While I am trying to figure how to change my FS start-up situation question (below!), I took off from Geneva in the Baron 58 to sightsee Holger's new incredible Alps scenery (wow, amazing!) and I headed straight to Mt. Blanc with 100% fuel at MGTOW. From 10,000' and up has been awful. She climbs worse than slug with prop control and mixture managed real lean. I chucked out 45% fuel at 12,000 and still could barely exceed 200 fpm and KIAS 90-95 from there up. I am now approaching FL150 and speed is down to KIAS 77 with VS of 100 fpm. All is in the green so no overheating or anything nasty, but this flight performance in good wx with wind of 276/25 is just diabolical.Am I a bad pilot or is this default a/c woefully underpowered ?!JS

Hi Have you checked the outside air temp, as you may need carb heat up there and perhaps de-ice as well.Andy.

Hi JS,You are getting behind the power curve up there in the thin air and trying to drag a high angle of attack and climb at the same time... can't do it. At around 8,000 to 10,000 try letting the airspeed go up to around 110-115 indicated and keep it there for the rest of the climb. You might need to turn off the autopilot and just let the aircraft climb at the trimmed airspeed. If you are starting out with full fuel and haven't made any changes to the passenger loading you are already overloaded so that will also make a big difference.

Cannot find OAT gauge inside this cabin !Had de-ice for prop and structure on for quite some time.Where is carb heat....?JS

I just don't get it. Surely if I depart at MGTOW, isn't this puppy supposed to be able to climb to cruise without nearly stalling? I am on 50% fuel now and about 500lbs below MGTOW as a result. I reached 15,800 feet and just scraped by the roof of Mt. Blanc by inches at IAS 90. I've now reached IAS 102 at cruise (accel is about I knot per minute!) and pitch is still 5 deg up which is about double what I'd expect.Are these MSFS default prop planes realistic? MS does not provide much guidance on how to fly them and does a poor job of providing typical operating weights and even broad flight parameters beyond a few speeds for certain flight phases.JS

Here is a shot of my real Baron panel just hitting 10,000 ft. near Jackson Hole Wyoming a few years ago. Check out the airspeed and rate of climb. If I recall the temp was about 80 degrees on the ground-I don't remember the actual density altitude that day-but remember density altitude is what it is about.Since I crossed on the backside of the tetons I had to go to 13,000 ft.-and I remember I was doing at best 50 fpm in those conditions at that altitude.Not sure what your density altitude was on your flight-but doesn't sound too unreasonable to me.Most pistons like the Baron/Bonanza if not turbo'd fly the best in the 6000-8000 range.P.S. There is no carb heat on the Baron-it is fuel injected.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/141595.jpg

GeoffI flew a Baron 55 and loved the aircraft low level if. I can remeber manifold pressure dropped to 19.7 inches on full throttle at those sort of levels and dragging it up to 12000 was heavy going for the bird.Turbo chargers a must :-) There was a B55 TC wasnt there????Peter

I think there is a turbo version. Wouldn't do me much good in the low altitude midwest where I live though.....I always file for 5-6000 where she hums like a top.and yes-12000 is heavy going!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Phew, I feel better now, thanks Geoff. Similar performance to me in this sim, I guess. Good to know it IS fairly accurate in that case. I just passed the Matterhorn and descended to land at SION airport. What a relief to descend and watch the engine gauges go back up (!) Beautiful landing at Sion.Interesting comment you make about altitudes. The certified ceiling of many of these props is miles higher than the numbers you provide although the typical cruising altitude you state seems reasonable and is very good for sightseeing (as long as it is not the Alps!). One wonders why or how the ceilings can be so much higher if it takes half a lifetime to climb to them. Or maybe they are only attainable with pretty low payload and low fuel...?Prop management is quite an art compared with jets. I've spent too long in big iron and been spoiled with an MCP and AP. There's a LOT more to manage in props. I forgot to open the cowls for approach.Thanks for your post. I do feel better now.JS

Those performance charts are based on the average day with everything at its maximum best ..like 15c/59F day and 29.92 and what not...and a new engine...flown by a test pilot/AP Mechanic who knows the machine...etc... :)Manny

An FSD Steve Small modification "fsdtwins.zip" is on the flightsim.com file library. It offers an improved flight model (for the Baron and KingAir) as well as the option to convert the default Baron to a turbo. It's an easy to use program that can easily roll back the changes.Whilst originally designed for fs2002, it works fine in fs9.regards,Jeff

Jeff:Hey, great news, thanks so much! JS

The turbo Baron that used the 55 model body was the 56TC. It was the test bed for the engines later released on the Duke. They were 380 hp turbo monsters and it was also nicknamed the personal P38. It would go very high, certified to 30,000 and with that kind of horsepower it was fast at any altitude. Those huge engines give it an aggressive appearance like a Shelby Cobra has on the ground. I'd love one if I wasn't afraid the potential maintenance wouldn't cause a divorce.

Installed. Wow, the TC baron goes like a rocket, mmmmmm !JS

I hope gas prices don't cause divorce either! :-lolhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg