Recommendations for best GA twin turbo prop or Piston

[MrDirt 7]

+1 For Flysimware's Cessna 441 Conquest II.

[fppilot 4,371]

12 hours ago, mpw8679 said:

I would buy direct from Milviz.  U will immediately have any updates available. 

A big agree from me on that!

[FDEdev 955]

5 minutes ago, NorwegianAviator said:

Yes, I'm aware of that. Have also tried it on a few planes, with mostly good results. Much closer to reality when it comes to startup with this tweak. However, this is far from the only issue with turboprop simulation in P3D. Beta range is one area that needs to be improved.

Not only startup and this is no 'tweak'. It's a normal FDE part.  The whole engine response can be fine tuned if you know what you are doing.

I agree that the small beta range doesn't really exist, but since this is usually never used in flight and only partially during taxiing, this definitely nothing which would keep me from flying turboprops in P3D.

[StewartH 66]

2 hours ago, NorwegianAviator said:

Turboprops are broken i P3D, so if you want to enjoy a descent turboprop your only choice is the Majestic Q400 (which uses external engine simulation etc). For twin GA I would recommend Milviz. For all other GA single engine props, without no doubt A2A. Personally I only fly A2A, PMDG and Majestic in P3D. With Milviz as an occational exception to this rule.

The mods that have been proposed and made available for the Carenado Cheyenne II in the Carenado forum do quite a bit to fixing the turboprop shortcomings in P3D and FSX.  For that matter, Flysimware's Cessna Conquest II or their Mitsubishi MU2 are decent simulations as well.  Your suggestion of the Majestic Q400 is fine as far as it goes, but it's a different class of aircraft compared to the others that have been mentioned.

Edited December 9, 2018 by StewartH

[Lenny777 299]

I've has the PA31T CHEYENNE II for a couple of years. Yes it is a good plane. But I must say this Milviz recommendation is an A-1 recommendation. I've had a couple of fights already with it and such a stable aircraft with wonderful modeling outside and in.

[FDEdev 955]

10 minutes ago, StewartH said:

The mods that have been proposed and made available for the Carenado Cheyenne II in the Carenado forum do quite a bit to fixing the turboprop shortcomings in P3D and FSX. 

You can't fix the startup problems for FSX turboprops. It's mainly the ITT/EGT indication that's improved with those patches.

[StewartH 66]

3 minutes ago, Lenny777 said:

I've has the PA31T CHEYENNE II for a couple of years. Yes it is a good plane. But I must say this Milviz recommendation is an A-1 recommendation. I've had a couple of fights already with it and such a stable aircraft with wonderful modeling outside and in.

Several improvements to the modeling were a result of considerable public input, which Milviz graciously implemented.  Glad you enjoy the aircraft--it's a keeper for all of us fans.

[StewartH 66]

1 minute ago, FDEdev said:

You can't fix the startup problems for FSX turboprops. It's mainly the ITT/EGT indication that's improved with those patches.

Yes,sir, it is as you say.

[NorwegianAviator 60]

2 hours ago, FDEdev said:

Not only startup and this is no 'tweak'. It's a normal FDE part.  The whole engine response can be fine tuned if you know what you are doing.

I agree that the small beta range doesn't really exist, but since this is usually never used in flight and only partially during taxiing, this definitely nothing which would keep me from flying turboprops in P3D.

It's very strange that no developer is using this as far as I know.

However, I tried it on a few Carenado planes at my friends house. It made a huge difference, especially the startup. Torque respons was better, but still way too slow.
Beta range is only used on the ground for controlling taxi speed. When taxiing a turboprop you use beta range all the time. On a PT6 engine this is quite noticeable as you can hear the change in tone pitch when it's taxing. If you go too far back the plane will actually start going backwards (happened a few times IRL if you don't pay attention). There's also a bunch of other issues with turboprops in P3D that this particular "tweak" won't fix. The broken ground friction is also on big hassle in P3D. If you can tell me how to fix them, I might actually give turboprops a new chance in P3D.

Edited December 9, 2018 by NorwegianAviator

[FDEdev 955]

32 minutes ago, NorwegianAviator said:

There's also a bunch of other issues with turboprops in P3D that this particular "tweak" won't fix. The broken ground friction is also on big hassle in P3D. 

From the previously 'unflyable' turboprops due to 'broken' turboprop modelling, via the small missing beta range (sound) you are now switching to your perceived general ground friction problem.

Way off topic IMO.

Edited December 9, 2018 by FDEdev

[NorwegianAviator 60]

7 hours ago, FDEdev said:

From the previously 'unflyable' turboprops due to 'broken' turboprop modelling, via the small missing beta range (sound) you are now switching to your perceived general ground friction problem.

Way off topic IMO.

Well, beta range is not only about sound. I would say it's quite important if you're flying a turboprop. Regarding ground friction. Part of the problem with beta range is also connected to ground friction which is way to high i P3D. Hence, it exaggerates the problem with beta range that is not simulated properly in the first place. If you can tell me how to fix turboprops in P3D it would be greatly appreciated.

[FDEdev 955]

3 hours ago, NorwegianAviator said:

Well, beta range is not only about sound. I would say it's quite important if you're flying a turboprop. Regarding ground friction. Part of the problem with beta range is also connected to ground friction which is way to high i P3D. Hence, it exaggerates the problem with beta range that is not simulated properly in the first place.

In every jet, turboprop and piston engine airplane it's no problem to overcome the ground friction problem by designing the FDE so that a turboprop/jet e.g. accelerates at idle power and it doesn't with just a tiny bit of reverse (beta). 

Edited December 10, 2018 by FDEdev

[dbw1 445]

On 12/8/2018 at 7:07 PM, Lenny777 said:

I've got 2 votes for  Milviz 310 and I'm very much inclined to this. Looks good.

I’ve got 1500 hours in the real world C310r and the MilViz one is very good.

Edited December 10, 2018 by dbw1
spelling

[NorwegianAviator 60]

7 hours ago, FDEdev said:

In every jet, turboprop and piston engine airplane it's no problem to overcome the ground friction problem by designing the FDE so that a turboprop/jet e.g. accelerates at idle power and it doesn't with just a tiny bit of reverse (beta). 

But as far as I know and according to several developers, this requires them to alter the thrust curves for the jet engine so that it produces more thrust at idle and very low power settings than it's supposed to (PMDG does this in the NG, not sure about their 777 and 747). In my opinion, this is not a very good solution, but just a tweak to get around the core issue and makes operation on the ground more unrealistic, because the thrust curves are not going to be correct.

But back to turboprops which this thread is all about. Do you have a solution to fix the turboprops in P3D?

[FDEdev 955]

31 minutes ago, NorwegianAviator said:

But as far as I know and according to several developers, this requires them to alter the thrust curves for the jet engine so that it produces more thrust at idle and very low power settings than it's supposed to (PMDG does this in the NG, not sure about their 777 and 747). In my opinion, this is not a very good solution, but just a tweak to get around the core issue and makes operation on the ground more unrealistic, because the thrust curves are not going to be correct.

But back to turboprops which this thread is all about. Do you have a solution to fix the turboprops in P3D?

I don't understand what's so unrealistic with the increased idle thrust on ground besides the slightly higher fuel flow, and I severely doubt that you would notice the incorrect thrust curves during operation.

Since we have different opinions about what needs to be 'fixed' I doubt that I would have a solution that's acceptable to you since I e.g. usually design my turboprops so that they taxi at idle power without actually simulating beta. That said, beta only indicates the range where the power lever controls the propeller blade angle, nothing else.