3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

Apparently this "mod" was developed by someone that has an axe to grind with SWS and is trying to promote his Twitch channel. The flight model was checked by a couple of real world Kodiak Pilots,  and that is why most people really like it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 

Snaking S turns along the entire ILS or RNAV approach is certainly broke. My Kodiak does this on every approach.

16 minutes ago, flyinpilot212121 said:

From what I gather he is a pilot for the Forrest fire fighters up in Canada currently flying an aero commander…Not sure about his actual type times but I’d imagine some of what he says must have some value. Either way, if SWS put out an update on the flying model to reduce the P-factor by 50% (if this is a fact) shortly after release, which is quite a big discrepancy, then I’d be questioning the “kodiak pilots” that tested the model during beta. I don’t own the plane, just playing devils advocate and looking at it from the outside in.

That's just about the most reasoned take here, I think.   As the SWS developer themselves said in that image I shared, flight modelling is much more of an art than a science.  Before all other complications, simply by the nature of how different each person's sim setup is, getting wide agreement on the performance of even a simple plane is going to be almost impossible unless you have everyone testing on exactly the same hardware set up exactly the same way and in exactly the same flight situations.   I can't begin to count how many times I've seen high-time pilots argue over whether or not a particular instance of a plane they both had hours in was authentic or not.

Like you said, the mere fact that SWS already issued one update from their out of the box configuration demonstrates that "tested by real Kodiak pilots" doesn't necessarily mean spit.   Is the modded version more or less "realistic"?   I don't know, it almost certainly depends on who you ask, and you could probably ask two different experienced pilots and get disagreement on that, anyway.   Anyone who says with absolute certainty that the official version, now, is actually the totally correct one and any enhancements are flawed is speaking with certainty they shouldn't have.   But, conversely, one is justified in asking what the experience of the person who created the mod is and how relevant their seat time is to this particular model.

Perhaps we should all have a bit less hellfire certainty about ourselves and our opinions and just accept that no digital rendition of an airplane in a consumer desktop sim is ever going to be totally accurate and name-calling and casting aspersions based on differences in particular takes on any one plane is uncalled for.

 

Edited January 19, 20224 yr by DeepestRed

4 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Snaking S turns along the entire ILS or RNAV approach is certainly broke. My Kodiak does this on every approach.

That is really bizarre. The Kodiak is the best flying aircraft I have in MSFS 2020 in both ILS and RNAV, and usually I am flying a star if available. I wish every aircraft I get for MSFS was as good as the Kodiak flying approaches. Have you posted this issue on  Discord to see if they have any suggestions? 

Edited January 19, 20224 yr by Bobsk8

3 minutes ago, DeepestRed said:

That's just about the most reasoned take here, I think.   As the SWS developer themselves said in that image I shared, flight modelling is much more of an art than a science.  Before all other complications, simply by the nature of how different each person's sim setup is, getting wide agreement on the performance of even a simple plane is going to be almost impossible unless you have everyone testing on exactly the same hardware set up exactly the same way.   I can't begin to count how many times I've seen high-time pilots argue over whether or not a particular instance of a plane they both had hours in was authentic or not.

Like you said, the mere fact that SWS already issued one update from their out of the box configuration demonstrates that "tested by real Kodiak pilots" doesn't necessarily mean spit.   Is the modded version more or less "realistic"?   I don't know, it almost certainly depends on who you ask, and you could probably ask two different experienced pilots and get disagreement on that, anyway.   Anyone who says with absolute certainty that the official version, now, is actually the totally correct one and any enhancements are flawed is speaking with certainty they shouldn't have.   But, conversely, one is justified in asking what the experience of the person who created the mod is and how relevant their seat time is to this particular model.

Perhaps we should all have a bit less hellfire certainty about ourselves and our opinions and just accept that no digital rendition of an airplane in a consumer desktop sim is ever going to be totally accurate and name-calling and casting aspersions based on differences in particular takes on any one plane is uncalled for.

 

Very well said! 
Anywho, I’m off going to decide whether I should get the kodiak or twotter lol.

Since I don't seem to have any S turn issues with the ILS (at least not yet), I'll think I just try the mod from Fltsim.to just to see what differences I notice in the Kodiak handling.  I also thought it was kind of interesting that the person who developed the Fltsim.to mod apparently did not see a reason to modify the AP PID controller parameters (as the other mod does) since in the list of changes there was no mention of that. I would assume that if he had S turn issues with the ILS he might have felt a need to make some PID parameter changes. Of course, this is just pure speculation on my part.

Al

 

To set the record straight about a couple of comments made:

1) Why the Kodiak was flipping on release has been explained many times: a 10x increase in rudder propwash slipped into v1, combined with P-factor which made climbing gentle slopes impossible and aggravated this further. It is "just a typo" with spectacular results. Daher tested a version like the patched one.

2) Snaking: reported, known and will be one of the first things fixed

3) CCM: What I wrote on Discord stands. We try to work with data and constructive criticism. Where possible with type rated pilots. If not possible, we play it by ear like CCM does. What will not fly is attitudes like his - and there is a long backstory. In the interest of not saying things behind him, I will leave this here.

His mod is a best guess and I can easily debunk it using his own numbers. It improves some things, it breaks other stuff and does not hold up to the data and feedback we have. This is why it was not done by us, but a 3rd party and that is totally fine. Mods are meant to cover differing tastes and are a blessing.

What isn't OK is his attitude, which shows in his own words and the reasons are known by me, him and a couple more people that were there in the beginning.

 

Edit: All said, we are a business and while receptive to feedback, we are protective of our work, licensors and testers. As you may notice I go into length explaining the design decisions that lead to a feature, in hope of people understanding the process and giving me info to take to the team. Stick time in a type is good, proven data tends to go in faster, though. This approach is what makes the Kodiak so well received by the overwhelming majority of its buyers, despite the shortcomings it admittedly has.

 

Edited January 19, 20224 yr by A320_SX ALX

I am really looking forward to the next SWS Kodiak update, and hope it is 'sooner' rather than 'later'. 🙂

Al

 

50 minutes ago, A320_SX ALX said:

To set the record straight about a couple of comments made:

1) Why the Kodiak was flipping on release has been explained many times: a 10x increase in rudder propwash slipped into v1, combined with P-factor which made climbing gentle slopes impossible and aggravated this further. It is "just a typo" with spectacular results. Daher tested a version like the patched one.

2) Snaking: reported, known and will be one of the first things fixed

3) CCM: What I wrote on Discord stands. We try to work with data and constructive criticism. Where possible with type rated pilots. If not possible, we play it by ear like CCM does. What will not fly is attitudes like his - and there is a long backstory. In the interest of not saying things behind him, I will leave this here.

His mod is a best guess and I can easily debunk it using his own numbers. It improves some things, it breaks other stuff and does not hold up to the data and feedback we have. This is why it was not done by us, but a 3rd party and that is totally fine. Mods are meant to cover differing tastes and are a blessing.

What isn't OK is his attitude, which shows in his own words and the reasons are known by me, him and a couple more people that were there in the beginning.

 

Edit: All said, we are a business and while receptive to feedback, we are protective of our work, licensors and testers. As you may notice I go into length explaining the design decisions that lead to a feature, in hope of people understanding the process and giving me info to take to the team. Stick time in a type is good, proven data tends to go in faster, though. This approach is what makes the Kodiak so well received by the overwhelming majority of its buyers, despite the shortcomings it admittedly has.

 

I think it's time to bury the hatchet on both side. I think both have the same end goal in mine but disagree on how to get there. I don't think there is any real animosity here. There is 2 options here available for the community to decide how they want to fly it.

1 hour ago, A320_SX ALX said:

2) Snaking: reported, known and will be one of the first things fixed

Very good news!

14 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

This approach is what makes the Kodiak so well received by the overwhelming majority of its buyers, despite the shortcomings it admittedly has.

I do have the snaking on ILS and RNAV approaches, but still consider the Kodiak the best MSFS aircraft I have purchased!

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

That is really bizarre. The Kodiak is the best flying aircraft I have in MSFS 2020 in both ILS and RNAV, and usually I am flying a star if available. I wish every aircraft I get for MSFS was as good as the Kodiak flying approaches. Have you posted this issue on  Discord to see if they have any suggestions? 

Even with the snaking it is also my best flying aircraft in MSFS - I haven't purchased the Cessna 337 or Twin Otter because it is so good.  Just read below it is a know issue and the first thing to be fixed in the next update 🙂

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by MrBitstFlyer

22 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Even with the snaking it is also my best flying aircraft in FS2004 - 🙂

Msfs 2020 must have been really bad to you, you’ve reverted back to fs2004 😂😂

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by flyinpilot212121

1 hour ago, A320_SX ALX said:

To set the record straight about a couple of comments made:

1) