nice effort from Burning Blue. I've flown both down south and up north in the real world, so it would certainly be nice to see a more varied approach. That being said, some of my favorite airfields are down south, so keeping my fingers crossed for those haha (and hoping Burning blue don't commit treason again, with any more US airfields : P). I'm really hoping we'll see another UK2000 superhuman effort, covering the whole of the UK at some point - wouldn't that be great! Regarding the Ercoupe; you aren't the only one to ask and never say never, but I can't see it happening any time soon I'm afraid. I think I've been devoting a bit too much time to UA-cam of late, the family might like to see me again at some point; so I'm planning on only covering the "big" releases / products I'm really interested in myself, for the foreseeable future (you may have noticed, I finally had my fill of Asobo flying boats haha) ; ) Cheers and all the best! : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Fair enough, your loved ones should always come first. Speaking of flying boats the new SA.55 is actually quite nice. I was originally not going to purchase it but then decided why not and was pleasantly surprised that everything works as intended, it looks and sounds quite nice and flies pretty well too. I did have some issues but the dev of the plane actually responded in the official forum thread which makes a change to the past Local Legends releases and he explained away some of my issues such as being able to not restart the engine was due to the primitive APU type motorcycle engine needing to build up pressure or something first and also the compass is really quite odd, instead of just one needle pointing the way it has 3 needles with different numbers on them and correspond to different headings, like if the needle labelled 2 is pointing at 80 degrees you're actually flying at 280. It's quite strange but was apparently a popular compass briefly back in the day and it's quite nice to see that modelled. It looks like a lot of love and attention went into this by the dev so it's worth a punt I say! In other release news: Flight Replicas released an L4 Grasshopper the other day which is basically just an army air force basic Cub. I'm a huge cub fan and also a fan of FR's cubs in FSX so I picked it up. Flies quite nice, really feels underpowered and can catch you out when going slow but the texture's ain't brilliant and the sounds are from the Savage Cub which uses a Rotax engine that's completely out of place.Also no Wwise stuff so old school sounds I did swap it out for the CAP10 which has something that sounds more appropriate though and some others have swapped it for the C152. The great repainter Jankees uploaded a couple of paints with the sound swapped out for the 152 as well making it easy to do so although I've not checked that out yet to compare with the CAP10 but will no doubt sound better than the Rotax. Probably aint worth your time unless you're a fan of proper old school Cubs though but I'm having a bit of fun with it.
Oh yeah that motorcycle starter engine I briefly commented on in the S.55 is really quite a nice touch. As usual I didn't bother looking at the checklists and just went hunting around the cockpit for dials and switches whilst wondering why I couldn't start any engines but then tucked away on the right there's a bank of switches and one had the tooltip 'APU Starter' which I thought was quite a bit odd on a 1930s plane. I clicked it and then grinned when I heard the little motor put-puting away and then could start the main engines. Really cool little touch. The dev said it's a Garelli motorcycle engine that compresses air and charges up the battery for the starters to work. There's no manual for it yet, well there is but as usual Microsoft are slow to upload it to their Local Legends documentation site. Probably has to clear through 10 levels of management and security or something obscene like that before it can be uploaded.
Thank you, a great review as usual Sir! I think this airframe Is a better alternative to the SWS RV-14 to be honest. Let me get my plastic out haha! Good care and happy flying.
Hi ROA, Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it / found it useful! I haven't actually tried the RV-14 myself, so can't compare (although it looks good). I was certainly very impressed with the S4 overall though and I'm sure I'll be flying it again at some point. Happy flying and all the best! : )
Thanks! Purchased. Want to support FSReborn for detailed maintenance and wear and tear. As in real life - ultralight is probably not you want do a cross country flight for hours. Just find a paradise island and do a few patterns bumping around in turbulence. Pure fun. I had to reduce rudder sensivity. Such a great plane for a less than an hour flight, and you feel you own it.
Ah well that's great øystein, FSReborn certainly deserves the support! Despite a few questions on the flight model, I really like the addon overall and it's one that I'm looking forward to taking out again when I get the chance. As you say, it feels like an aircraft that you own, with it's failure modelling, persistent state etc. Enjoy! : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Update. Flying a few more hours, and I am in love. The various autopilot options is excellent for longer flight. Highly recommended for all simmers.
Hi Jean-Baptiste, I’ve never seen one myself, but that doesn’t surprise me to hear. The ballistic parachute is obviously designed to keep the occupant alive and not much more from what I’ve read (having heard stories of broken bones etc on landing). I don’t know why FSReborn decided to go with a lower descent rate (perhaps it is in fact accurate to the Sting specifically) but as you say, the animation is very nice at the very least. Cheers and all the best! : )
Yes, the S4 doesn't exactly "rock the MSFS boat", in terms of the flying option it offers. To be fair though, it is by far and away the best in its class : ) Cheers BG, all the best!
Very nice aircraft. I was waiting for a well done LSA aircraft. Hope to see much more of this kind in the future, eventually with steam gauges too because in flight school there are few well equipped ones. My favourite wolud be Tecnam P2008 or P2002, or some older ones, like Zenair CH 601 or the slippery MCR 01. 👍👍👍👍👍
Hi Antonio, Well this is indeed a very nicely done LSA; overall one of the better aircraft in the sim currently I would say. I too would like to see some steam gauges though, never a big fan of the Garmin solutions (they're amazing in the real world, but not my cup of tea in the sim). I know that "Ant's Aeroplanes" made some nice LSA's for FSX / P3D - I expect he will be brining those into MSFS at some point (the Tiger Moth is next though!). All the best! : )
Man, I'm interested in this plane but not sure how it will fit in with the SWS RV-14, which I don't fly enough as is. Seem to fill the same kind of role. That EFB is something else. The interior modelling and textures look amazing, as does the interior. Great review as usual.
Thanks very much M@!, glad you enjoyed the video! I haven' tried the RV-14 myself, so I can't really compare the two. From what I have seen though, the S4 seems to offer more functionality overall. It's a really nice aircraft, but if LSA's aren't really your thing, I suspect this one may end up gathering dust as well. Still, it's not too expensive and it does offer rather a lot. All the best! : )
You said that some aircraft are unable to recover from a spin and that's why they have ballistic parachutes. I don't think you could get an aircraft certificated in many countries if it was structurally incapable of stall spin recovery at altitude. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.
Unfortunately some aircraft are not designed for spins, due to how their empennage is set up. If the rudder is "blocked" by the horizontal stabiliser, if you think about the angle of attack of the airplane in a spin (coming from below going straight up), the rudder ends up in the stabilisers shadow. To recover from a spin, you would need to apply opposite rudder, but alas the rudder doesnt "bite" into the air, and recovery wont be possible. Unless the aircraft is somehow very nose heavy or has other characteristics that would allow it to recover from a spin by itself. I dont know why some planes are designed like this. The Cessna 152 and 172 for example have rudders that stick out beyond the stabiliser a little bit but not much, which is why you should keep elevator UP, and why its the last point in the PARE recovery technique, to give as much area to the rudder as possible when giving opposite rudder. The Extra 300 has its rudder sticking out beyond the stabiliser completely, giving it awesome controllability even when in a flat spin
So, ability to recover from spins isn't a "yes" or a "no" but exists on a spectrum. At least in the US, where I live, the FAA does have certain minimum standards for type certification of "normal" category aircraft. However, LSA aircraft in the US do not receive a normal type certification and have different standards. The European category of "ultralight" often overlaps with the US category of "LSA" but they don't totally match, so not all European "ultralights" can be certified as an LSA in the US. For example, the VL-3 in the sim has retractable gear, a constant speed propeller, and some v speeds that are too fast for LSA certification. As a result, what few VL-3s have made it to the US have had to get an "Experimental" certification. Kit airplanes like the Van's RV-14, the Zenith CH701, or the Kitfox STi, all of which are available in the sim, are also generally registered as Experimental, and thus not subject to the same standards as the "Normal" Type certification. As far as I can tell online, some Stings are registered as "Experimental" while some have been registered as LSA but the LSAs don't appear to be the model in the sim. As to spin recovery, a lot of regulations go into restricting how likely an airplane is to go into a spin rather than how it recovers. For example, I don't expect many airliners could structurally survive a spin and mostly, they are certified based on protections like yaw dampers and complex ailerons designed to increase lateral dynamic stability so that even in stalls spins are unlikely. Most GA aircraft can recover from a spin mechanically, but are not certified for intentional spins because spins might cause structural damage that would make a plane dangerous to fly after spin recovery. Only airplanes certified for aerobatics can do intentional spins, and these are largely certified by their ability to withstand certain G forces, meaning that they can not only recover from a spin, but also be safe to fly afterwards. But there are still aircraft that may recover from a normal spin, but if the CG is too far aft, they can fall into an unrecoverable flat spin, where they are unable to get the nose down to properly recover. In this case I suppose a BPRS would be better than just plummeting to the earth, but I'm skeptical that a parachute could deploy without getting twisted if the plane was in a flat spin. I know very little about the whole ballistic parachute system technology, so maybe they've engineered a solution? Unrecoverable flat spins, it should be noted, are usually caused not by design flaws but by improper loading of the aircraft, with the CG too far aft. Looking at the weight and balance sheet for the sting, It seems like it is indeed possible to overload the baggage area and put the CG too far aft, so that might be part of the concern. But, I should also note that the main place where the POH actually says the parachute should be considered as a first choice rather than a last choice is in recovery from a Spiral Dive after accidental flight into IMC. The aircraft is not certified for IFR/IMC even though it has a nifty glass cockpit, which means you can't really fly it IFR because the instrumentation you need isn't actually there. So in this case, I think the concern is that you can easily become disoriented in a spiral dive in IMC and you lose altitude and gain speed VERY quickly, raising the dual specters of CFIT and Overspeed. So I think their idea is that if you are lost in clouds and spiraling downward, pulling the parachute might be safer than trying to fly out of the dive by the seat of your pants. In MSFS a spin and a spiral dive are improperly differentiated, and the result is that you might think of MSFS as actually having something more like a "Spin Dive" and exactly how one should respond to that is hard to say because it is a behavior unlike what you get in real life airplanes. Normally, in the sim, the "spin dive" gains speed and brings the nose up resulting in a sort of automatic recovery behavior, so I don't think too many simmers worry about it unless they are trying to do aerobatics.
Hi Mike, It's certainly not my area of expertise but anecdotally, I understand that is why the SR-22 is fitted with a parachute (it is unrecoverable from a spin). It seems Raphael and Austin probably know much more about this than me - I'm about to dive into their responses now haha. All the best! : )
An incredibly informative and interesting response as always Austin, thanks! Like you, I don't know much about these parachute systems etc; until a week ago, I thought the system was more or less unique to the SR-22 haha. Someone else mentioned that apparently in Germany, it's actually mandatory for all LSA's to be fitted with a chute; so as is often the case, it seems these things vary from country to country. . . All the best : )
Hi AV8R, I didn't; I actually moved the camera around it haha. Didn't actually try removing the joystick to be fair (it sounds like it's not possible from what you're saying though?). I know the dev is already working on an update, so maybe that functionality will be added as part of it (if enough users gave feedback on the issue). All the best! : )
That startup sound puts me right off. I feel that if the developers haven't put in the time to make that moment perfect then their priorities don't match with mine. Thanks for the review though!
Hi pgtrots, Yes, the startup was a little bit odd. Holding down the key seemed to repeat the startup animation over and over again. I suspect had I just clicked on the key, it might have behaved a little bit more reasonably. I have to say, I think the dev has done a nice job with the aircraft overall though, so hopefully the startup will be refined at some point. My pleasure on the review - I'm glad it told you what you need to know. All the best! : )
Hi Kdb, I'm not sure if the aircraft has one actually. I didn't check exhaustively, but it seemed to be a case of either using the chocks, or holding the aircraft on the brakes (that's what the checklist seemed to suggest as well). I hope that helps. All the best! : )
As much as I enjoy the S4 Richard, I’d definitely recommend the 310 overall. The C310 is a deeper, richer simulation, the aircraft has more features / configuration options and behaves a little more convincingly overall. Further to that (although it’s just a personal preference), I prefer the steam gauges of the C310, over the G1000 of the S4. I hope that helps a little. All the best! : )
Hi Mike, I undoubtedly will at some point! Don't get me wrong, I really like the S4 overall and maybe I was just unlucky with the climatic conditions, but the way it was bobbing around in (what I presume was) the turbulence, really didn't feel very natural to me and the aircraft did feel a little sensitive in pitch in general (the same for the crosswinds). As I always say, it's only conjecture on my part (not having flown the aircraft), so I'm happy to admit that I could well be wrong in my assertions. I'm sure FSReborn will continue to work on the aircraft (and hats off to them for making full use of the new prop / CFD physics) and I'm actually looking forward to taking it for another spin when I get the chance either way. Cheers and all the best! : )
Hi Kieron, I don't use much of anything really. I do occasionally bump up the brightness, or decrease the "warmth" of the sim a little bit, using the in-game Nvidia tools, but for the most part I think it's down to choosing a decent time of day / weather setting. That can make a huge difference in the sim - in stark lighting conditions, the sim often doesn't look that great. I hope that helps a little and I'm glad you think the sim is looking good in the videos! All the best : )
in sim modeling more dangerous spin very close to flat, but not too easy drop ac to that situation, just need add some aileron opposite spin direction, and never do that under 10k or better 20k:) and i think that chute better to be use same as emergency landing, found some big field if alt is enough for that but not enough for landing good, then at 1k use this. because the more ac at chute the more chance it landing somewhere on buildings or trees or even the rope will break. but i don't sure for sure :)
Cheers Einherz! Yeah for sure in an ideal situation, you want to be deploying the chute away from densely populated areas, high terrain etc; this was just a bit of a demo, but landing in a row of trees certainly wouldn't be ideal XD All the best! : )
Yes. Well, I expect the course knob works, but as the HSI is in GPS nav by default, the course can't be changed. I couldn't find how to get the HSI into conventional nav myself, but I'd be surprised if there isn't some sort of method that I missed. Sorry I can't be of more help on that one! All the best : )
Hi Chinook, For me that's an easy one - MILVIZ 310 all the way! Whilst the Sting is excellent, the 310 has it beat in most categories. They are of course quite different aircraft types and that may influence your personal decision, but if you aren't too fussed either way about that, then I think you will be very happy with the 310 : ) I hope that helps. All the best!
Hi Mr B, MSFS doesn't currently natively support helicopters, though there are a couple of 3rd party options out there (and natively helicopter support should be added in the future): ua-cam.com/video/neZqbcEfZ4Y/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/piGG7F2HW6w/v-deo.html The flight modelling physics for rotary aircraft are "ok" at the moment; other sims (namely X-Plane and DCS) do it much better, but then they aren't perhaps quite as good graphically and don't have the same level of open world to explore. I hope that helps a little. All the best! : )
Haha - I didn't even think about it to be honest Jay. I was so busy being impressed by the parachute, it never even occurred to me that the landing might be all wonky ha. I don't know though, I just didn't fancy showing a "crash". All the best : )
Thank you for this video. Interesting spin characteristics. In real life I would pass on the parachute, other than night flying in mountains and and expecting an engine out if a pilot needs a parachute he or she needs to give up flying.
My pleasure ZZ! Yeah, I'm not too sure about the whole parachute thing. Better to have than not in theory I suppose, but I gather these sorts of aircraft do tend to have higher accident rates, presumably in part because the pilot pushes things, thinking he has a "get out of jail free card". As I mentioned during the video, some aircraft do require a parachute due to their inability to recover from a spin etc (the SR22 for example), so fair enough in those sorts of instances I suppose. Still, it's good fun to try in the sim haha! All the best : )
Hello Breenild, Good question. I don’t know if these are the only reasons but, as I understand it 1) returning to both (should) regain the engine rpm and therefore helps to burn off any fouling from the set of mags that was selected off (ahead of testing that particular mag) and 2) you’re returning to a known datum, so you can more accurately confirm the drop and differential between the two mag systems. I hope that helps a little? All the best : )
Hi Gary, Do you mean the parking brake? The aircraft doesn’t have one I don’t believe (there is no mention of it in any checklists). I just hold the aircraft on the toe brakes as required. I hope that clarifies things. All the best!
Haha, thanks Diddles, glad you think so! I often try and structure the flight to bring out the best in the sim, choosing decent weather and a nice time of day etc. I always think the sim looks great on the console though haha. You guys get 4K (sort of) right (which is more than I can manage)? All the best : )
There's no mod JRO, but in the S4 the G500 can be replaced with the PMS GNT750 / TDS GTNXi. There is of course a freeware version of the PMS unit, so one can turn the S4 into a really nice platform overall : ) All the best!
Hello there thanks for your extensive review, I am the developer of the aircraft and I would like to clarify something, the bumping you experienced during your flight is caused by SU9 convection thermal depiction. The S4 is already CFD enabled + new prop physics enabled and it is reacting to the environment in accordance with it's class, it is a very light aircraft and as such it does get more affected by turbulence / thermals than a Cessna for example, Asobo is addressing the convection depiction on SU10, since it is a bit overdone.
Regarding the stalls, the Sting S4 in real life is very hard to stall into a spin, the aerodynamics always makes it stall forward, this is why you were not successful to spin it. It took me a long time being able to replicate this behavior since MSFS always like to stall one wing first, with the arrival of SU9 we had more tools to tweak stalls and I was able to replicate the stall behavior of this aircraft as per real world. We had real Sting S4 pilots as part of the beta team which confirmed the flight model and stall behavior as very accurate.
Thanks again for taking the time to showcase the products.
Kind Regards,
Raul
Thank you for this great airplane for simulator :)
Fantastic airplane, and I'm really glad that you have gone all in on the CFD / Prop effects. I feel like as the sim evolves that will only make the plane better. And also not enough praise for giving us a plane with such deep systems at such a reasonable price. One question though:
I've seen a lot of people complaining about the sounds and I can see why they are, but I also think I see what's going on. It felt to me the engine sounded rough, especially without the choke, until I really got the CHT up to the 110 F that they ask for in the POH and then it seemed to smooth out. Is that because the sound package has been created to emulate not simply the sound of an engine, but the real time function and condition of the engine in the plane?
I personally would rather have engine sounds that contribute to my knowledge of the plane's condition and performance over pleasant sounding ones. I didn't see any details on it in the product description, but if this is the case, I think it's a great direction to go. I appreciate for similar reasons the way the airplane communicates so much to you when stalls are incipient, so they don't strike out of nowhere as they do in many other MSFS aircraft.
Hello Raul,
Thank you very much for getting in touch. I have pinned your post, to hopefully make clear the points you bring up.
That's all noted and I did wonder whether it might be a turbulence issue. When I make such comments during a video, it's not to point blame at yourself or anyone else, merely to describe what I am experiencing at the time. I am sure that LSA's are generally rather susceptible to turbulence etc, I just thought the way the aircraft handled the bumps felt a little odd - but again I'm happy to acknowledge that it was pure conjecture on my part. I know I speak for most of us when I say, it's really great that you took the time and effort to make use of the sim's new flight modelling options; hopefully Asobo will continue to tweak things a little more on their end.
At any rate, please don't misunderstand me; there may have been one or two point I brought up about the aircraft (erroneous or otherwise), but I really enjoyed the S4 overall and was very impressed with you efforts! : )
Thanks again and all the best!
I thought the sounds were really great, so was quite surprised to hear people saying otherwise haha (my headphones are not the best though to be fair). Is some of that "roughness" not "vibration" in the panel? That's what I took it to be at the time anyway. . .
Cheers Austin : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Hi Austin, I discovered a sound bug after release, the wind sound is excessive. I thought this was MSFS wind sound and that I could not tweak it down. However Asobo helped me to track this down and the issue is I forgot about the gears drag sound, which in this case I set it too loud, this is causing at high speed to feel too much wind, which can be tiring. I have pushed an update to market place which address this issue and some other sound improvements this week (13th- May-2022), my understanding is the update will be released to the market place this upcoming Thursday 16th of May. The update will also include other fixes and a new feature which allows user to switch their altimeter from IN to hPa as requested via my discord channel.
I continue to improve the aircraft pretty much weekly, mostly via feedback from customers. But there are things that will be implemented when SU10 comes out since I will get the opportunity to implement even more nice things I had on my road map that were not possible with SU9.
Thanks for everything,
Raul
I just purchased it several days ago and I am more than pleased! It's a cool aircraft and a great little island hopper too!
Ah well, I’m really glad you’re enjoying the S4, TBMDD; FSReborn certainly did a nice job with the aircraft! Happy flying and all the best : )
Looks like a fun plane fly and to "pull the chute" every now and again and again. I do like the tablet and all the settings so as we progress in our flight capabilities we can add more and more realism.
Like the Milviz 310, these two planes throw down the gauntlet for other developeers. Well done! !! !!!
Yeah, the S4 was good fun overall Mark. The chute might be too tempting to pull on occasion though haha.
It's great that we're seeing more and more aircraft with a persistent state / failure modelling, it really does drastically change the experience of the sim. A very impressive effort from FSReborn overall!
Thanks as always : )
Regarding the parachute : at least for German market every ultralight has to be equipped with this safety feature, independent of its stall characteristics
I'm still trying to figure out in what situation a parachute would be helpful. I guess only then when you are over terrain where you can't find a spot to put her down in a glide.
@@Quotenwagnerianer Explanation at 23:01
@@Quotenwagnerianer or your steering is not working..
Ahh, thanks very much for the information Pemigris! I did wonder if that might also have something to do with it (never actually knew that though to be fair). . .
The only aircraft I actually knew to be fitted with a parachute is the SR22 and I believe that is for spin recovery reasons.
Cheers and all the best : )
I gather some of these aircraft also aren't certified for IFR conditions. Someone else commented that it may be a requirement to pull the chute, in the event of an inadvertent entry into such conditions. . .
All the best! : )
So, I took the S4 over to my usual testing grounds of Goldendale, Washington, which is a great airport for winds and soaring IRL and has a complex variety of terrain close at hand (gorges, mountains, prairie). I found that it is a very jittery plane with turbulence, and part of that may be the actual airplane (I wouldn't know) but part of it I think is that it is making full use of the new MSFS CFD model, because I got very similar behavior in the 172 that ASOBO updated.
This is combined with the fact that MSFS has been tinkering with winds and turbulence a LOT. For example, they definitely dialed up turbulence after it was gone for a while, and they introduced updrafts and downdrafts in valleys for the ICON bush flying tutorials. But also I've noticed they've been trying to add other behaviors, like the turbulence you'll get flying low over trees. (Goldendale is a good place to test this, as the approach is normally about half over forests and half over open fields, and you'll notice the difference immediately in a light aircraft)
So I tested the S4 on some of this. First I went into the Columbia River gorge and tried drifting between calmer air in the middle and turbulent air on the updraft side. Then I tried flying over a series of ridges in the Cascade Foothills to get a feel for the wave compression. Then I climbed up to a higher altitude to try out some stalls. The result each time was that the plane dramatically mellowed out every time I moved into calm air. I also did some crosswind landings that were shall we say "marginal" according to the POH and it did not go particularly well. This may be the way the real airplane handles, but I am more inclined to think that it is more of an issue with the MSFS CFD model being young and still being dialed in, while interacting with a new turbulence model that is also young and still being dialed in. I feel many aircraft are too sedate even in what should be rough air, so it is refreshing that this doesn't have that problem, but I'm inclined to suspect the pendulum has swung too far the other way.
On the stalls it was honestly disappointing. Given the depth they put into the systems, the flight model doesn't seem as sophisticated as some of the others coming out. Key examples of MSFS behavior present in the S4:
First, I was able to get it into a spin, but it was an MSFS one, where you get the lack of aileron authority of a true spin, but the acceleration in airspeed of a spiral dive (this is because MSFS in general tends to exaggerate lift and struggles to simulate the loss of lift that causes a true spin) This means the plane recovers from a spin even if I'm intentionally doing all the wrong things, and I'm unable to induce a flat spin because at any time I can just pull back on the stick and fly out of the spin. Given the warnings in the POH about needing to use the parachute to escape a spin, I kind of suspect that this plane has much more aggressive spin characteristics than MSFS.
Second, it won't perform an accelerated stall. You can cut the power to idle, set the bank to 90 degrees and yank back the stick as hard as you want, and you will get a stall warning horn, but the airplane will oscillate around the horizon without dropping or even losing much altitude. This, once again, seems to be standard MSFS behavior with variation in wing loading not being terribly well simulated, and is probably related why you can't realistically fly on "knife edge" in the Sim.
Related to this, when I was testing dynamic stability for Dutch Roll, the rudder singlet really just skidded me a bit without getting any wing dip, and when i held the rudder long enough to get more bank, it didn't right itself. The former could be due to aircraft design, low wings that aren't swept won't manifest full dutch roll, but the later problem of not righting itself from a rudder bank is reflective of the fact that MSFS doesn't allow extra lift surfaces beyond the wings and horizontal stabilizers, so the vertical stabilizer can't generate lift in the sim as it would in life when the angle of bank heels over too far.
These three problems are all part of the sim and I don't really blame the dev for having them, but on the other hand, there are airplanes that actually have found ways to model them - the Black Box Cessna Birddog doesn't gain speed in a spin, the Carenado / Asobo Gee Bee will perform an accelerated stall, and quite a few aircraft, even some of the default aircraft, will demonstrate the self-righting behavior of tailplane lift in dutch roll.
On the other hand, I'm a pretty forgiving guy when it comes to flaws where other areas are excellent. Some planes seem to have fewer default MSFS flight model quirks, but none of them have a working BPRS, and I don't ding them for that. I feel like if an advanced plane covers most of the bases and then does something interesting, that's enough for me. It's a WILD improvement over the other Ultralight / LSA aircraft in the Sim, and I had been feeling like that was an area getting neglected with a lot of mods coming out that were just minor improvements on default aircraft, compared to the "in depth" planes coming out for GA and commercial.
Also, I've got to say, thanks for being one of the few IRL tubeliner pilots whose channel actually devotes a lot of time to the smaller and older planes in the sim. As someone who mainly likes GA and Vintage planes, it's great to have a place to see those planes get evaluated with the same technical and methodical precision that is normally given mostly to the airliners.
I am so loving the new turbulence in SU9!
Wow, well you've obviously been doing your homework Austin! ; )
I pretty much agree with all you have said there. I still have some questions regarding the flight model, but the issues clearly aren't there through a lack of effort (going off the quality of the rest of the aircraft). It must be incredibly hard for devs to get these sorts of things right, especially with the goalposts constantly moving (the tweaking if the turbulence modelling for example).
It may not be perfect, but I for one am a big fan of what Asobo is trying to do with the atmospheric effects modelling; MSFS does to tend fall apart a bit at the extremes of the flight envelope (as you mention above), but it "feels" (there's that word again haha) better than most sims when cruising around.
I'm sure the dev will continue to work on the aircraft and hats off to him for making the effort and using the new prop physics etc (I pinned a post he made on this video, if that's of any interest to you). I couldn't agree with you more, that a product need not be perfect in every respect to be enjoyable; a lot of people seem to conflate accuracy with quality and of course the two are not necessarily always mutual. I still think the S4 feels a little bit odd to fly at times (great at others though to be fair), but it is a quality product in almost every other respect and certainly a very enjoyable one either way!
Cheers : )
My absolute pleasure Austin!
It was always my dream to fly "the big jets", but I often wonder to myself why haha - I do miss the "real" flying. I'm not currently in the position to go off and enjoy what the GA world has to offer, so ironically (where once I used to spend all my time flying "study level" airlines in FSX etc) I continue to live vicariously through the sim haha.
Thanks as always! : )
A fantastic review and what a view of the sim from inside the cockpit of the Sting S4 lovely ickle plane x (oh and what a change from flying the Darkstar ha ha) Artful
Thanks very much Artful, glad you enjoyed it!
Yes, the view is definitely one of the big advantages of the S4 - a great little aircraft for sightseeing and a very nice effort from FSReborn overall. The little Sting is not quite the Darkstar. but it tries it's best : P
All the best! : )
I used to fly and maintain Stings, very fun aircraft to fly. We had a couple in our fleet and they both suffered nose gear to fuselage separations which sucked but they weren't really meant for the abuse as a daily trainer. We handled the U.S. Navy's initial flight screenings. Those young bucks could tear up some airplanes lol.
As always, great video and review. Thank you.
Haha, was it a straight pass if the student managed to separate the nosewheel then Lance - carrier landings and all that? XD
Yeah, the Sting doesn't look like it would hold up well to training (it does indeed look like good fun though). I had a similar experience at one of the flight schools I went to: The school ran trials on various aircraft to renew its fleet, all of the instructors said to go for the PA28 or the C172, but instead the school went for the DV20 (if memory serves me correctly). I don't think many of those airframes lasted nearly as long as they should have haha.
Glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks for sharing and all the best : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations They are fun no doubt! Thanks again.
Looks like another fun aircraft. Thr chute would probably keep me occupied for some amount of time! Thanks for another very enjoyable and informative prese!
Indeed Art, the S4 is good fun (albeit I’m not a massive fan of glass cockpits) and modelled very nicely by FSReborn. The parachute is a laugh and always there to get one out of trouble haha : P
Many thanks once again! : )
Thank for another great review! I have about 200 hrs in the Sting S3 and was very excited to see this model. Flight behavior was pretty realistic. LSA/ultralight aircraft air usually flown with two fingers on the stick and light rudder inputs. The stall buffet is dead on. The AC will spin. Recovery is a non event. The Gross weight for a US LSA is 1320 lbs, so convective turbulence will induce a little more bounce than a C172/PA28 below 2000ft AGL. XW landings require attention, but are not difficult. The only con, for me, is that the in-flight engine sounds are HORRIBLE. I wouldn’t fly a Rotax 912 powered AC if the engine sounded like that. Finally the wing tanks are missing the fuel fill ports.
Thanks very much for the info sir! Always good to get an opinion from someone "in the know".
I can imagine that an ultralight would indeed be quite sensitive to turbulence etc, but the way the aircraft responded to the bumps felt a little bit odd to me?
Haha, never flown anything with a Rotax myself. Was it just the internal sounds you didn't like, or the external sounds as well?
All the best : )
The interior sound. IRL the Rotax sounds like any smoothly running aircraft engine.
Very nice video, I was eagerly waiting for your review! Last year I flew as a passenger in a Pioneer 200, which seems quite similar to the Sting 4. The pilot allowed me to take the stick for most of our flight, and it was not twitchy at all. Being a very light plane, it was of course sensitive to movements of the air, but that moved the whole plane up or down but did not influence pitch very much. The Pioneer 200 also had a BRS, I think they are quite common in ultralights nowadays.
Thanks Volker!
Yes, I've never flown an ultralight myself, but what you're describing is more or less what I would have imagined. I have no issue with the aircraft moving around per se, but the movement didn't "feel" natural. Again, my opinions are purely conjecture regarding the flight model though.
All things considered, the S4 is still a very nice effort from FSReborn! An aircraft that I'm sure I will continue to enjoy flying : )
Enjoy the rest of your holiday!
I don't know to what extent MSFS models thermals. The S4 looks light enough to get buffeted flying over built-up areas on a hot day. Maybe that's what was happening.
I've never been in an S4, maybe it has amazing sound proofing, but that Rotax sounds rather quiet!
The twitchy flight could be realistic. Some ultralights are twitchy and not fantastically well harmonised. I can't tell if it's the "right" kind of twitchyness lol.
Great review as usual. If this gets a polish and some avionics options it's a definite buy.
sim update 10 will have thermals updated. On calm days like this they dont want rising thermal air to be shaking around your airplane. So it'll be tweaked by wind speeds as well. So 0 wind = smooth thermals = less turbulence.
It’s realistic.
Haha, well that's the tricky thing Roland; not having flown the S4 myself, I can only pontificate. It wasn't so much the movement itself that I took any issue with (as you say, the S4 looks like it could easily be a leaf in the wind), but the way the movement "felt" - it just didn't feel quite natural. At the end of the day though, that's obviously a very subjective opinion; everything I looked at objectively on the S4, was very impressive I have to say!
I gather FSReborn took the time to make full use of MSFS' new prop physics and CFD modelling (hats off to them for that), so it could just be a bit of a mismatch between the sim and its current turbulence modeling for sure.
Either way a very nice effort from the dev and a great little platform with the GTN750 / GTNXi fitted.
Cheers as always! : )
That's great to hear RRaven. The weather modelling in MSFS could still use some tweaking for sure, but it's already light years ahead of the competition and Asobo do seem to be finally ironing out some of the major creases.
Thanks for the info and all the best! : )
Love it ❤ Nice alternative Now we can land on those helipad lol!
Yeah, the S4 is a a nice little offering Steve - I'll be well impressed if you can manage to get one down on a helipad though haha! Sounds like quite a fun challenge, a bit like flour bombing XD
All the best! : )
The GTN 750 is my current favorite GPS unit. It's pretty rad. Gives me a cool window to use too.
Hi Drew,
Yeah, it’s a pretty great piece of kit and a big upgrade to the Sting overall. I’ve been making good use of the TDS GTNXi myself (in other aircraft) and intend to give it a go in the S4 at some point : )
Cheers and all the best!
I noticed the default DA40 likes to spin with full flaps, but not without. Easy to get into a spin by trying to lift the stalling wing with the ailerons that way. Maybe that's the case here as well?
Hi Leander,
Thanks very much for the pointer. The FSReborn dev actually posted a comment on the video; apparently it is actually very hard to get the aircraft into a spin in real life also (and very easy to recover thereafter). So it seems on that front, the aircraft's behaviour is pretty true to life.
Cheers and all the best! : )
Although I'm not a huge fan of the G1000, its implementation here looks a lot better and more customized compared to most or all of the default Asobo planes. The buttons are larger and better organized and easier to identify. And the plane in general looks super cute and fun, and the included maintenance features make it surprisingly "meaty" for a plane this size, as well as having a working parachute. 2022 has really been an amazing year for aircraft releases, I wish I could afford to support all of these talented developers. I'm especially looking forward to tomorrow's HondaJet release, which should be hitting the Marketplace at 10 am my time here in California.
Hi bwc,
Yes, these types of G1000 LSA's usually do very little for me, but I have to say that FSReborn did more than enough to make the aircraft very enjoyable! A really nice effort from them overall. 2022 has indeed been a pivotal year for the sim and it's great to see how far MSFS has come in the last few months. Surprisingly, most of the quality addons that we have seen coming into the sim, have been from small / relatively unknown devs like FSReborn - which is awesome!
Cheers and all the best : )
Looks like quite a decently modelled plane and the wear & tear and damage options are really cool. Ain't exactly keen on the aircraft itself though, I mean IRL. The virutal version does look like quite a splendid rendition of the real thing but these modern day ultra light/light sports planes all look very samey to me, same aerodynamic teardrop shape, same 3 glass panel layout, same or very similar Rotax engine and they all just merge into one for me and lack character. Still I might get this one down the road to see how often I burst the tyres on my usual heavy landings. I'm hoping we'll start seeing this kind of detail in older GA planes though sometime soon.
Denham airfield looks quite nice though, well it's to be expected from Burning Blue. Although I was hoping that after Bodmin they'd do some more small airfields around the country outside of the south east. I do most my flying in the UK over to the west but most devs seem to focus on the south east for smaller airports which is a bit of a shame. Variety is the spice of life!
Well ain't I Mr Negative today! Well your video was good! Also to be expected ;).
Fancy giving BRSimDesigns Ercoupe a review? I'm interested in it but never bought a plane from them before so a bit wary. It's a vintage plane so should be right up my alley but money is a bit tight and I wanna buy a number of planes now! The real plane is quite interesting as they designed it to be extremely safe and almost impossible to stall and I'm wondering if BRSim managed to model that. But no pressure, you do what you do and I'll be sure to watch whatever you upload!.
Cheers
I very much agree with you on the whole LSA thing, though credit to FSReborn, they actually did enough here to make me want to fly in again at some point (I'll just have to avoid the temptation of pulling the parachute XD)
Denham is indeed another very nice effort from Burning Blue. I've flown both down south and up north in the real world, so it would certainly be nice to see a more varied approach. That being said, some of my favorite airfields are down south, so keeping my fingers crossed for those haha (and hoping Burning blue don't commit treason again, with any more US airfields : P). I'm really hoping we'll see another UK2000 superhuman effort, covering the whole of the UK at some point - wouldn't that be great!
Regarding the Ercoupe; you aren't the only one to ask and never say never, but I can't see it happening any time soon I'm afraid. I think I've been devoting a bit too much time to UA-cam of late, the family might like to see me again at some point; so I'm planning on only covering the "big" releases / products I'm really interested in myself, for the foreseeable future (you may have noticed, I finally had my fill of Asobo flying boats haha) ; )
Cheers and all the best! : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Fair enough, your loved ones should always come first.
Speaking of flying boats the new SA.55 is actually quite nice. I was originally not going to purchase it but then decided why not and was pleasantly surprised that everything works as intended, it looks and sounds quite nice and flies pretty well too. I did have some issues but the dev of the plane actually responded in the official forum thread which makes a change to the past Local Legends releases and he explained away some of my issues such as being able to not restart the engine was due to the primitive APU type motorcycle engine needing to build up pressure or something first and also the compass is really quite odd, instead of just one needle pointing the way it has 3 needles with different numbers on them and correspond to different headings, like if the needle labelled 2 is pointing at 80 degrees you're actually flying at 280. It's quite strange but was apparently a popular compass briefly back in the day and it's quite nice to see that modelled. It looks like a lot of love and attention went into this by the dev so it's worth a punt I say!
In other release news: Flight Replicas released an L4 Grasshopper the other day which is basically just an army air force basic Cub. I'm a huge cub fan and also a fan of FR's cubs in FSX so I picked it up. Flies quite nice, really feels underpowered and can catch you out when going slow but the texture's ain't brilliant and the sounds are from the Savage Cub which uses a Rotax engine that's completely out of place.Also no Wwise stuff so old school sounds I did swap it out for the CAP10 which has something that sounds more appropriate though and some others have swapped it for the C152. The great repainter Jankees uploaded a couple of paints with the sound swapped out for the 152 as well making it easy to do so although I've not checked that out yet to compare with the CAP10 but will no doubt sound better than the Rotax.
Probably aint worth your time unless you're a fan of proper old school Cubs though but I'm having a bit of fun with it.
Oh yeah that motorcycle starter engine I briefly commented on in the S.55 is really quite a nice touch. As usual I didn't bother looking at the checklists and just went hunting around the cockpit for dials and switches whilst wondering why I couldn't start any engines but then tucked away on the right there's a bank of switches and one had the tooltip 'APU Starter' which I thought was quite a bit odd on a 1930s plane. I clicked it and then grinned when I heard the little motor put-puting away and then could start the main engines. Really cool little touch. The dev said it's a Garelli motorcycle engine that compresses air and charges up the battery for the starters to work.
There's no manual for it yet, well there is but as usual Microsoft are slow to upload it to their Local Legends documentation site. Probably has to clear through 10 levels of management and security or something obscene like that before it can be uploaded.
Clear Prop! I can`t get enough of this :p
Me too!
Haha, thanks Gus! Really happy to hear you're enjoying the content : )
Cheers Kiwi! Much appreciated : )
Thank you, a great review as usual Sir! I think this airframe Is a better alternative to the SWS RV-14 to be honest. Let me get my plastic out haha! Good care and happy flying.
Different missions…
@@a.osunaiv6124 For the price.
Hi ROA,
Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it / found it useful!
I haven't actually tried the RV-14 myself, so can't compare (although it looks good). I was certainly very impressed with the S4 overall though and I'm sure I'll be flying it again at some point.
Happy flying and all the best! : )
Thanks!
Purchased. Want to support FSReborn for detailed maintenance and wear and tear. As in real life - ultralight is probably not you want do a cross country flight for hours. Just find a paradise island and do a few patterns bumping around in turbulence. Pure fun. I had to reduce rudder sensivity. Such a great plane for a less than an hour flight, and you feel you own it.
Ah well that's great øystein, FSReborn certainly deserves the support!
Despite a few questions on the flight model, I really like the addon overall and it's one that I'm looking forward to taking out again when I get the chance. As you say, it feels like an aircraft that you own, with it's failure modelling, persistent state etc.
Enjoy! : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations Update. Flying a few more hours, and I am in love. The various autopilot options is excellent for longer flight. Highly recommended for all simmers.
From the few real-life CAPS rescues i've seen, the vertical speed is waaaay bigger than in this video. But the animation is very nice!
Hi Jean-Baptiste,
I’ve never seen one myself, but that doesn’t surprise me to hear. The ballistic parachute is obviously designed to keep the occupant alive and not much more from what I’ve read (having heard stories of broken bones etc on landing). I don’t know why FSReborn decided to go with a lower descent rate (perhaps it is in fact accurate to the Sting specifically) but as you say, the animation is very nice at the very least.
Cheers and all the best! : )
Am sure it's good, but is just another little composite low wing with Garmin dash...dime a dozen these days.
Yes, the S4 doesn't exactly "rock the MSFS boat", in terms of the flying option it offers. To be fair though, it is by far and away the best in its class : )
Cheers BG, all the best!
Very nice aircraft. I was waiting for a well done LSA aircraft. Hope to see much more of this kind in the future, eventually with steam gauges too because in flight school there are few well equipped ones. My favourite wolud be Tecnam P2008 or P2002, or some older ones, like Zenair CH 601 or the slippery MCR 01. 👍👍👍👍👍
Hi Antonio,
Well this is indeed a very nicely done LSA; overall one of the better aircraft in the sim currently I would say. I too would like to see some steam gauges though, never a big fan of the Garmin solutions (they're amazing in the real world, but not my cup of tea in the sim). I know that "Ant's Aeroplanes" made some nice LSA's for FSX / P3D - I expect he will be brining those into MSFS at some point (the Tiger Moth is next though!).
All the best! : )
Man, I'm interested in this plane but not sure how it will fit in with the SWS RV-14, which I don't fly enough as is. Seem to fill the same kind of role. That EFB is something else. The interior modelling and textures look amazing, as does the interior. Great review as usual.
Different aircraft for different missions. The RV-14 is faster and aerobatic.
Thanks very much M@!, glad you enjoyed the video!
I haven' tried the RV-14 myself, so I can't really compare the two. From what I have seen though, the S4 seems to offer more functionality overall. It's a really nice aircraft, but if LSA's aren't really your thing, I suspect this one may end up gathering dust as well. Still, it's not too expensive and it does offer rather a lot.
All the best! : )
You said that some aircraft are unable to recover from a spin and that's why they have ballistic parachutes. I don't think you could get an aircraft certificated in many countries if it was structurally incapable of stall spin recovery at altitude. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.
Unfortunately some aircraft are not designed for spins, due to how their empennage is set up. If the rudder is "blocked" by the horizontal stabiliser, if you think about the angle of attack of the airplane in a spin (coming from below going straight up), the rudder ends up in the stabilisers shadow. To recover from a spin, you would need to apply opposite rudder, but alas the rudder doesnt "bite" into the air, and recovery wont be possible. Unless the aircraft is somehow very nose heavy or has other characteristics that would allow it to recover from a spin by itself. I dont know why some planes are designed like this. The Cessna 152 and 172 for example have rudders that stick out beyond the stabiliser a little bit but not much, which is why you should keep elevator UP, and why its the last point in the PARE recovery technique, to give as much area to the rudder as possible when giving opposite rudder. The Extra 300 has its rudder sticking out beyond the stabiliser completely, giving it awesome controllability even when in a flat spin
So, ability to recover from spins isn't a "yes" or a "no" but exists on a spectrum. At least in the US, where I live, the FAA does have certain minimum standards for type certification of "normal" category aircraft. However, LSA aircraft in the US do not receive a normal type certification and have different standards. The European category of "ultralight" often overlaps with the US category of "LSA" but they don't totally match, so not all European "ultralights" can be certified as an LSA in the US. For example, the VL-3 in the sim has retractable gear, a constant speed propeller, and some v speeds that are too fast for LSA certification. As a result, what few VL-3s have made it to the US have had to get an "Experimental" certification. Kit airplanes like the Van's RV-14, the Zenith CH701, or the Kitfox STi, all of which are available in the sim, are also generally registered as Experimental, and thus not subject to the same standards as the "Normal" Type certification. As far as I can tell online, some Stings are registered as "Experimental" while some have been registered as LSA but the LSAs don't appear to be the model in the sim.
As to spin recovery, a lot of regulations go into restricting how likely an airplane is to go into a spin rather than how it recovers. For example, I don't expect many airliners could structurally survive a spin and mostly, they are certified based on protections like yaw dampers and complex ailerons designed to increase lateral dynamic stability so that even in stalls spins are unlikely. Most GA aircraft can recover from a spin mechanically, but are not certified for intentional spins because spins might cause structural damage that would make a plane dangerous to fly after spin recovery. Only airplanes certified for aerobatics can do intentional spins, and these are largely certified by their ability to withstand certain G forces, meaning that they can not only recover from a spin, but also be safe to fly afterwards. But there are still aircraft that may recover from a normal spin, but if the CG is too far aft, they can fall into an unrecoverable flat spin, where they are unable to get the nose down to properly recover. In this case I suppose a BPRS would be better than just plummeting to the earth, but I'm skeptical that a parachute could deploy without getting twisted if the plane was in a flat spin. I know very little about the whole ballistic parachute system technology, so maybe they've engineered a solution? Unrecoverable flat spins, it should be noted, are usually caused not by design flaws but by improper loading of the aircraft, with the CG too far aft. Looking at the weight and balance sheet for the sting, It seems like it is indeed possible to overload the baggage area and put the CG too far aft, so that might be part of the concern.
But, I should also note that the main place where the POH actually says the parachute should be considered as a first choice rather than a last choice is in recovery from a Spiral Dive after accidental flight into IMC. The aircraft is not certified for IFR/IMC even though it has a nifty glass cockpit, which means you can't really fly it IFR because the instrumentation you need isn't actually there. So in this case, I think the concern is that you can easily become disoriented in a spiral dive in IMC and you lose altitude and gain speed VERY quickly, raising the dual specters of CFIT and Overspeed. So I think their idea is that if you are lost in clouds and spiraling downward, pulling the parachute might be safer than trying to fly out of the dive by the seat of your pants.
In MSFS a spin and a spiral dive are improperly differentiated, and the result is that you might think of MSFS as actually having something more like a "Spin Dive" and exactly how one should respond to that is hard to say because it is a behavior unlike what you get in real life airplanes. Normally, in the sim, the "spin dive" gains speed and brings the nose up resulting in a sort of automatic recovery behavior, so I don't think too many simmers worry about it unless they are trying to do aerobatics.
Hi Mike,
It's certainly not my area of expertise but anecdotally, I understand that is why the SR-22 is fitted with a parachute (it is unrecoverable from a spin).
It seems Raphael and Austin probably know much more about this than me - I'm about to dive into their responses now haha.
All the best! : )
Thanks very much for the response Raphael, very interesting and very much appreciated! : )
An incredibly informative and interesting response as always Austin, thanks!
Like you, I don't know much about these parachute systems etc; until a week ago, I thought the system was more or less unique to the SR-22 haha. Someone else mentioned that apparently in Germany, it's actually mandatory for all LSA's to be fitted with a chute; so as is often the case, it seems these things vary from country to country. . .
All the best : )
the rescue system is really nicely modeled.
Very nicely indeed MZ! I was quite surprised to see the level of detail involved. I’d bet it’s quite an experience in VR haha!
All the best : )
How did you get the control stick out of the way so you could access the very very tiny iPad?
Hi AV8R,
I didn't; I actually moved the camera around it haha. Didn't actually try removing the joystick to be fair (it sounds like it's not possible from what you're saying though?). I know the dev is already working on an update, so maybe that functionality will be added as part of it (if enough users gave feedback on the issue).
All the best! : )
That startup sound puts me right off. I feel that if the developers haven't put in the time to make that moment perfect then their priorities don't match with mine. Thanks for the review though!
Agree with ya. It reminds me of a Piper Thomahawk with a lawn-mower engine.
Hi pgtrots,
Yes, the startup was a little bit odd. Holding down the key seemed to repeat the startup animation over and over again. I suspect had I just clicked on the key, it might have behaved a little bit more reasonably. I have to say, I think the dev has done a nice job with the aircraft overall though, so hopefully the startup will be refined at some point.
My pleasure on the review - I'm glad it told you what you need to know. All the best! : )
Good video ☝🏽 sorry could you tell mr where is the parking breaks ? Please
Hi Kdb,
I'm not sure if the aircraft has one actually. I didn't check exhaustively, but it seemed to be a case of either using the chocks, or holding the aircraft on the brakes (that's what the checklist seemed to suggest as well).
I hope that helps. All the best! : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations thank you. Yes i have seen no parking break really but the msfs key works (ctrl ;)
What would you prefer? 310 or S4?
