Climb to 15,000'OAT -5CITT 720 (Maxed Out)RPMs 1950(indicated)/ 1900(pop-up)Torque 1512 ft-lbs (Maxed Out)119 KIAS / 137 MPHFAC

One beef I have (and this is also true of the F33) is that the altitude alerter doesn't work as it should. The two left-hand buttons don't work at all, so I can't arm ALT SEL as I should. The click spot you use to switch between VS and ALT settings is not on the knob, as it should be (and as it says in the manual supplement provided by Carenado), but below and to the left of the knob.

The F33 altitude alerter is written in XML and is editable...I am waiting for someone to release a fully functioning version.. including the two left-hand buttons (anyone?)Regarding the knob, for starters, you can change the knob behavior so you can click on the knob to switch and use the mouse wheel to turn the knob.The code I use is:

<Mouse>  <Area Left="478" Top="69" Width="175" Height="163">       <Cursor Type="Hand"/>       <Click Kind="LeftSingle+WheelUp+WheelDown">      (M:Event) 'LeftSingle'  scmp 0 == if{ (L:VSMODE,number) 0 == if{ 1 (>L:VSMODE,number) } els{ 0 (>L:VSMODE,number) } }          (M:Event) 'WheelUp'  scmp 0 == if{ (L:VSMODE,number) 0 == if{ (>K:AP_ALT_VAR_INC) } els{ (>K:AP_VS_VAR_INC) } }      (M:Event) 'WheelDown'  scmp 0 == if{ (L:VSMODE,number) 0 == if{ (>K:AP_ALT_VAR_DEC) } els{ (>K:AP_VS_VAR_DEC) } }         </Click>   </Area></Mouse>

The ALT. select knob works for me. I can scroll with the mouse no problem. :( F33 and 208

Hmmm. It worked better after you loaded the default Cessna? I'll give that a try and see if it makes a difference for me, too. Wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

This technique certainly saves a lot of problems with complex simulatoions like the LDS 767 or the F1 ATR, it is SOP for me now, load a FSX default plane first then switch to your payware. Is there a difference between the cargo version and the passenger version other that no seats? Just curious..

This technique certainly saves a lot of problems with complex simulatoions like the LDS 767 or the F1 ATR, it is SOP for me now, load a FSX default plane first then switch to your payware. Is there a difference between the cargo version and the passenger version other that no seats? Just curious..

Yes, the cargo version has no side windows, and a sparse, stripped-down cargo hold with replaceable wooden floor. There's also a cargo barrier behind the cockpit. The Cessna website has some photos of the inside of a Cargomaster.

Ok folks I took a few minutes out of the avionics project to do some testing and tweaking and here is what I have come up with. In terms of power issues number one thing to check is that you do not have the Inertial Separator on all the time. I found that I did and it was causing quite a reduction in power.Second thing I managed to find is that there are a few settings in the aircraft.cfg file that control some basic parameters of the engine performance characteristics that you can tweak and yeild some much better climb and cruise performance. Posted below are the areas I changed on my Caravan using, believe it or not, the default C208B. Most of these parameters will control the power output and some specific functions of the engine. If you wish to give this edit a shot make a back-up copy of your original aircraft.cfg file first, in case you wish to go back to the origianl settings.[propeller]thrust_scalar = 1.0propeller_type = 0propeller_diameter = 8.83propeller_blades = 3propeller_moi = 40beta_max = 45beta_min = 15min_gov_rpm = 25520 prop_tc = 0.004gear_reduction_ratio = 17.4fixed_pitch_beta = 0low_speed_theory_limit = 80prop_sync_available = 0prop_deice_available = 1prop_feathering_available= 1prop_auto_feathering_available= 1min_rpm_for_feather = 700beta_feather = 88.0power_absorbed_cf = 0.9defeathering_accumulators_available= 0prop_reverse_available = 1minimum_on_ground_beta = 1.0minimum_reverse_beta = -14.0[TurbineEngineData]fuel_flow_gain = 0.011inlet_area = 1.0rated_N2_rpm = 33000static_thrust = 150 [turboprop_engine]power_scalar = 1.0 maximum_torque = 1865All you have to do is replace the sections in your aircraft.cfg with the ones I posted above and fly. After making these changes I did a test flight here is how my flight progressed:OAT 10°CClimb to 6500 @ 90% powerInertial Separator OffRPM set to 18001000 FPM climb rate117 KIAS during climb to cruiseITT was a bit warm at 740-780° (couldn't get an exact number as I forgot what it was)During cruise:Power set to 80%RPM set to 17008kt Headwind145 KIAS fuel burn rate 320PPHITT 695°So as you can see by my observations there was a good amount of improvement in performance and no sacrifice in economy or ground handling. Primary reason for this finding was the "static_thrust=" entry in the Carenado aircraft.cfg being set to "85" and it being changed to 150. So I invite anyone interested to give this a shot and post your feedback as I'm curious to see what other will experience.

Nick,I wouldn't call 740-780C "a bit warm". 740C is max cruise ITT, and anything over 765C is limited to five minutes. The guys I've talked to who fly PT6-powered airplanes watch the ITT very closely all the time. Running the engine hot significantly shortens the engine's lifespan. ITT limits, according to Cessna are:805C for takeoff, above 765C limited to five minutes765C maximum climb740C maximum cruiseThat said, I considered your approach, too, but instead of replacing the numbers wholesale, I did a tiny bit of playing around, based on what we found out yesterday regarding the engine running hot and producing inadequate thrust. With the unedited Caravan at 5000 feet and 20C:1220 ft/lbs TQ1881 prop RPMs740^oC ITT114 KIAS (126 KTAS)By the Cessna Grand Caravan Information Manual, at 5000 feet and 20C, we should have:1600 ft/lbs TQ1900 prop RPMs740^oC149 KIAS (165 KTAS)I realized that the overtemp condition was likely to be corrected by an improvement in engine power; more power, less effort required to get the desired torque, lower ITT. So, I changed:[turboprop_engine] power_scalar = 1.31 // was 1.0A test flight to 5000 feet at 20C yielded:1600 ft/lbs TQ1893 prop RPMs740^oC128 KIAS (141 KTAS)Now, more testing is needed...that solved the TQ/ITT problem at 5000 feet, but I need to spend some time at various altitudes and temperatures to produce an average deviation I can use to adjust the power scalar properly. Once that's done, the thrust will need to be tweaked to get the right airspeed.Maybe. This approach to fixing the FDE is about the same as discovering the fender and door on your new Porsche don't quite line up and taking care of the problem with a ball peen hammer. The results are not going to be perfect.

Edited August 26, 201015 yr by EMB120

Whew, this whole thing feels all to familiar :(. Thanks to you fellows for having a go at this. Kurt, sorry I didn't get back to you yesterday. I'm in the process of beta testing the MilViz Cessna 310 and when I saw your post asking me to give the Caravan another go and see if I got the same things as you, I was at 8,000 somewhere between Fort St. John and Fort Nelson B.C. :(. It didn't seem 'prudent' at that point to switch airplanes. It will likely be tomorrow before I can get in and do some real testing of my own, but there's no reason to doubt your findings, so anything I do will just be re-confirming facts, not proving theories at this point. So I will watch with great interest (and appreciation) the work you are doing here. I'm just really 'concerned' that we have to be doing this at all. The aircraft, after all, is "certified" by real C208 pilots. If the issues you folks raise are present (and enough people I know and trust have made the same claims, so at this point I don't doubt they do exist), then either the "real C208" beta testing pilots are fictional, or the powers that be didn't listen to their own beta testers. Either way, I have to admit, I'm getting real sick of paying for something that then has to be rebuilt (almost from the ground up) in terms of the BASIC flight dynamics. It's one thing to have new and experimental gauges that are pushing the envelope a bit not work quite as hoped, but when you have an outstanding flight model in the default Caravan, and then pay for an upgraded one that doesn't come close to the specs (within 10 kts is fine by me, but this is 15 to 20 or more!), something is really wrong here. I'm afraid this has been a trend, from at least the 185 onwards, and despite my comments re first impressions (which were just that - first impressions; now being replaced by far less positive feelings overall as more things come to light), I'm rather concerned about future purchases here. I suspect the Caravan will be my last Carenado purchase until they can prove that they can release not just a great LOOKING model, but one that flies reasonably close to reality. There's no question this plane flies beautifully, and if it had a pair of floats under it, I'd be saying the airspeeds were dead on. But it doesn't have floats, so the speeds are about 15 to 20 kts too slow from the sounds of it. I have a couple of videos of the Caravan in flight, and they consistently see about 138 to 145 kts (True, calibrated). So, we'll see. I'll probably get the cargo version as that's the one I really want, but that's knowing you fellows are likely going to get this thing pretty close to the book numbers (or all of us combined will finally sort it out), but after this, I'll only buy a "finished" product. That means waiting until enough reviews are in that say the airplane is as it should be. Trust has become an issue here.Sorry for the rant, and thank you again Kurt and others, for working this out. Much appreciated. Oh, by the by, if you are experimenting, try fiddling a bit with the induced drag (not the parasite). That might make the biggest difference in airspeed and may mean you don't have to play with the engine values at all (which can have far reaching effects). Just a thought.

Glenn,Don't worry about it, man...sounds like you had a very good excuse! I don't think the basic flight dynamics are a problem with the Caravan, it's just that the engine is a bit under powered. Drag may indeed be part of the airspeed problem, but the TQ readings were very much off (by as much as 25%, in fact), so they also need to be tweaked. I'm with you on accepting some latitude with airspeed. No two airplanes perform exactly the same, so I'm not a slave to the book airspeeds. As long as we can set the engine power correctly, and the speeds are within 5 or 10 knots, I'll be very happy. Right now, we're off by a third!More to come on this...

Glenn,Don't worry about it, man...sounds like you had a very good excuse! I don't think the basic flight dynamics are a problem with the Caravan, it's just that the engine is a bit under powered. Drag may indeed be part of the airspeed problem, but the TQ readings were very much off (by as much as 25%, in fact), so they also need to be tweaked. I'm with you on accepting some latitude with airspeed. No two airplanes perform exactly the same, so I'm not a slave to the book airspeeds. As long as we can set the engine power correctly, and the speeds are within 5 or 10 knots, I'll be very happy. Right now, we're off by a third!More to come on this...

I'm all for realism, but if the speeds are going to be off, I'd like 'em to be off on the high side. Not much time for 'simming, don'tcha know, and when I do I need to get there. Still, I'm enjoying the Caravan as-is. In fact, I'm working on a Kenmore Air repaint right now that should be done by the time you FDE geniuses work your tweaking magic. :(

Bill,Great minds, Bruddah! I was just looking at the Kenmore Air website and wishing someone would do up that livery!On a side note, there's a whole bunch of different stripe patterns provided in the options guide on the Cessna Grand Caravan documents page. A repainter could have a lot of fun making all of those up!

Wow this looks like an awesome plane and is one I have been wanting Carenado to do! Im very happy since I bought their U206 series but its the Caravan Ive been waiting for. However I will discipline myself for an update once all initial bugs have been ironed out hee hee. Will buy when its V2! Until then the Feelthere Caravan will do hee hee.I did have one (silly) question :(

The other thing you will notice is a very definite lag from when you push the throttle forward to when you feel it take effect. That is very, very typical of a real turboprop machine

I didnt know turboprops had this characteristic. I thought it was only turbofans. I always thought prop engines were very responsive. Or am I getting mixed with with piston prop engines? Cuz I guess a turbine is a turbine wether its driving a fan (turbofan engine) or a propeller and it is THIS that takes time to spool up? However I still thought in small engines like PT6 this was a quick reponse!?Thanks :(

Turbine lag is definitely a characteristic of PT6-powered airplanes.