View Full Version : Just Flight FS 2004 Lancaster review

09-01-2006, 06:31 PM
Just bought and downloaded the new Just Flight Lancaster.

The good news: The download, net verification, and installation were flawless and quick.

The bad news: Everything else. This FS 2004 add-on is truly terrible. Even the "free" inclusion of a Mosquito does not save it. The plane detail is poor, perhaps not even as good as many of the included FS2004 planes. The 2D cokpit is generic, full of fraggies, and is simply boring.

The 3D cockpit? Well, there is none. The 3D cockpit is an interior view twenty feet back of the right hand seat. At 4X zoom, you can almost use it as a 3D cockpit, but it still looks poor. The interior plane graphics range from poor to nice. Nothing better.

The sound is weak and un-Merlinish in every way. I had sound file DLs for CFS1 of Merlin engines that would knock your socks off. The Lancaster sounds in this add-on are not nearly as good as those seven year old files.

The plane flies well enough, so does the Mosquito, but both are so poorly done there is little joy in flying them at all. Very sad.

Compared to other new FS2004 add-ons, the Lancaster is a disaster. One star out of five. And for $45, nothing more than a rip off. This is FS98 detail at premium FS2004 prices. What a bummer!

09-01-2006, 06:54 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

09-01-2006, 07:11 PM
Dont act so surprised http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

Black Sheep
09-01-2006, 07:13 PM
Damn shame, I was toying with the idea of picking this up - thanks for the warning http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

09-01-2006, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
Dont act so surprised http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

Why not?

This is not the first FS2004 add-on I've purchased, but it is surely the poorest.

09-01-2006, 07:46 PM
I got it within minutes of release. If I had to chose between it and the superb Plane Design Lanc set, I'd chose the PD. Just Flight gave all the variants the Dambuster spotlights, the Mk IIs lack dorsal turrets, every version has the late-war paddle props (even the prototype!)---see the Just Flight General Discussion forum for a list that goes on and on. The strong points, a fully detailed bombardier's station, W/OP station, navigator's station, and front turret are buggered because they are just for decoration---nothing works. Furthermore, if you use these features, you start back at the W/OP's position and, if you try to go forward to the pilot's dais, or the bombardier's station on some of the versions, you hit an invisible wall and can't go forward. The engines spew black smoke if you keep them firewalled---nice. You can drop bombs---but to do so you have to go on autopilot and go to the bombardier's station in the nose to press the button---no, there is no way to release the bombs in the cockpit. Ironically, they have the bomb jettison tee on the instrument panel, and you can click it out, but nothing happens. This was done by Aeroplane Heaven for Just Flight. I am not happy. One thing that is particularly nice---they beautifully got the colors made by the oil on the canopy. The weathering is good on some versions. The Mosquito Mk IV in PFF markings is a taster of a forthcoming Mosquito set. It is OK.

09-01-2006, 08:03 PM
If you want a decent Lancaster for FS2004 get the shockwave wings of power addon, pretty nice all around.

09-01-2006, 09:22 PM
Right, staticline, it probably has the best flight model of all the Lanc flight sims plus it comes with B-17s, B-24s, and a B-29, among others---a huge bargain. From a purely aesthetic and Lanc nut point of view, I like the Plane Design Lanc set best. I am crazy about their Mk II with the Hercules engines.

09-02-2006, 01:14 AM
Thanks guys - you have saved me some money here, but I am sad about you having to cough up cash to find out.

09-02-2006, 01:35 AM
With the advertising they did, there was no way I was going to pass it up. Another thing, Just Flight is hurridly making a patch to correct a great number of errors---maybe in a few weeks it will be great, never know. Suggest following the feedback on the Just Flight forums (it is under the General Discussion main heading).

09-02-2006, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
With the advertising they did, there was no way I was going to pass it up. Another thing, Just Flight is hurridly making a patch to correct a great number of errors---maybe in a few weeks it will be great, never know. Suggest following the feedback on the Just Flight forums (it is under the General Discussion main heading).

I'll check that out. Thanks.

Seems they have a return policy. If so, I'll swap for a 172 or something. I know those are well done. Or wait for the patch you mention.

09-02-2006, 03:33 AM
Might be worth the wait - they had to patch their Spitfire collection. Big patches too. Mainly textures from what I can see, though they lost the nice prop effect somewhere along the line. That being said, you shouldn't have to wait for this sort of stuff from a self-appointed leading payware firm.

09-02-2006, 04:29 AM
Well, seems I'm a bit of a dummy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

I found the 3D cockpit (thank God), seems not all planes have it. It's not that great, but it's ok. My second impression is certainly better than the first, but I still find the plane very poorly detailed. I guess I was expecting a level of detail for the Just Flight Lancaster as the Captain Sim C130 had. The Lancaster does not compare to the C-130 in any way. The lancaster needs a hi-res skin job something fierce! New sound files as well.

I apologise for posting too fast with such a negative review.

(Mind you, I still can't get the landing gear down. Yeesh!)

09-02-2006, 05:00 AM
FS has in my opinion infact conned people for years, making people belive there has been vast improvements in different fields. (I don't think this statement is too wrong although strong)

I bought most versions hoping for improvements everytime, especially in graphics and feeling of flight but everytime I realise that I've been fooled, again.
the best graphics are not so good at all, but requires almost the double power compared to PF.

I wanted to fly the civil planes and helicopters but the feeling is too arcade while I get more real life feeling from PF. (I'm not a real pilot but I have flown a little. and can tell atleast that)

The small improvements that has been done in FS the last 10 years have seemingly been done or initiated by the community for most part.
I don't trust the guys behind it anymore.
There is more to a flight simulation than working gauges and an ok cockpit. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

The new FS-X promises a lot but my intuition tells me I'll get dissapointed once again.
They have roaming animals in africa, birds and moving ground traffic and big forests, BUT the clips are short and one can infact notice and recognise the stutters, even on their high-end computers.
I belive thats why the clips are short so one cant tell for sure.
I strongly suspect that all the mid-end users will have to cut the eyecandy back to crappy-level.

A faithful but dissapointed customer.
No one would be happier than me if I'm wrong in my asumption, but
experience tells me otherwise.

09-02-2006, 05:27 AM

I feel your pain. But in some areas there have been improvements, even if only in allowing better add-ons to be made for each version.

If you install better sky and lighting textures, load up a good add-on plane and fly into some good add-on scenery, the effect is great. Nice sensations of speed and flight and necessity of proper control. You can get those moments of total immersion and that's what it's all about.

Granted, all this takes add-ons, but what other option is there? As imperfect as the FS series is, nothing else can do what it can.

*But I'd still sell my grandma's kidney for a really good IL2 Lancaster. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

09-02-2006, 05:29 AM
I'll be stickin' with IL2aepPFs it does exactly what it says on the tin.

Would dearly love the Lancaster and MkXIV though but our Mossie is kewl.

09-02-2006, 05:40 AM
It sucks that it sucks.


09-02-2006, 05:40 AM
I can't get on the trash Microsoft wagon (I was on it for years) because FS9 lets me fly bombers and exotic aircraft we will never see from Maddox and others (barring a frigging miracle). Not only that, some of the flight models, like the Cloud 9 F-104 are just absolutely phenomenal. The Active Sky and Ultimate Terrain is just icing on the cake. What I want to do is fly a long time through the clouds in a lumbering, old Whitley, or a Lanc, or belt through the sky in an F-104. By the way, I've discovered to my surprise that using the Microsoft Sidewinder 2 FF stick with FS9 bumps the FMs up to Maddox levels (just got one recently).

If you really want a Lanc, I can't recommend Plane Design's set enough.

09-02-2006, 05:53 AM
I'm a little disapointed with it. It seems more like 25 worth of freeware at the moment. It really feels like its un-finished & rushed.
Hopefully they will get it sorted. If not justflight will have no more of my cash again.

Shockwaves Wings of Power walks all over it.

09-02-2006, 06:10 AM
How can I phrase this........hmmmm....


$45 for "A" plane, a "combat" plane, that has no combat, most of it doesn't work, that is a bomber, but doesn't bomb, etc..

Yet $17 for what has thus far been the most minimal addon ever that gives you 5 planes, that all work, plus loads of other items, and can interact as a combat plane should is railed on by a community, that begged and pleaded for it, demanded and threatened.....Then when they got it raised a bigger stink then greatgrandma on a fiber and prune juice diet.....

Yes, by all means Oleg, give us the Lancaster and in that it will work, can interact, and so on charge $150 for that single plane add on as it has just been proven the community at large doesn't know a deal when it see's it and wants to get ripped off. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif In fact, forget BoB and just put out single plane add-ons, it looks like a much more lucrative market then entire sims....http://www.babesandstuff.com/forum/images/smilies/2thumbs.gif http://www.babesandstuff.com/forum/images/smilies/2thumbs.gif http://www.babesandstuff.com/forum/images/smilies/2thumbs.gif

*Curtsies, then backflips off the soapbox, moonwalking into the sunset, stage left*

09-02-2006, 06:20 AM
In a word, correct.

09-02-2006, 06:21 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

09-02-2006, 06:25 AM

09-02-2006, 06:35 AM
Kuna, where are you? I need you to help me with your

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">"This thread is worthless without pics" </span>


09-02-2006, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
How can I phrase this........hmmmm....


$45 for "A" plane, a "combat" plane, that has no combat, most of it doesn't work, that is a bomber, but doesn't bomb, etc..

I agree, $45 for a plane is a lot, but what price fun?

I've paid $15 for a magazine that lasted a few hours. $25 for a book that lasted a few days. $35 (and more) for a game I played through once. So who is to say what's what?

I've paid for some add-ons that were fantastic and that I fly with several times a week. Like I said, if I'm having fun and the cost works out into the one to two dollar an hour range (or less) in the long run, what's wrong with that?

Of course, if it simply makes you feel good to laugh at others, be my guest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

09-02-2006, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by tigertalon:
Kuna, where are you? I need you to help me with your

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">"This thread is worthless without pics" </span>


Good point.
The detail ain't that great at all. Smudgy and generic.

2D cockpit. Not great either.

3D bomber station on some models but no 3D cockpit. Very odd.

Compare any of those with the gorgeous C-130 or F-104 works of art and the Just Flight lancaster falls well short.

09-02-2006, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by Beirut:
........Of course, if it simply makes you feel good to laugh at others, be my guest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Actually having been around these forums for some time as I can tell from your date of membership hopefully you realize I'm NOT laughing at you, or even those in this thread, or even the MSFS community........

YET, am openly, and hopefully cruelly taunting the many "IL2FB/PF" players that have been posting here and generating 100's of threads slamming the PE2 add-on.

Frankly it aggitates me at how many slam the very sim that gives them so many fulfilling hours of enjoyment for very little money compared to most others.....The quality or at least effort at of this sim clearly shown as well........

Value, for roughly the same $45 you laid out for the Lancaster which is not near what you had hoped for you can own the entire IL2/AEP/PF/PE2 series, plus all the great additions made by the very talented players here. http://shop.ubi.com/Prod_ExtDesc.asp?catalogid=396&id=97 ..........YET, we have a rediculously large contingent of members who think they're getting ripped off.

So no hon, not laughing at you or your disappontment......Yet using your experience to slam hard on those so ungrateful participating in this sim......I find their gripes pathetic....Yours clearly warrented. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Sorry to pull your thread OT.

09-02-2006, 09:30 AM
LEBillfish, Thank you for that.

I am not, nor have ever been, an "Oleg ripped me off" person. I think IL2 is great and I've always been very, very thankful for the free add-ons, maps and planes et al. I think IL2 is fantastic. I also think MS FS2004 is fantastic.

All I care about is having fun and flying. Too bad there are a few bumps along the cloudway sometimes.

09-02-2006, 09:51 AM
BillFish, I think you're confusing people that think they got ripped off with people who simply don't care for the content Oleg has put out. It's a case of likes and dislikes rather than rip-me-offs. Both types of people exist, but if you filter out the latter, then the number of malcontents isn't really that astounding.

09-02-2006, 09:59 AM
I quite like the add on by Shockwave for CFS3 (not currently on my drive at the moment) with the Lancaster. Except that the bombing controls in all CFS3 are rubbish. Plus there seems to be a bug. On long missions I may not necessarily have time to fly a Lancaster all the way to Berlin and would like to use the CFS3 'skip to next action' feature, but with the Lancaster it tends to crash CFS3 halfway to the target, so I've never actually done a mission in the Shockwave Lancaster in CFS3.\

Off topic a little: Any good Halifax or Stirling models for CFS3 or FS2004?

09-02-2006, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
BillFish, I think you're confusing people that think they got ripped off with people who simply don't care for the content Oleg has put out. It's a case of likes and dislikes rather than rip-me-offs. Both types of people exist, but if you filter out the latter, then the number of malcontents isn't really that astounding.

No, I'm not........I don't give two hoots about the italian planes as an example yet are grateful for them, in kind really the PE2 though did ask for it long ago as it was very appropriate and needed. Heck, 75% of the planes here i've not flown, but am glad to have them.

As far as the PE2 add-on went, those planes were begged for and griped about since FB came out by more people then I could ever count and in as many threads.......Yet since people were so spoiled with all the free content, they thought that simply by whining, griping, and stomping their foot that suddenly a business would roll over and give it to them for free.

It's not about buying a particular plane set or I'd of bought nothing since FB on having just started to fly the P47 only, and had only a fleeting curiousity about the PE2, no desire to fly it now focussed on IJAFC planes......."It's about buying to fly the simulation in all its glory"....Yet instead of some lame pay to play ploy we get content for dollars and a heck of a lot of it, most of it free really.

Hence posting in this thread, and look at how all talk about the expense elsewhere, and what you get for it......Shoot, if Maddox games sold content like was described above it wouldn't be a now $47 sim to have it all it would be a thousands of dollars sim.

Content is a lame excuse to cover the truth.....The option to pick and choose clearly shown through the example in this thread....pshawwww.....Buy one plane at the cost of our entire sim that doesn't do 1/10th of what it should and cannot be enjoyed in the role it was meant to play.

Fine, push for that method of play. We're getting the best deal here I've seen on any software, heck, just about anything.

I'll stand by my statements with absolute resolve.

Beirut was point blank ripped off.........As far as this sim goes I never have been.

09-02-2006, 11:19 AM
That F-104's a beaut. LF_Mk_Vb posted some smashing shots of the F-86 a few months ago. There're some fantastic looking aircraft out there for the MS Flight Sims.

09-02-2006, 12:09 PM
Ah, but there's the rub, old chum. That Sabre was freeware. There are - as you so rightly noted - some great add-ons for FS9. Unfortunately, there's an awful lot of, er, how can I put it? not quite so good stuff to wade through. It's a case of 'vive la difference' with M$ and IC Maddox. I'm glad that the big O is in charge of things with FB/PF (Level playing field and all that), and I'm happy that I can fly a Whitley in FS9. (If you're that interested I can post a screenie when I've sobered up, just let me know) There's room for both. Trust me. What annoys me is paying hard earned cash for sub-standard stuff when people like Kirk Olssen are putting an obvious amount of hard work in for free. Justflight take note.

The following aircraft didn't cost me a penny. Just my two BoB's worth.








09-02-2006, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Black Sheep:
Damn shame, I was toying with the idea of picking this up - thanks for the warning http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Yeah me too, thanks for the heads up.

09-02-2006, 01:54 PM
Love the Sabre LF. I just love that jet, If 1C goes to Korea I'll be right with them. That Seafire's glorious looking too, incredible metal effects. How's the FMs?

09-02-2006, 02:19 PM
I'm no expert, but all seems cool to me (must admit I got a Sabre soundpack to finish things off (but to be fair Mr Olssen steers you towards it in his readme) I've said before, it takes something special to get me interested in jets - this guy's done a good job on me.

Check his stuff out at Simviation, kids. His F-16 Viper is the dog's doo-dahs if you've got a passing interest in such things (Me into jets again - whatever next?). And the Sabre comes in the following flavours (more available from other skinners, but 'out of the - free - box' - well, what can I say?):


The Reflective texture Seafire is from Aeroplane Heaven BTW - some nice freebies on their site.

09-02-2006, 04:03 PM
The redoubtable fish is right---FS9 can be expensive and the add-ons sometimes are busts. The inability to blow the h--l out things is less a concern because I like RAF mediums and heavies from WWII and the deal with them was navigation and long flights out of formation in the dark through all kinds of weather; thus, the challenge was 90% flying---right up good old FS9's alley. Learning to fly a man-slaying monster like the F-104 with a no-compromise FM like Cloud 9's is a great deal of fun. I don't give a hoot in h--l for online brawling---it is a matter of what you want from the simulators. With FS9 you can largely make it what you want---down to details of terrain, clouds, sea, model textures, or whatever. Rumors are that FSX has provision for combat---if so, Microsoft will have eliminated the artificial wall between intensive simulators and combat simulators. Rather than groaning over the myriads of planes I'll never see from Maddox I'm happily flying them with FS9---if we can get combat in FSX, all the better.

09-04-2006, 10:34 AM
Well, I applied for a refund and the customer service people at Just Flight were very friendly and helpful and said they indeed had a money back guarantee which they will honour.

Too bad though, I really would have liked the Lancaster had it been (much) better quality.

The End.

09-04-2006, 11:07 AM
I'm very tempted to cross to the darkside and invest in Microsoft's flight simulator after looking at LF's shots. It looks great and there do seem to be alot of flavours to chose from, so to speak.

09-04-2006, 11:10 AM
Phew glad I didn't rush out and buy it.

If you are going to buy an add-on for FS then find at least two reviews that rave about it and check out the forums for the product.

Granted you have to wait a week or two following release but it's better safe than sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Avsim always provide great reviews and always look at the good stuff that's been released.


Here's one of a recently released B17:


09-04-2006, 11:18 AM
Beirut, do you happen to have screenies of that 104's cockpit? could you post some here please?

09-04-2006, 02:28 PM
My pleasure.



2D (Which I fly with about as often as I fly with my feet.)

I like this plane a lot. Very, very fast, a real rocket, handles like a brick with razor blades for wings, but it's a blast to cruise around in, very heavy response on my MS FFB2, and without a shadow of a doubt the hardest plane to land I've ever had. But is it ever gorgeous. Look at that detail! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

09-04-2006, 02:46 PM


09-04-2006, 03:41 PM
wow thanks a lot you 2... the pit looks awesome! I might have to get that plane now. Even modelled the rear pit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

09-04-2006, 04:59 PM
I have both the Captain Sim and the Cloud9 104s. The former is a bit prettier but the latter has the details of flying the 104 down like no other flight sim I've ever used. You have to, literally, fly by the 104's book. Go too fast on take off and you blow your tires and crash. Pull up too steeply on climb out and you hear three bangs and your engine cuts. Shows you the many ways you could be killed by that airplane. Having written that, it also is a huge kick to fly---truly "a missile with a man in it."


09-04-2006, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by mrsiCkstar:
wow thanks a lot you 2... the pit looks awesome! I might have to get that plane now. Even modelled the rear pit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

Actually it doesn't model the rear pit. It's a 3D view over a blank pit. The front pit is 2D only. But the single seater is full 2D & 3D.

The Captain Sim planes are really gorgeous and done is exquisite detail. Leitmotiv might be right about the FM though.

09-05-2006, 12:21 AM
They both are terrific but Cloud9's a bear to fly, and I suspect it wins the contest for fidelity to the real thing. Reminded me of learning the I-16---it's great within its narrow parameters but if you leave them, you're Spam in a can.

09-05-2006, 03:04 AM
No surprise that plane had such a high accident rate then. BTW anyone of you tried the Captainsim Mig-21 that is a plane I have been contemplating...

09-05-2006, 03:29 AM
Have contemplated several times, joeap, but not keen on it since it doesn't have the single seater. Cloud9 just released a German Phantom II which looks absolutely fantastic. Presently I am learning the 104 and seething over busted Lancaster expectations. This is probably crazy, but do you happen to know of any way to turn off the lights on FS9? I thought ULT TERRAIN had a feature that allowed this, but you can only turn out some lights.

09-05-2006, 10:08 AM
Getting back to Just Flight, its not unusual for them to produce such poor quality. The Spitfire pack that they released was equally poor. In fact if you look in their Spitfire forum, you can still see the posts that I made complaining about the quality. Despite posting photographic evidence that their skins were grossly incorrect, they denied that the faults existed and even said the photo's were wrong!!

There were also many inaccuracies with the plane models too, which I also pointed out. The JF fanboys called me a "rivet counter"! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

It seemed that I was out of order to expect a high quality product for 30 and "how dare I complain as JF were doing a splendid job and who looks at the skins anyway"

I would be happy paying 30 for a Spit or Lanc of similar quality to the F104/F86 in the above screenies, but JF have to realise that if they are going to charge these high prices for add ons, they need to be as good as or better than the best freeware aircraft available.

Just Flight are great at hyping their products up prior to release, but usually the are high in content but low on quality. Avoid if possible, but if you buy and dont like, do ask for your money back. If enough people do that they might get the message and improve their standards.

09-05-2006, 11:24 AM
Right, hunhunter-texas. That's a very pretty Stirling---did you do a FS9 add-on for it?

09-05-2006, 04:11 PM
hunhunter-texas, doens't just flight sell stuff made by other companies?? I know they have sold stuff by PSS and Captainsim for example which are pretty good quality. I agree you have to be careful though.

09-05-2006, 04:23 PM
Unlucky... wasn't there a review on avsim?

wrt FS2004 addons.. i bought phoenix-sim A320 pack and loved it. The FMC was a pain to learn, but it roxord.

Really the best fs2004 addons take the original sim to places the creators don't envisage.
I've always been dissapointed how FS didn't include a weather radar, but Xplane did... that's a fantastic feature.

09-05-2006, 07:09 PM
Leitmotiv, the Stirling is an FS2004 freeware model. I downloaded it mainly out of curiosity and whilst it looks ok on the outside, the cockpit was a bit disapointing. Made a good screenshot though.

Joeap, I am no expert on Just Flight but I have bought some of their products. Both the Spitfire & Lanc add on's were made for them by aeroplane heaven.

If you want an idea of how bad the Spitfire add on is, check out the screenshots of two stock JF spitfires in this thread...


The guy that posted them thinks they're fantastic! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Just Flights Flying Club add on was also garbage but I cant recall who made it for them.

09-05-2006, 08:37 PM
Thanks, hunhunter-texas---that's the one I have.

09-15-2006, 01:36 PM
Sorry to bring a dead thread back, but this had to be posted.

I asked for a refund from Just Flight because of the poor quality of the Lancaster Add-On and true to their money-back-guarantee word they gave me the refund. Their customer service was very good, efficient, and friendly.

Hats off to Just Flight. I wouldn't hesitate to do business with them again. (Just have to read the product reviews first next time.)

09-15-2006, 01:45 PM
Just Flight's Fair Deal policy is really good, as is their support. On the strength of that, I've decided to keep my "Lancaster" and see what the patch has to offer. It's almost there as far as I'm concerned. My problem is with the manual start up in the VC. I just can't get the engines to catch. I could in the Wings of Power and Plane Design models.
Best regards.

09-15-2006, 02:51 PM
Now I use it only for the Mosquito IV.

09-16-2006, 10:22 AM
So if you had to chose would you get the Shockwave model or the PlaneDesign model...which is the best ( readhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gifhotorealistic) of these two?

09-26-2006, 11:18 AM
What is most disapointing is the review that has recently been published at http://www.ausflightsim.net/article293.html http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

This reviewer gives it a 10/10 and raves about how realistic it is etc.

It anoys me to see raving reviews on a product that are simply misleading, I understand that reviewer may in some way feel ablidged to give an encouraging report in the hope of future oportunities but a reviewer can still highlight the good points of a product and perhaps playdown some of it shortfalls while still maintaining some integrity.