As much as I enjoy the S4 Richard, I’d definitely recommend the 310 overall. The C310 is a deeper, richer simulation, the aircraft has more features / configuration options and behaves a little more convincingly overall. Further to that (although it’s just a personal preference), I prefer the steam gauges of the C310, over the G1000 of the S4.
I hope that helps a little. All the best! : )
I think you need to take this one out for another run. The flight model is pretty good, although it does not like a crosswind
Hi Mike,
I undoubtedly will at some point! Don't get me wrong, I really like the S4 overall and maybe I was just unlucky with the climatic conditions, but the way it was bobbing around in (what I presume was) the turbulence, really didn't feel very natural to me and the aircraft did feel a little sensitive in pitch in general (the same for the crosswinds).
As I always say, it's only conjecture on my part (not having flown the aircraft), so I'm happy to admit that I could well be wrong in my assertions. I'm sure FSReborn will continue to work on the aircraft (and hats off to them for making full use of the new prop / CFD physics) and I'm actually looking forward to taking it for another spin when I get the chance either way.
Cheers and all the best! : )
Do you use reshade or nividia freestyle, and if so wich settings? Your sim look amazing!
Hi Kieron,
I don't use much of anything really. I do occasionally bump up the brightness, or decrease the "warmth" of the sim a little bit, using the in-game Nvidia tools, but for the most part I think it's down to choosing a decent time of day / weather setting. That can make a huge difference in the sim - in stark lighting conditions, the sim often doesn't look that great.
I hope that helps a little and I'm glad you think the sim is looking good in the videos! All the best : )
in sim modeling more dangerous spin very close to flat, but not too easy drop ac to that situation, just need add some aileron opposite spin direction, and never do that under 10k or better 20k:) and i think that chute better to be use same as emergency landing, found some big field if alt is enough for that but not enough for landing good, then at 1k use this. because the more ac at chute the more chance it landing somewhere on buildings or trees or even the rope will break. but i don't sure for sure :)
Cheers Einherz!
Yeah for sure in an ideal situation, you want to be deploying the chute away from densely populated areas, high terrain etc; this was just a bit of a demo, but landing in a row of trees certainly wouldn't be ideal XD
All the best! : )
.. and.. Course knob doesn’t work !? Thx
Yes. Well, I expect the course knob works, but as the HSI is in GPS nav by default, the course can't be changed. I couldn't find how to get the HSI into conventional nav myself, but I'd be surprised if there isn't some sort of method that I missed.
Sorry I can't be of more help on that one! All the best : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations > i have quit gps mood on the gtn750 and it works
I am still on the fence which aircraft to buy either this or the Milvis 310 thoughts what to get?
Hi Chinook,
For me that's an easy one - MILVIZ 310 all the way! Whilst the Sting is excellent, the 310 has it beat in most categories. They are of course quite different aircraft types and that may influence your personal decision, but if you aren't too fussed either way about that, then I think you will be very happy with the 310 : )
I hope that helps. All the best!
Thinking about trying out one of these flight sims. Do they have any helicopters in this game?
Hi Mr B,
MSFS doesn't currently natively support helicopters, though there are a couple of 3rd party options out there (and natively helicopter support should be added in the future):
ua-cam.com/video/neZqbcEfZ4Y/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/piGG7F2HW6w/v-deo.html
The flight modelling physics for rotary aircraft are "ok" at the moment; other sims (namely X-Plane and DCS) do it much better, but then they aren't perhaps quite as good graphically and don't have the same level of open world to explore.
I hope that helps a little. All the best! : )
Very cool thanks ✅✌🏼
Thanks very much Kimberly, glad you enjoyed it! My pleasure and all the best : )
After all that you cut away from the parachute landing 😭 lol
Haha - I didn't even think about it to be honest Jay. I was so busy being impressed by the parachute, it never even occurred to me that the landing might be all wonky ha. I don't know though, I just didn't fancy showing a "crash".
All the best : )
Thank you for this video. Interesting spin characteristics. In real life I would pass on the parachute, other than night flying in mountains and and expecting an engine out if a pilot needs a parachute he or she needs to give up flying.
My pleasure ZZ!
Yeah, I'm not too sure about the whole parachute thing. Better to have than not in theory I suppose, but I gather these sorts of aircraft do tend to have higher accident rates, presumably in part because the pilot pushes things, thinking he has a "get out of jail free card". As I mentioned during the video, some aircraft do require a parachute due to their inability to recover from a spin etc (the SR22 for example), so fair enough in those sorts of instances I suppose.
Still, it's good fun to try in the sim haha!
All the best : )
Does anyone know, why the magneto check procedure always is: B-L-B-R-B ?
Why is B-L-R-B not okay?
Hello Breenild,
Good question. I don’t know if these are the only reasons but, as I understand it 1) returning to both (should) regain the engine rpm and therefore helps to burn off any fouling from the set of mags that was selected off (ahead of testing that particular mag) and 2) you’re returning to a known datum, so you can more accurately confirm the drop and differential between the two mag systems.
I hope that helps a little? All the best : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations thank you very much!
Your reason 1 sounds very obvious!
My pleasure! Cheers : )
why didnt i think of that! Skydiving!
Haha, exactly! Someone else suggested trying to get the aircraft down on a helipad - sounds like a fun challenge XD
All the best!
Where are the brakes on this thing. The bottom I always use doesn’t work.
Hi Gary,
Do you mean the parking brake? The aircraft doesn’t have one I don’t believe (there is no mention of it in any checklists). I just hold the aircraft on the toe brakes as required.
I hope that clarifies things. All the best!
@@IntotheBlueSimulations thanks
You’re welcome! : )
Insane graphics and very well done Video! what are the specs of you PC?
Thanks very much Daffy, really glad you enjoyed it!
PC specs are in the video description : )
All the best!
💸💸💸 thank you and take care😁
Haha, thank you sir! Enjoy the S4 -it's a great little aeroplane : )
Is the plane free?
No. It is $25 on the Marketplace in the simulator.
I'm afraid not Mikael (as Austin details).
All the best!
@@IntotheBlueSimulations hi,can you make please the new landing challenge skyline it’s the hardest challenge I can’t land with this plane
Wow, I thought flight simulator looked good on my Xbox series X, this looks bloody amazing!
Haha, thanks Diddles, glad you think so! I often try and structure the flight to bring out the best in the sim, choosing decent weather and a nice time of day etc.
I always think the sim looks great on the console though haha. You guys get 4K (sort of) right (which is more than I can manage)?
All the best : )
4 stars I'd had gone 5 if they had a livery or option for NO WINDOW TINT!
Hi Ron,
I believe that is actually an option that will be included in the next update : )
All the best!
Still HATES the G500 TXi implemented in MSFS, and there's no mod for the G500 like the WT G1000 mod
There's no mod JRO, but in the S4 the G500 can be replaced with the PMS GNT750 / TDS GTNXi. There is of course a freeware version of the PMS unit, so one can turn the S4 into a really nice platform overall : )
All the best!
Hi there 🤓
Hi ST! Long time no see - I hope you're well? : )
@@IntotheBlueSimulations ☺️
Brace yourself Swiss001 sighting
Haha, I could indeed imagine this being right up his street Brandon! XD