Just to change hear for a quick second away from manuals and tutorial flights; overall, how is the airplane?

How does it fly? I really liked the f1 kingair because if felt solid. It didn't feel like a feather with pitch and roll.

How do the power levers work? In the f1 kingair, it was kinda weird for me. I always had to keep my physical throttle up a bit or it would go into beta. 

It would be nice to get some of y'all's overall impressions.

I love hand flying this thing.  As much as is possible for a person flying behind a PC monitor, it feels like a king air, it's a bit heavier than the beechraft I fly (just a bit lol).

You can easily hand fly your entire flight, it trims out nicely.  Typically I'll throw on AP in cruise and hand fly the rest.

Single engine ops I've been told is realistic by our beta KA pilots but I rarely fly any failures in flightsim

oh edit: I forgot to address your question about throttles.  I use a CH throttle (so a single lever for both controls - I know its sacrilege but it is what it is).  And everything works fine for me.  I believe that you can adjust yours in MVAMS (the milviz app thing on your desktop).

Edited June 3, 20206 yr by ryanbatcund

I have now done a step my step walk thought, after doing a flight just now it got me from A to B or C&D to shutdown.

It has no run up checks just the bare bones to get you though a flight and the order to do everything. The FMS is very simple and you really should not need help with that. if you do see MV vid on it.

If you would like a copy PM me your email. Once I have some feed back and I know its all good I will upload it somewhere.

17 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Just to change hear for a quick second away from manuals and tutorial flights; overall, how is the airplane?

How does it fly? I really liked the f1 kingair because if felt solid. It didn't feel like a feather with pitch and roll.

How do the power levers work? In the f1 kingair, it was kinda weird for me. I always had to keep my physical throttle up a bit or it would go into beta. 

It would be nice to get some of y'all's overall impressions.

Myself and others worked very hard with the flight dynamics developer to try and get the feel of this airplane as close as possible. There was dozens of back and forths trying to nail this and even so a change right at the end put the torque settings out of wack for release. That was fixed in the first HF.

Basic flight maneuvers should feel right for a B350. The pitch axis is sensitive and the roll axis a little heavy. The MV B350i like the real airplane is well dampened. This means the airplane demonstrates postivtie static stability in that when it is upset by the airmass it generally returns back to where it was. See Boldmethond on Stability It also has been coded with positive dynamic stability which is the dampening. Now I know some in the group will eschew this as "flying on rails."  If you are in that crowd then you may want to skip this airplane. I also caveated all my testing  as within the level of error of my cheap Saitek Yoke, Rudders, and six lever power quadrant. Saitek is known for using cheap potentiometers so what I feel (input to response loop) can be different then someone with higher quality controls. Controls sensitivity and null zones are also adjustable inside the sim so there is lots of room for different feels even within similar controls. 

I flew lots and lots of traffic patterns, touch and gos, and landed in every flap setting. Most of the tuning started with a 15,000 airplane and then just checked that everything was still close at lighter weights. Hot and cold weather and high altitude airports were all checks. I also did a full round of steep turns, slow flight, stalls, engine failure after takeoff, single engine maneuvers, and single engine landings. Also as a certified UPRT instructor I tested maximum and minimum pitch and aggressive roll rates based on the UPRT recovery scenarios we practiced in the simulator. The only area the FDE failed was VMCA in which the airplane would stall and spin before yawing. Also note the Rudder Boost is super aggressive. The decision was made to leave it that way for people without separate rudder controls. You can fail and engine and fly the airplane almost without touching the rudders with Rudder Boost ON. Most of my single engine testing was with Rudder Boost OFF. 

The aircraft systems are all coded in. The engines actually start correctly. This was a huge disagreement in which we had to show a video of an actual King Air start routine thanks to Flight1 and Carenado leading so many to believe that propeller is static. Nope that is not how a free turbine works, once the air mass inside the engine (even before the fuel is added) overcomes the static position of the propeller, it starts turning. The electrical system is meticulously coded to include the Hall Effect Devices (or Bus ties for you non-1900 rated.) This is not a CTRL+E airplane, if you are unwilling to follow the checklists then you will have problems. Systems are properly connected to their appropriate buses and thus without a source of 28VDC you loose the generator buses. The battery is 24VDC. These procedures and checks are all covered in the preflight tutorial videos. These were my first attempt to make videos like this and I promise I will never try it again. The bleed air system is also well designed, however it is linier. If you try to load the airplane inflight the bleed air system variables seems to not be set for flight correctly. You have to fly this airplane from start to finish and I only recommend COLD and DARK as the setup. You can even properly manually lower the gear with the alternate extension lever. 

The avionics were the most difficult piece and I think they did a remarkable job considering how much that had to be reverse engineered. I was driven near mad at times with what if questions on the avionics that was not described in the Operator's Manuals. You know those things a properly trained pilot would never actually do, but someone who just mashs buttons in a sim might try. There was a lot of "I don't know let me try and see what happens" moments. There were also a number of "based on my knowledge of Collins logic." Then there was the Navigraph factor. I apologize to Eaglesoft for any negative comments I may have made regarding their choice of RealNav database. I understand now! So, you are getting the best PL21 simulation based on not knowing every logic decision programmed in by Rockwell-Collins and based on the limitations of Navigraph data. This was reverse engineering miracle. I really thank our other pilots for stepping up as well. The avionics were a massive undertaking.

I wish this product was available back when I was actively teaching 350s. (I now teach 200s and 1900s as the time off is much better.) The systems emulators were only available in the classrooms and the avionics software (FMS 3000 and AFDs) was a $700+ purchase per client. To consider how much you are getting in a desktop platform for $80 is just staggering! I know a lot of clients would have rejoiced over a product like this.

The beta testers really did a great job on this product. The other pilots and I were pretty much regulated to major items and all of the detailed grunt work of finding and reporting errors fell to the beta testers. Considering all of the work they did for free it is really unfair when someone criticizes the beta team.

10 minutes ago, KenG said:

Myself and others worked very hard with the flight dynamics developer to try and get the feel of this airplane as close as possible. There was dozens of back and forths trying to nail this and even so a change right at the end put the torque settings out of wack for release. That was fixed in the first HF.

Basic flight maneuvers should feel right for a B350. The pitch axis is sensitive and the roll axis a little heavy. The MV B350i like the real airplane is well dampened. This means the airplane demonstrates postivtie static stability in that when it is upset by the airmass it generally returns back to where it was. See Boldmethond on Stability It also has been coded with positive dynamic stability which is the dampening. Now I know some in the group will eschew this as "flying on rails."  If you are in that crowd then you may want to skip this airplane. I also caveated all my testing  as within the level of error of my cheap Saitek Yoke, Rudders, and six lever power quadrant. Saitek is known for using cheap potentiometers so what I feel (input to response loop) can be different then someone with higher quality controls. Controls sensitivity and null zones are also adjustable inside the sim so there is lots of room for different feels even within similar controls. 

I flew lots and lots of traffic patterns, touch and gos, and landed in every flap setting. Most of the tuning started with a 15,000 airplane and then just checked that everything was still close at lighter weights. Hot and cold weather and high altitude airports were all checks. I also did a full round of steep turns, slow flight, stalls, engine failure after takeoff, single engine maneuvers, and single engine landings. Also as a certified UPRT instructor I tested maximum and minimum pitch and aggressive roll rates based on the UPRT recovery scenarios we practiced in the simulator. The only area the FDE failed was VMCA in which the airplane would stall and spin before yawing. Also note the Rudder Boost is super aggressive. The decision was made to leave it that way for people without separate rudder controls. You can fail and engine and fly the airplane almost without touching the rudders with Rudder Boost ON. Most of my single engine testing was with Rudder Boost OFF. 

The aircraft systems are all coded in. The engines actually start correctly. This was a huge disagreement in which we had to show a video of an actual King Air start routine thanks to Flight1 and Carenado leading so many to believe that propeller is static. Nope that is not how a free turbine works, once the air mass inside the engine (even before the fuel is added) overcomes the static position of the propeller, it starts turning. The electrical system is meticulously coded to include the Hall Effect Devices (or Bus ties for you non-1900 rated.) This is not a CTRL+E airplane, if you are unwilling to follow the checklists then you will have problems. Systems are properly connected to their appropriate buses and thus without a source of 28VDC you loose the generator buses. The battery is 24VDC. These procedures and checks are all covered in the preflight tutorial videos. These were my first attempt to make videos like this and I promise I will never try it again. The bleed air system is also well designed, however it is linier. If you try to load the airplane inflight the bleed air system variables seems to not be set for flight correctly. You have to fly this airplane from start to finish and I only recommend COLD and DARK as the setup. You can even properly manually lower the gear with the alternate extension lever. 

