I have always wanted good turboprop aircraft for FSX, but have always been skeptical because FSX is known for having terrible turboprop modelling unless the developers work outside of the FSX defaults. I gave up on the Digital Aviation Cheyenne partially because I wasn't satisfied with their turboprop model.

 

SO...now I have two different turboprop aircraft. The PMDG J-41 and the Real Air Turbo Duke. The J-41 is well known to have the best engine modelling for any turboprop available in FSX, and the Turbo Duke is also said to have some good realism of the PT6, plus full RXP integration. I consider the Turbine Duke one of the best planes available for FSX, although the fact that it is nothing short of a rocket plane actually gets on my nerves in some circumstances (I actually prefer flying the piston)

 

I've been looking at the Carenado aircraft. It looks very nice, and I've always thought the KingAir was sharp. But what about the strict realsim of the turboprop model (compared to the Duke) and flying-by-the-numbers flght model accuracy compared to the real thing? I'm talking about proper relationship between things like torque and fuel flow and temps compared to reality, not just some generic "engine" that you power up and down and simply sounds like a P6T. Did Carenado use a custom model or did they just revert to the stock FSX turboprop simulation? What about RXP integration compared to the Turbine Duke? Generally I steer clear of Carenado aircraft for a variety of reasons, but I want to keep an open mind and consider each new product as they come, not based on past experiences with previous products.

 

Eye Candy matters too, but the strict realism of systems and performance is most important of all. Should I just stick with my Turbine Duke for the best realism?

I've been on the fence for the Carenado King Air as well. The Aeroworx version for FS9 was just too good, so anything less is out of the question. But now Flight1 and Milviz are working on King Air's so I'm gonna wait for those before buying. The new Twin Otter from Aerosoft is a must have though and I hope they can get the engine simulation and sound right.

I believe that Carenado has the turbo prop modeled properly. However, you may want to move this post to the B200 forum, where more people will see it.

I believe that Carenado has the turbo prop modeled properly. However, you may want to move this post to the B200 forum, where more people will see it.

 

Why? ..... He's talking about general choice of Turbo-props, not purely the CAR B200 .........

 

To the OP: The Carenado B200 will fall short of expectations if measured even any where close to the RealAir Duke ..... I would defintely recommend waiting for the MilViz Kingair.

The Carenado B200 will fall short of expectations if measured even any where close to the RealAir Duke

 

I don't have the B200, but I do have the Carenado C90 and I like it fine. I personally find the Turbine Duke a somewhat more enjoyable plane, but largely because it fits my use model better, and I would still argue that the C90 holds up remarkably well in modeling the PT6 and flight dynamics. Neither is perfect, but both are very good and credible.

 

As for the B200, though, I decided to wait and see what Milviz and Flight1 do with their upcoming KAs. Rumor has been that Flight1's will feature a true beta range, and the Milviz panels that have been shown are drop-dead gorgeous.

 

I'd wait a bit. :-)

 

Scott