Don't worry, we'll get you back on track. This was a good post, at least reasonable. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/369566-i-just-dont-get-it/#entry2334431 Keep em coming.

After a few more minutes of flying this thing I will say the flight dynamics seem pretty good. I will have to fly it a bit more to get a better conclusion. Its a bit pitchy although the king air were a bit pitchy. I yanked the ICO lever to see how the autofeather would react and it did a pretty good job. One thing though, and it seems no one has simulated this in the PT6, is that as you go up in altitude and keep increasing the power, the ITT should be increasing as well. I am not sure if I am missing something but I cant get the VS or IAS mode on the AP to work. Not simulated perhaps?

True on the AP modes. I was wondering too as every click on the buttons lead to the whole AP popup window to 'blink'. Now the manual says those modes are inop. I don't know the background on that detail when it comes to the real plane and the AP versions there.

At least VS works in the way of the ALT sel mode, which then lets you adjust the VS on the way towards the selected altitude.

 

That ITT is a topic for Bernt. I think the folks pointed that one out on the JetProp too.

The NGX took more than three months to get a SP1, which then rendered it stable on some systems. And that Carenado plane is a day old, does not simulate the things your eyes like and you start a thread with 'I don't get it'. Very professional indeed.

 

A lot of the frustration comes from the fact that this is the way Carenado does think EVERY SINGLE RELEASE. As was said above they don't even send out complete packages for testing. How can they claim that it was tested by real pilots then if they don't even give them the whole package? Carenado does this every time and the excuses are the same every time. Also the issues and bugs are the same every time. They repeat the same stupid mistaktes over and over and over and loyalists always defend it that other Addons have issues too and that the bugs will be fixed. Well Carenado will do a quick fix or two but the huge bulk of issues will remain unfixed as it has always been. Great individuals of the community will fix a few more on their own but a typical Carenado will never be properly tested.

 

I don't have an issue with that if they would be properly priced. Carenado did great thinks for the flight sim world but recently they are getting more expensive with every release yet they don't increase their standard. 30 bucks would be borderline ok for the flying texture folder the Carenados usually are, 40 is plain greedy. We're talking Turbine Duke and J41 territory here and Carenado is not nearly up to the required standard here.

I love my Dukey

Jack,

 

That ITT thing is related to the base FSX turboprop model, I believe. Henning did some sleight of hand to get it working correctly in the Aeroworx B200.

 

For those who don't know, as the aircraft climbs, the density of the air flowing through the turbine decreases and becomes less efficient at cooling the engine. Thus, the ITT should increase with altitude. What seems to be happening in FSX with all turboprops that don't have outside-the-sim corrections for it, is that the ITT decreases with the outside air temp, so when you climb, the ITT incorrectly decreases.

Hehe Jack, you've had it easy. I got flamed for posting about lack of RXP integration... was told I couldn't fly a plane without FMS/GPS and that I needed to man up and fly /A lol....

 

On a side note I flew the SR22 sim again in real life, and nailed a practice ILS into Duluth - the approach wasn't overlaid on the Avidyne either pfffff!

A lot of the frustration comes from the fact that this is the way Carenado does think EVERY SINGLE RELEASE. As was said above they don't even send out complete packages for testing. How can they claim that it was tested by real pilots then if they don't even give them the whole package?

I think you've got a point there, Private-Cowboy. I too wonder where that magic phrase comes from, but not only on Carenado planes. It's not that I don't trust the devs, it's more that I think that especially this 'by real rocket engineers' phrase sort of makes it into product descriptions on an automated basis. And it may even work out well on the sales, still!

I, personally, don't need it and I couldn't even tell if this or that item behaves like on the real plane. Same goes for a lot of other sim folks, but I sense that not all of them would admit that.

 

But more on the Carenado case. As said, very true on e.g. repeated items, being easy to fix and really enhancing the experience. Although ranting, bliksimpie named e.g. the display brightness and things. I don't understand why a dev would leave them unfixed.

 

However, I disagree on the view that the sheer system fidelity indicates the class and especially the fun potential of an addon. Sales and happy customers don't reflect that and it may well be that the forum community, which only acts as a small part of a market, sets the standards here. 'Here' means 'in the corresponding forums', sometimes being driven by the devs itself or a more or less hardcore fan base an co-workers.

 

For me, it's not the most accurate plane that gives the most fun, but the most fun plane that gets the most flying hours. Viewpoints differ among persons and if pure accuracy is the top level interest, being free of the mentioned forum hype elements, than Carenado may indeed not be your dev of choice. It never was and may never be in that regard.

 

The pricing impression is different at each end, actual values aren't. Buying the T Duke alone is 54 USD here, that C90 came in at 40. Both prices include taxes. So there's a difference of some magnitude.

I've praised the T Duke before, but I've also linked to this thread, showing her accuracy, often being used as a sort of benchmark, but failing when looking closer, depending on the actual item.

 

Turns out that every release from every dev comes with the pros and cons and none reaches the 100% accuracy or even fun level. The J41 has its quirks, bugs and will remain unfixed on them. Does it spoil the fun? Only if you allow it to do so.

Something I penned some time ago. (Somewhat) tongue-in-cheek...

 

FSX Add-on Testing by Real-World Pilots: The Inside Story

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Developer: "OK Mr Pilot, before we start, I just want to say how we really appreciate your input here. This will help us deliver a first-class product to our customers."

 

Real-World Pilot: "No problem, glad to be able to help."

 

Developer: "OK here we go...have you got FSX running?"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Yes"

 

Developer: "Good...can you load the flight?"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Yes"

 

Developer: "Great! Has the aircraft loaded sucessfully?"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Yes, I can see the panel and everything."

 

Developer: "Excellent! How is the external view?"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Looks OK to me."

 

Developer: "Fantastic! Does the aircraft seem to be flying OK?"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Well, it seems to be so far bu-"

 

Developer: "Perfect! Well, thanks for all your help with the testing!"

 

Real-World Pilot: "Um...don't you want me to see how it handles in various situations and configurations and test the systems? Slow flight? Slips? Stalls?"

 

Developer: "No thanks, I'll just add "tested by real-world pilots" to the marketing blurb and we're done here..."

 

H

Haha, yeah, sometimes I did think of a story like that. :lol: As said, on more than one dev, even the forum darlings.

"tested by real-world pilots" which ran away crying as they saw the outcome.

The magic of letting facts out. Can't blame someone for lying. Politicians use it since politics came up.

Well it doesn't say what was piloted by the 'real-wold pilot'. Could be a motorized lawnmower.

Wow so much feedback so much outrage i wonder what the developers think

I don't know... they don't say much in these forums...

The idea a PC flight simulator can truly immulate the characteristics of any real world aircraft is laughable at best...

 

I've many, many hours in many types of props, including the Cessna 421, Piper Cheyenne II and Malibu...

 

No one can truly duplicate the "feel" of any real airplane... until they can duplicate that seat of the pants feeling you get when in a moving aircraft... which will never happen.

 

It's barely noticeable in full motion sims that cost millions of dollars, because the unreproducible psychological side of flying is still not there.

 

Lots of designers do have many real world aviators who tsp their products. Some even have pilots rated to fly whatever plane it is they are designing.

 

But the idea that somehow a FS developer with the help of "real world pilots" can somehow produce a product that duplicates the real deal is simply laughable... the limitations of FS and the PC simply prohibit it.

 

I find it amusing at the number of chairborne aviators who turn their noses up at whatever project is being offered by whomever because of this item or that item... like they are all rated in the latest 777 or FSX Space Shuttle add on, and find it faulty...

 

Soemtimes, you guys really are hilarious...

 

Its a PC based game, barely a simulator... enjoy the eye candy and what systems are duplicated. Have fun and fly what they give you, if you don;t like it don;t buy it... stick to freeware.

 

If you are holding out for full fidelity from any add on for FS then you'll be awaiting ALOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time...

Jacoba, when it comes to the FDE of the addon I will agree with you to an extent but systems can be realistically simulated.