I've been testing it after Sean PM'd me the details of the change required in the aircraft.cfg and there is a difference in feel. Since the update FSX complains that the aircraft is over the MTOW when the tanks are full with the default payload load out. Maybe once you go over the MTOW FSX somehow exaggerates things in the FDE to punish you for not watching for over weight situations and perhaps this is what I am seeing in the ground handling. I'll try and do a little more testing today but I'm supposed to be building a new rig today, its still not arrived yet due to the shipping company being total idiots and using the wrong intercom system (they had the foresight to take a picture of it too) to get in the building and hence they thought no one was home to accept the delivery. They say they are going to come back.

hi Andy,It might be the case that being overweight would tend to stop the Duke quicker on idle taxi. I think that can be alleviated by reducing either passengers or fuel load so you are back to where you were. We set fuel tanks so they are close to the longditudinal centre so centre of gravity should not be too affected. As I said, if you are unhappy you can change the fuel type back to what it was pre-patch.All the best,Rob

Hi All,I must be going crazier than I already am, but I think I have a Vne of 200 kts with the patch and 235 kts with the original release. I experience some buffeting above 200 kts IAS with the patch and not with the original release. How can this be if the air file wasn't changed????Love the Duke though.Happy landings,Bill in Colorado

The current green arc is proper... the pre patch one was off.I'm not sure how it works but I would think the buffet effect comes and goes based on where you are in relation to vne. Not sure if it's an actual change in the FDE.

That doesn't explain the buffeting though Ryan. New PC bits have finally arrived so that's it from me for testing for a few days.

That doesn't explain the buffeting though Ryan. New PC bits have finally arrived so that's it from me for testing for a few days.

Why? The config panel controls whether or not it buffets and the strength of it. All I'm saying is that it might read whether or not the user is exceeding 200kts vs wherever it used to be pre patch.

The patched Duke handles the same to me. I did notice stall buffeting but I assumed that was because I upped the realism setting to max per the update document and notched up the stall setting in the Duke config tool.The Duke is still the best GA twin alive IMO!Cheersjja

Anybody noticed the new touchdown effect or is it just me?No matter how smooth I land, it always looks like my head almost hits the dashboard.BTW: Love the new night lighting.Alex

Anybody noticed the new touchdown effect or is it just me?No matter how smooth I land, it always looks like my head almost hits the dashboard.BTW: Love the new night lighting.Alex

Some of the "effects" people are noticing are not connected with the Flight Model, which I promise you hasn't changed. Some of the effects are proprietry things which we've developed and are unconnected with the air file or aircraft cfg. For example if you get slight buffeting above 200 knots that is because it IS the correct VNE (we got it wrong before due to a sparsity of info, and Zane Guard, who has flown the Turbine Duke, alerted us to the correct V-speeds). You can adjust the amount of stall and other buffet in the config application.The landing "thump" is quite mild but we wanted to communicate that every landing in this kind of twin, however good, will generate some movement of the head in relation to the horizon.There are all sorts of subtle and not so subtle changes in this iteration, most of them requested, some not. We hope in general users will get use to them. Generally speaking the Duke is now a more accurate simulation than the initial release as a result of knowledge we have gained from Duke pilots and other knowledgable parties.All changes are sometimes difficult to get used to at first because we all tend to like what we had before. But what we have now is we believe a better simulation and that is what we constantly strive for.All the best,Rob - RealAir

Thanks for your answers, Rob and Sean.I've asked this question before, but I think it went missed. Is there a chance to get the clickspot and switch operation changes in the piston version too?I wouldn't speak of an urgent need there, but it would maybe make the Duke experience more consistent for some. I'm still using both models and enjoy their different characters regarding the FDE.With manual editing, I can get rid of the view clickspots (thanks to Bert for that tip), but the switch operation is a gauge thingy, way above my head. :blush:Talking about the nice left/right click tech in the turbine 1.2 now.

Thanks for the answer, Rob.I did a few more flights and it looks like my description above is a bit exaggerated. Certainly like it now.Alex

Some of the "effects" people are noticing are not connected with the Flight Model, which I promise you hasn't changed. Some of the effects are proprietry things which we've developed and are unconnected with the air file or aircraft cfg. For example if you get slight buffeting above 200 knots that is because it IS the correct VNE (we got it wrong before due to a sparsity of info, and Zane Guard, who has flown the Turbine Duke, alerted us to the correct V-speeds). You can adjust the amount of stall and other buffet in the config application.The landing "thump" is quite mild but we wanted to communicate that every landing in this kind of twin, however good, will generate some movement of the head in relation to the horizon.There are all sorts of subtle and not so subtle changes in this iteration, most of them requested, some not. We hope in general users will get use to them. Generally speaking the Duke is now a more accurate simulation than the initial release as a result of knowledge we have gained from Duke pilots and other knowledgable parties.All changes are sometimes difficult to get used to at first because we all tend to like what we had before. But what we have now is we believe a better simulation and that is what we constantly strive for.All the best,Rob - RealAir

Thanks for your answers, Rob and Sean.I've asked this question before, but I think it went missed. Is there a chance to get the clickspot and switch operation changes in the piston version too?I wouldn't speak of an urgent need there, but it would maybe make the Duke experience more consistent for some. I'm still using both models and enjoy their different characters regarding the FDE.With manual editing, I can get rid of the view clickspots (thanks to Bert for that tip), but the switch operation is a gauge thingy, way above my head. :blush:Talking about the nice left/right click tech in the turbine 1.2 now.

The Duke piston already has its own update, but we learned new things with the Turbine version, and that is the version that the vast majority of the requests were made on. As it is we have spent months on this update. If we had to retrospectively revisit every aircraft we did (and not actually to fix bugs but more to add options and new features), we would never produce anything else. The consensus is that both Dukes, though not perfect, are fine. We can't spend for ever endlessly tweaking. We've spent several months suspending development to satisfy the Turbine Duke customers. The piston Duke is a fully functioning aircraft. It is often the case that when you offer free updates to an already satisfactory product that some users want every past product to be revisited in addition. We have to draw a line at some point.Kind Regards,Rob - RealAir

No problem, Rob. Thanks for your answer again.

...We can't spend for ever endlessly tweaking. We've spent several months suspending development to satisfy the Turbine Duke customers. The piston Duke is a fully functioning aircraft. It is often the case that when you offer free updates to an already satisfactory product that some users want every past product to be revisited in addition. We have to draw a line at some point.Kind Regards,Rob - RealAir

Unless of course you charge for micro-updates!Would I pay $5 - $10 to get my piston Duke updated to Turbine standards? You bet! So it might be worth your while for your more popular models. And anyone in disagreement, well that's cool, just keep flying the version you already have (a fully working aircraft, as you point out.)Slightly OT, but the Turbine adds the option for a castering nosewheel: Although I rather enjoy the added challenge of steering via differential braking, wouldn't the RW aircraft have a steerable nosewheel? I would imagine the insurance premium differential might just pay for the mod if it didn't...Cheers,- jahman.

Unless of course you charge for micro-updates!

Sorry to ask, are they doing this in your eyes with the turbine model?Having trouble understanding your post in that aspect. :mellow:Regarding the nosewheel options, the 1.5 piston Duke offers them too (bound to the rudder or castoring), just like the turbine.

Sorry to ask, are they doing this in your eyes with the turbine model?Having trouble understanding your post in that aspect. :(

Just hoping Real Air offer a micro update to bring the piston Duke VC up to par with the Turbine VC. Just got the Turbine and the VC is absolutely stunning in terms of attention to detail and lighting. Yet while I enjoy flying the Turbine, I also like the piston for its more challenging takeoffs and landings. (Due to its tremendous power (2x 550 hp rather than 2x 380 hp), the Turbine is almost too easy to fly provided you respect engine limits).

Regarding the nosewheel options, the 1.5 piston Duke offers them too (bound to the rudder or castoring), just like the turbine.

OK, but same comment applies: Wich is the RW configuration, or is it an even split?Cheers,- jahman.