You wrote about choosing between the MU-2 and PC-12. The PC-12 in x-plane, despite of beeing a payware, looks like a freeware, toy-ish and rough textures, for this plane I'll rather switch to FSX and fly the excellent Flight1 Pilatus.For what concern the MU-2 I think it's a marvel. Controling gauges and levers in 3D panel has never been so realistic before. Everything is modelled and in this case there is NO MU-2 like this in FSX...Thanks for reviewing anywayRV

I don't have this model, so can't comment on it, but I did want to comment on the apparent Bias (or at least the appearance of) of the reviewer. He starts a paragraph with "FSX vs X-Plane - Not going there here". Then proceeds to bash FSX at every turn. I thought this was a review of an airplane model for X-Plane? There were absolutely no reason to bring the subject up in this review, except maybe comparing a FSX model of the PC-12 to the X-Plane model, which other then mentioning he flew a nice freeware FSX model, he didn't go into.

apparent Bias (or at least the appearance of)

Hello and apologies for the delayed response. I would like to thank you for taking the time to read to read my first review effort for AVSIM. I would like to state I had no intention of introducing a bias or preference towards MSFS (FSX) and X-plane. When I read other reviews and commentary surrounding the simulations we enjoy the ones I pay the most attention to are those that actually allow a bit of the personality and thoughts behind the author to shine through and felt-being a new writer-my comments would be appropriate so you (the reader) might get to know a bit of my thought process and thus understand and hopefully enjoy the piece.As noted in the formal review:Reviewer’s Note: I fly both simulation packages and enjoy each on its own merits.Perhaps I should have made that clear in bold as opposed to in italics!As opposed to a bash my motivation was more to enlighten readers to why a simulator pilot might be tempted to experiment with an alternative to the so-called "mainstream". I hope that makes my intentions a bit more clear.CheersTedp.s. I believe my next subject is an FSX piece :Thinking:

I didn't think it was biased; just an honest account of the typical frustration that most of us have at some times, with FSX. Conversely, it's a fact that X-Plane tends to just 'run well' , with little need for configuration.(I use both and favour none over eachother. I Fly the MU-2, Corvalis TT, Dash8-Q400 and CRJ in X-Plane 9.7 , and everything else in FSX. So genuinely no bias).But X-Plane is starting to get some good complex airliner addons now (the Dash8-Q400 VC is stunning), so more AVSIM reviews would be great.

A cockpit update and other stuff shortly appearing for this aircraft.The EFIS stack is NOTABLY improved:http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=56083Happy flying!

***********************************XP9.7 Only-Not for XPX (yet)*********************************************************************************Hi folks,The update for the PC-12/47 has been released and I loaded it up to grab a couple of screens for you. It is obvious plenty of attention has been paid to the issues regarding instrument resolution....check it out:Huge improvement over the initial release with a full remake of that unpleasant EFIS/transponder stack.Also a very cool paint scheme (current owners will have had this)Far and away this remains my favorite X-Plane aircraft to fly and have gone over 200 hours already :Love: .CheersTed