I love the Aerosoft Cheyenne....it has always stood out as one of the more realistic planes I have in FSX. It's a great plane to have and to learn to fly. However, I have a question: Does the REAL Cheyenne fly with the same characteristics like the "slow spooling up and very slow spooling down" that are so powerfully evident in the FSX model? Sometimes it's hard to slow down sufficiently to land when doing some short-hop GA flying. The LAG from throttle application to full power and de-throttle lag are somewhat difficult to control. I love the challenge and I absolutely enjoy the flight model and visual accuracy. I just don't have any other plane, turboprop or whatever, that has such a lagging powerplant.Do you know what I mean?

From what I have read, that is characteristic of turboprops, some jets are the same. it takes a while to spool up and down, which means you have to think ahead, Makes it fun though.

It's still my favorite small turboprop too.I've flown the real one a little and I've flown King Airs with the same engine a lot. I think they did a pretty good job on the PT-6A engine, considering the limitations of the FSX turboprop model.The PT-6A has two internal shafts, so the shaft driving the prop is not physically connected to the shaft on which the power is made, so it's basically just air going through a turbine wheel that drives it. That's different from the 331 engine used in the C-441 or Turbo Commander or the more powerful version in the Jetstream 41. Those engines have one shaft, more of a direct drive.That all translates into different characteristics when you move the power levers. With the Conquest, the C-441, on a windy bumpy day, I'd add or remove power on final as needed as there's virtually no lag. Same situation in a Cheyenne or King Air, though, for me was to make a power change when I thought that I might need it, to do it slightly ahead of time. You have to be more proactive with the power levers or you can get behind.So, I think Digital's Cheyenne is really good, the best representation of a PT-6 out there. Not perfect, but I know the FSX model means they have to compromise in one area to make it work in another. You've got to look at the gauges to set power and you can easily overtorque or overtemp. 400 to 500 # of torque is a pretty good number to keep in mind. If you hold the brakes on takeoff, push it up to that number, let go of the brakes, and ease the power up the rest of the way, it works pretty good. For descent and landing, it needs planning, just like the real one. It's very hard to slow down and go down at the same time. You need to get it slowed down while level and then descend. You'd like to be on a five mile final at around 120 knots, gear down, approach flaps, and somewhere around that 400 to 500 pounds of torque. That'll give you a stable descent of 500 to 700 fpm down. Full flaps at 500 feet, speed to 100 knots over the fence, and ease the power off as you start your flare.Hope that helps.cheers,steve :(

It's still my favorite small turboprop too.I've flown the real one a little and I've flown King Airs with the same engine a lot. I think they did a pretty good job on the PT-6A engine, considering the limitations of the FSX turboprop model.The PT-6A has two internal shafts, so the shaft driving the prop is not physically connected to the shaft on which the power is made, so it's basically just air going through a turbine wheel that drives it. That's different from the 331 engine used in the C-441 or Turbo Commander or the more powerful version in the Jetstream 41. Those engines have one shaft, more of a direct drive.That all translates into different characteristics when you move the power levers. With the Conquest, the C-441, on a windy bumpy day, I'd add or remove power on final as needed as there's virtually no lag. Same situation in a Cheyenne or King Air, though, for me was to make a power change when I thought that I might need it, to do it slightly ahead of time. You have to be more proactive with the power levers or you can get behind.So, I think Digital's Cheyenne is really good, the best representation of a PT-6 out there. Not perfect, but I know the FSX model means they have to compromise in one area to make it work in another. You've got to look at the gauges to set power and you can easily overtorque or overtemp. 400 to 500 # of torque is a pretty good number to keep in mind. If you hold the brakes on takeoff, push it up to that number, let go of the brakes, and ease the power up the rest of the way, it works pretty good. For descent and landing, it needs planning, just like the real one. It's very hard to slow down and go down at the same time. You need to get it slowed down while level and then descend. You'd like to be on a five mile final at around 120 knots, gear down, approach flaps, and somewhere around that 400 to 500 pounds of torque. That'll give you a stable descent of 500 to 700 fpm down. Full flaps at 500 feet, speed to 100 knots over the fence, and ease the power off as you start your flare.Hope that helps.cheers,steve :(

Putting this type of info with the vendor's product would be helpful.

It's still my favorite small turboprop too.I've flown the real one a little and I've flown King Airs with the same engine a lot. I think they did a pretty good job on the PT-6A engine, considering the limitations of the FSX turboprop model.The PT-6A has two internal shafts, so the shaft driving the prop is not physically connected to the shaft on which the power is made, so it's basically just air going through a turbine wheel that drives it. That's different from the 331 engine used in the C-441 or Turbo Commander or the more powerful version in the Jetstream 41. Those engines have one shaft, more of a direct drive.That all translates into different characteristics when you move the power levers. With the Conquest, the C-441, on a windy bumpy day, I'd add or remove power on final as needed as there's virtually no lag. Same situation in a Cheyenne or King Air, though, for me was to make a power change when I thought that I might need it, to do it slightly ahead of time. You have to be more proactive with the power levers or you can get behind.So, I think Digital's Cheyenne is really good, the best representation of a PT-6 out there. Not perfect, but I know the FSX model means they have to compromise in one area to make it work in another. You've got to look at the gauges to set power and you can easily overtorque or overtemp. 400 to 500 # of torque is a pretty good number to keep in mind. If you hold the brakes on takeoff, push it up to that number, let go of the brakes, and ease the power up the rest of the way, it works pretty good. For descent and landing, it needs planning, just like the real one. It's very hard to slow down and go down at the same time. You need to get it slowed down while level and then descend. You'd like to be on a five mile final at around 120 knots, gear down, approach flaps, and somewhere around that 400 to 500 pounds of torque. That'll give you a stable descent of 500 to 700 fpm down. Full flaps at 500 feet, speed to 100 knots over the fence, and ease the power off as you start your flare.Hope that helps.cheers,steve :(

That REALLY helps. Thanks.Stan

That REALLY helps. Thanks.Stan

Yes agree it's a great aeroplane. We have some "real" Cheyenne's in our fleet here at Oxford Kidlington and the Aerosoft version is pretty damn realistic compared to the real thing. Certainly my favourite FSX twin prop. Great on FPS too!TrafficPilot

From what I have read, that is characteristic of turboprops, some jets are the same. it takes a while to spool up and down, which means you have to think ahead, Makes it fun though.

True, perhaps it also helps to move the prop pitch to tune the RPM after adjusting power. I know in the jetstream you set power and then set the prop pitch using the propeller control levers, and they propeller control levers have a feather, taxi, and flight mode, which means prop pitch can greatly affect the performance you get out of the airplane... :(. Another good turbo prop plane to practice with is the King Air 350 or Cessna 208 (probably one of the best default FSX planes). I also love the sound of the 208, almost more than jet engines! :(Edit to add on...:http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/19945...tml#post2223042

The geared turbofan displaces huge amounts of air to create thrust, and thrust control is done through pitch control (quick reaction).

I forgot to tell you that turboprops like the Cheyenne, C208, King Air 350, etc. all have high RPMs, so you adjust power for torque, and pitch for RPM. The RPM on a turbofan is always high unlike a piston engine, so you should adjust speed with the propeller control (pitch) mainly and power less often, due to the fact that the aiprlane was made to adjust speed with the pitch most often, and also that changing power is very slow. I find the best way to change the pitch if you do not have a full throttle quadrant or extra keys on your controller is to use CTRL + F2 and F3 For slow adjustments, and because controlling prop pitch is not like adjusting RPM on a fixed pitch prop, it is important to look at the prop control levers in the virtual cockpit, or else you may damage the engines.

The RPM on a turbofan is always high unlike a piston engine, so you should adjust speed with the propeller control (pitch) mainly and power less often, due to the fact that the aiprlane was made to adjust speed with the pitch most often, and also that changing power is very slow. I find the best way to change the pitch if you do not have a full throttle quadrant or extra keys on your controller is to use CTRL + F2 and F3 For slow adjustments, and because controlling prop pitch is not like adjusting RPM on a fixed pitch prop, it is important to look at the prop control levers in the virtual cockpit, or else you may damage the engines.

You really don't do that, however. True, the RPM of the turbine is very high, but prop RPM is geared so it's generally quite slow. Mostly what you're doing by reducing prop RPM is just making cabin noise a little less. All the turboprops I've flown have a prop RPM reduction after takeoff, some at cruise also, and that's really the only time you're touching the prop levers until you push them forward before landing. You really spend a lot of time on the power levers and little on the prop levers.cheers,steve :(

You really don't do that, however. True, the RPM of the turbine is very high, but prop RPM is geared so it's generally quite slow. Mostly what you're doing by reducing prop RPM is just making cabin noise a little less. All the turboprops I've flown have a prop RPM reduction after takeoff, some at cruise also, and that's really the only time you're touching the prop levers until you push them forward before landing. You really spend a lot of time on the power levers and little on the prop levers.cheers,steve :(

Oh, I thought the Cheyenne was a free turbine turboprop like the PT6s. Are free turbines the ones were pitch is adjusted more than power? I'm a bit confused, because I thought on planes like the BAE Jetstream 4100 the pitch is adjusted to fine tune the RPM and the power is moved less often (althought its geared which would mean power changes would be faster).

No they don't have it right, There is no lag between power lever movement,and torque gauge needle movment in flight,And a few seconds of lag on the ground(No air load on prop disc). I have about 15 years experience wrenching, And some right seat time on the Beech 99,1900 C & D, Also EMB110. FSX,or vendors do not have this right! Let me further edit this post to state that on the ground,With the propellers in governing range,There is no lag.

Because of some inherent problems with the modeling of the turboprop engines in FS9, which unfortunately persisted in FSX, you'll see a number of new add-ons use the ability to use the newer FSX APIs (or FSUIPC) to override the engine model and associated physics to make the model behave more realistically. Short of a complete engine simulation replacement, it's an arduous task. Then, the "hacks" cascade into some unwanted behavior. For example, a desire to ignore parking brakes (aircraft moves forward with parking brakes and chocks), thrust reverse can be iffy, hardware joystick axes don't work as expected, etc...The good news is that every time a new turbo prop gets released for FSX, it seems the development teams take more of those issues head-on and overcome the simulator's defficiency in new ways.Cheers,