The avionics were the most difficult piece and I think they did a remarkable job considering how much that had to be reverse engineered. I was driven near mad at times with what if questions on the avionics that was not described in the Operator's Manuals. You know those things a properly trained pilot would never actually do, but someone who just mashs buttons in a sim might try. There was a lot of "I don't know let me try and see what happens" moments. There were also a number of "based on my knowledge of Collins logic." Then there was the Navigraph factor. I apologize to Eaglesoft for any negative comments I may have made regarding their choice of RealNav database. I understand now! So, you are getting the best PL21 simulation based on not knowing every logic decision programmed in by Rockwell-Collins and based on the limitations of Navigraph data. This was reverse engineering miracle. I really thank our other pilots for stepping up as well. The avionics were a massive undertaking.

I wish this product was available back when I was actively teaching 350s. (I now teach 200s and 1900s as the time off is much better.) The systems emulators were only available in the classrooms and the avionics software (FMS 3000 and AFDs) was a $700+ purchase per client. To consider how much you are getting in a desktop platform for $80 is just staggering! I know a lot of clients would have rejoiced over a product like this.

The beta testers really did a great job on this product. The other pilots and I were pretty much regulated to major items and all of the detailed grunt work of finding and reporting errors fell to the beta testers. Considering all of the work they did for free it is really unfair when someone criticizes the beta team.

Thanks for the very solid write up! I'll most likely be purchasing this today based off what you wrote. Once again thanks! 

Two from today's flights

 

Thanks for the info. VNAV is most helpful for RNAV/VNAV arrivals with multiple altitude restrictions. Over the years I'm able to figure TOD in my head. Y'all have answered my questions. I wasn't familiar with Milvis.

23 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

How does it fly? I really liked the f1 kingair because if felt solid. It didn't feel like a feather with pitch and roll.

I have no real world king air experience but I love the flying feel of this aircraft.  I’m normally a take off, fly to 1000 feet and turn on the autopilot kind of guy.  Not with this aircraft though, I’ll happily handfly to and from cruise as it just feels great.  The Milviz team really nailed this in my opinion.

On 6/3/2020 at 1:07 PM, TedK said:

Yeah, The default FMS in FSX will not go "direct to" from current position without deleting the entire flight plan, or it will attempt to join aroute from your departure airport or previous way point.

I was wondering about the VNAV function. That was another downfall of FSX. Also, a lot of add-ons FLC functions are unstable. They porpoise up and down trying to hold the IAS. Like the Flight1 Mustang, FLC porpoises under FL180. So it's useless on climb-out.

I don't fly the King Air, but I do fly a Proline 21 equipped aircraft in the real world.

IMO, the avionics in the Milviz King Air are brilliantly implemented. The FMS 3000 is a very good re-creation of the real unit and there is a lot more functionality in there than I expected at this price point. While I don't have a Navigraph chart subscription, I believe charts can be displayed on the MFD, per the real aircraft. The menu system for the charts works just as it does in my aircraft (though I haven't actually displayed any in P3D).

I've noticed one small bug in a very specific situation, but it does not affect the integrity of the flight (only a display bug).

As for the VNAV, we only use it on descent IRL and so far, it's worked as intended, though I have yet to try it on a complex STAR with multiple stepdowns. FLC mode works beautifully on climb and switches from IAS to Mach automatically, per the VNAV climb profile in the FMS.

 

More shakedowns are required, but for now I am content with my purchase.

Cheers,

DB

1 hour ago, DaviiB said:

I don't fly the King Air, but I do fly a Proline 21 equipped aircraft in the real world.

IMO, the avionics in the Milviz King Air are brilliantly implemented. The FMS 3000 is a very good re-creation of the real unit and there is a lot more functionality in there than I expected at this price point. While I don't have a Navigraph chart subscription, I believe charts can be displayed on the MFD, per the real aircraft. The menu system for the charts works just as it does in my aircraft (though I haven't actually displayed any in P3D).

I've noticed one small bug in a very specific situation, but it does not affect the integrity of the flight (only a display bug).

 

You should let Milviz know about that display bug, they might be able to fix it.

Good to hear from real life users of either the aircraft or its systems, and even better when they like the fidelity.

21 hours ago, KenG said:

I apologize to Eaglesoft for any negative comments I may have made regarding their choice of RealNav database. I understand now!

Thanks for that... and it's ok.  It's really, really hard to explain the reasons for creating RealNav.

I have not watched it yet, but I just noticed that Captain Mac just uploaded a 2.5 hour full-flight tutorial to YouTube.

 

 

 

the worst tutorial ever seen 

the birds fly nice , the fms works , the prolems seems to be the user.

Edited June 5, 20206 yr by westman

I agree, the video isn't convincing.  After watching all the things he did incorrectly, it actually moved me off the fence to purchase the thing. 

 

how are frame rates in v5? (noticed also that this is for 4.5 only?)