<>Crimguy, you need to change your technique. In, no twin engine aircraft I am aware of is it proper to "drop power before the flare."Depending on the make and model, it is correct to carry at least some power all the way into the flare...and sometimes a bit all the way to touchdown. But assuming a "power chop" is called for at all, it comes just seconds before touchdown...literally inches above the runway and certainly not before the flare, in which case the bounce you mentioned would be your BEST expected outcome.Most sim aircraft, both default and add-on are WAY too easy to land. In most cases, you can impact the runway with no flare at all at 400 fpm descent rate and get a "chirp and stick" landing. Try it...you'll see what I mean.Impacting the runway at nearly 7 feet PER SECOND will produce a bounce...and THEN SOME, ITRW but that is not generally modeled in all but a few sim aircraft.I don't necessarily fault MS or the developers for that fact because they are targeting a very large mass market where only a tiny percentage of users are RW pilots. So, if they make landings too hard (read realistic) then they would lose sales to those who make the landings easier (read less realistic).Every time I read that flying a sim aircraft is more difficult than ITRW, I just have to chuckle. Here's the deal. I can teach an 8 year old to acceptably land a sim aircraft in 30 minutes. (and a 74 year old...I've done both)Now, take that 8 year old up in, say, a Skyhawk and give a half hour of instruction and then handcuff your hands behind your back and your feet away from the rudders and let the kid land by him/herself.Any takers??(-:

Here is an UNSOLICITED comment on the DF Baron 58 from a REAL WORLD pilot who flies one.""I can't stay away from this plane! Having recently started using Microsoft Flight Simulator, your Baron has been a blessing. I was first using the included Baron, but I quickly forgot about it once I began testing yours.Yours is so close to the real one I fly, in every respect, that it has become a great aid to me in keeping sharp with instrument procedures, etc. Yesterday I used it to fly a flight I would be making in my Baron the next day; a flight to an airport I had never visited. Your Baron proved ideal, and when I made the real flight the next day my comfort level was much higher, especially with the approach in relatively poor weather. From the look, feel, sounds, and flying qualities, your Baron is just what I need to keep sharp. I can't thank you enough for it!" Warren - Unsolicited remarks received on July 27, 2005"Of course, YOU are entitled to YOUR opinions, however devoid of experience and accuracy they obviousl are.Regards,Jim

Have had no problems with the FSD 337 either.Today's Baron hops consisted of carrying a bit of power through the flare, and power at idle approaches carrying an extra bit of airspeed. I also did numerous landings with the nose at any angle I cared for, including a flat attitude three wheel landing which I'd prefer not to do in real life. However, this Baron was capable of all. Easily capable!Wasn't really paying attention to the throttle settings, but they were on the low end of the scale, even when carrying a bit of power. Not even close to full power as has been suggested. Not 1/2 or even a forth.L.Adamson

>Crimguy, you need to change your technique. In, no twin engine>aircraft I am aware of is it proper to "drop power before the>flare.">>Depending on the make and model, it is correct to carry at>least some power all the way into the flare...and sometimes a>bit all the way to touchdown. And it's the same with the RV series of single engine high performance kitplanes. RV6A with 180HP and C/S prop means a higher wing loading. Carry a bit of power into the flare, or it will suddendly drop from underneath you. Or...........you just have to land faster to keep elevator authority, and miss the first turnoff, or overshoot that short runway.The newer RV9A with a longer wing, more wing area, and lower wing loading. It will land like a 172 with power off-------everytime. It's the same way with the Piper Cherokee series. The Warrior and Archer will land by chopping the power with no problem. The Arrow, which is still basically the same airframe, has a heavier engine, C/S prop and retractable landing gear. It all adds up to a higher wing loading. It will also drop from beneath you in the flare if you don't carry a bit of power to keep the nose up. Or as previously stated, you just have to land faster, which wears the tires more quickly!:-hah L.Adamsonedit: BTW, how do you get a reply with a date of Jan 2006 ?he,he --- nevermind, this is a rehash of an old thread! Same mis-information, and many of the same names in almost the same order, but the new thread is locked! :)

The Arrow, the Seminole and the Seneca... all of them,, I had to hold some power before chopping off. To do a Short field landing for my multi eninge check ride.. Thats what I had to do. At the 1000 marker, I simple cut the power off.. and it landed with a thud.. but it was a short field landing all right.The checkride paramter only spoke of feet from the aiming point or something.. there was no mention of any thud or nothing.:)Manny

Thanks Jim:I wanted say that but had decided to stay out of this, but will say that the reduction in altitude and SPEED made this old CFI cringe a bit. Of all places, in particularly a severe slip, loss of airspeed would be one of my deepest concerns. Especially if it is a slick bird regardless of whether it is a twin or single engine.Respectfully:RTH1585368CFI

<>Yep, you keep slipping twin engine aircraft Rico. Those who know what they are doing will prefer to arrive on final at the proper algitude in a stabilized descent.(-: