Greetings,

 

After a couple of years, I am in the process of returning to the C441. As such, I recently started recurrent training with the excellent videos produced by Joe (last name?); is he still active at Flysimware? I have a few questions and would be most appreciaive for any support one could offer.

 

1.) Are there additional videos for takeoff, cruise or approach/landing?

 

2.) Joe explains how most C441 operators have upgraded to the Garrett -10 engines. Is this rendition modeled on the -8 or -10 engine as it relates to performance (e.g. fuel burn, etc.)?

 

3.) I have the real-world Cessna C441 POH for the -8 engines. Are there performance charts available for the -10 conversion with a presumed STC?

 

4.) There has been discussion in other forums how FSX improperly manages turboprop performance relative to what should be increase in ITTs with altitude for P&W engines. Sine the TPE utilizes EGT, does the same apply? Is the C441 modeled correctly? I have heard the PMDG J41 got it right.

 

 

Many thanks / Les Parson

Joe (capceo) is still visiting here and his footer still says Flysimware, so I guess he is still working for them.

1) Unfortunately not (see http://www.avsim.com/topic/489441-please-create-more-cessna-441-videos/), but there are many non-sim videos of the 441 on youtube.

2) This should be the -10 (see one of the comments in the Start Locks video, and I think this is mentioned by him in one of the videos, too). The manual says "Horsepower: 635.5 x2" though, but according to http://www.cessnaconquest.net/30.html the -10 has 715 SHP. In a test flight it went beyond the ceiling of 35000ft stated for the -8, but I don't remember how high it climbed, maybe 36500 or 37000.

3) I haven't found any. I have the AIM paperback and copies of two POHs with revisions up to 1987, but they only have performance data for the -8.

4) I don't really know. One thing that (according to one of Joe's videos) is not modeled perfectly in the C441 (due to FSX/P3D limitations) is the input lag. The real C441 seems to have less input lag for power changes than the simulated one.

Thanks very much for the input.