Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Tom_L

Turboprop logic - here we are again....

Recommended Posts

While there is a lot to like about the TBM in MSFS, it still suffers from the shortcomings of turboprop behaviour of the old days. Torque rises with altitude, ITT remains in lower ranges, Beta range doesn't seem to work. Does anybody know, if the SDK will allow for 3rd party developers to fix this or will our only hope be Majestic with the Q400 - provided their external simulation is possible in MSFS? Oh - and on a side note: the startup procedure is broken too: put the lever in taxi position prior to start in order to avoid a hot start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell all the engine modelling is a wholesale port of the behaviour from FSX, so very broken indeed for turboprops and constant speed propellers. Hopefully Asobo will put this on their list to fix because otherwise it will compromise every addon aircraft that doesn't find a workaround.


ckyliu, proud supporter of ViaIntercity.com. Find my spec and settings in "About me" on my profile.

support1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Tom_L said:

While there is a lot to like about the TBM in MSFS, it still suffers from the shortcomings of turboprop behaviour of the old days. T 

All the returns from users, albeit admittedly still fragmentary, point indeed to the old flawed engine from FSX/P3D : torque vs rpm, NG and ITT vs altitude. From startup to landing. Not much yet about the interaction of these parameters and ambient temp. which is not an unimportant factor on tropical bush flying and on the sound management.

I'd love to see the opinion of @robert young or a proven turboprop pilot on the TBM or the Caravan engine management to optimize power. Is it that bad or are we getting returns from people who don't have a clue ?

2 hours ago, ckyliu said:

  Hopefully Asobo will put this on their list to fix because otherwise it will compromise every addon aircraft that doesn't find a workaround.

I am not sure that a fix is possible. We have been waiting 15 years for one. Neither the Aces nor the P3D team could deliver.

If the bad scenario was confirmed, why in the world did they have to bring three subpar turboprops instead of one but good one ? November 2019 Neuman at Golem.de:  We don't want to do this as a game. Our target group are people for whom flying is a hobby. They know a lot about it. Yes we do, Jorge. A little.

Edited by Dominique_K
  • Like 2

Dominique

Simming since 1981-  4770 @ 4.4 GHz and a 1080 @ 2560*1440 - Warthog HOTAS - MFG pedals -

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ckyliu said:

As far as I can tell all the engine modelling is a wholesale port of the behaviour from FSX, so very broken indeed for turboprops and constant speed propellers. Hopefully Asobo will put this on their list to fix because otherwise it will compromise every addon aircraft that doesn't find a workaround.

I had wondered whether this issue had finally been fixed.  It was spoken and complained about ad nauseam  during FSX/P3D.  Disappointed that it isn't and hope they address it soon.  Haven't flown any TP yet

Edited by ErichB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The logic is definitely still flawed.  At least from my perspective as a RW PC12 driver.

I just tried a test climb in the TBM out of south Florida up to FL240.  I used a keybind to set the power exactly.  As you climb in a turboprop, your engine limit, generally speaking, should transition from TRQ to ITT.  In the MSFS TBM, the ITT actually dropped as I climbed up to 240.  TRQ stays the same throughout the climb or even rises, which is incorrect.  And this is with extremely warm temperatures vs. ISA aloft where ITT should be even more of an issue.

The inertial separator also seems to have zero effect on ITT which it should.  On the PC12 it would add a good 20-30c to the ITT.

Edited by Valcor
a word
  • Like 4

lotusban11.jpg

 

Dave Creed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ckyliu said:

As far as I can tell all the engine modelling is a wholesale port of the behaviour from FSX, so very broken indeed for turboprops and constant speed propellers. Hopefully Asobo will put this on their list to fix because otherwise it will compromise every addon aircraft that doesn't find a workaround.

If Asobo didn't feel it was necessary to fix something that was broken for decades, it's quite clear they won't do anything about it in the future.

Anyone hoping Asobo will do miracles to fix the flight model needs to face reality. 


Alvin Lee / WSSS 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no easy way to put this. The PT6 modeling is just plain garbage. That is my opinion as a 21 year King Air pilot and 15 year King Air instructor.

Not to mention that with "2000 surfaces" not a one of those was the propellers as the propeller aerodynamics is buggered as well. 

I am starting to think that Asobo's pilots were the same guys who worked for Carenado in they are pilot's but not certified in the airplanes being developed. i.e. a motor glider pilot is used to comment on the accuracy of a business turboprop.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am disappointed as well and hope Flight 1 does their B200 for FS2020.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

RW pilot with multiple 1000s of hours in C208s and B200s. In a nutshell, the turboprop simulation is the same poor model we have had for the last 15-20 years. Torque, ITT, Ng, RPM all responding incorrectly.

They don’t have to hit real work figures, leave that for the 3rd party devs, but these values should at least move in response to the correct inputs, and in the right direction. At the moment they don’t. After 20 years, I was really expecting better here.

The worst part is this severely hinders the ability of 3rd party devs to produce a realistic turboprop product. Unless they have the resources and skill to build a complete engine simulation external to MSFS 2020 (only 1 or 2 devs have this ability), they are stuck trying to fit their products into a broken system.

Edited by norman_99
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turboprop Logic. Sounds like Steely Dan album title. 🤣

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Alan Bradbury

Check out my youtube flight sim videos: Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, maniamcool said:

If Asobo didn't feel it was necessary to fix something that was broken for decades, it's quite clear they won't do anything about it in the future.

Anyone hoping Asobo will do miracles to fix the flight model needs to face reality. 

Couldn't agree more...cept it's more likely MS's decision to copy/paste and not Asobo's....but who knows.

There's alot of fsx copy/pasting going on from what ive seen thus far...not impressed tbh...MSFS in its current state is more of a scenery simulator than an aircraft simulator.

From what I see, the XP devs have taken the "simulation" aspect MUCH more seriously than MS has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, norman_99 said:

 

The worst part is this severely hinders the ability of 3rd party devs to produce a realistic turboprop product.

Absolutely and that puts into perpective Jorge Neuman’s declaration, that I found rather lame in any case, that they wanted to do simplistic default aircraft not to compete with 3rd Party Developer. The only solution will be yet again to use an external model like Majestic did in P3D if it is still possible. Crossing the fingers.  Or have some wizardry à la RealAir inside the sim which cannot solve all the problems.

On another level, this also puts into perspective the partnership they have with Daher or Cessna. Where is the beef ?

 


Dominique

Simming since 1981-  4770 @ 4.4 GHz and a 1080 @ 2560*1440 - Warthog HOTAS - MFG pedals -

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tom_L said:

While there is a lot to like about the TBM in MSFS, it still suffers from the shortcomings of turboprop behaviour of the old days. Torque rises with altitude, ITT remains in lower ranges, Beta range doesn't seem to work. Does anybody know, if the SDK will allow for 3rd party developers to fix this or will our only hope be Majestic with the Q400 - provided their external simulation is possible in MSFS? Oh - and on a side note: the startup procedure is broken too: put the lever in taxi position prior to start in order to avoid a hot start.

Those things have been reported in alpha beta numerous times, but unfortunately has never been fixed. I'm not sure the odds if getting it fix eventually. Meanwhile, I hope 3rd party developer will mod it


flight sim addict, airplane owner, CFI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, norman_99 said:

The worst part is this severely hinders the ability of 3rd party devs to produce a realistic turboprop product. Unless they have the resources and skill to build a complete engine simulation external to MSFS 2020 (only 1 or 2 devs have this ability), they are stuck trying to fit their products into a broken system.

As you mentioned, some developers (i.e. Majestic) do have the ability to code a realistic emulation of how a turboprop actually functions. Rather than waiting for a third party to develop an add-on with an external engine model, perhaps the answer would be to license Majestic’s turboprop technology so that it could be incorporated into the core sim and available to all turboprop models.

Unfortunately, it may be that the model Majestic created is so specific to the PW150 engine of the Q-400, that it could not be made generic enough to work for a variety of other turboprop engines.

At the very least, perhaps Asobo could contract with Majestic to serve as expert consultants in the area of engine modeling. Probably nobody on the Asobo development staff has that kind of specific expertise, since it appears they have simply re-purposed the old FSX turboprop model.


Jim Barrett

Licensed Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic, Avionics, Electrical & Air Data Systems Specialist. Qualified on: Falcon 900, CRJ-200, Dornier 328-100, Hawker 850XP and 1000, Lear 35, 45, 55 and 60, Gulfstream IV and 550, Embraer 135, Beech Premiere and 400A, MD-80.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    35%
    $8,760.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...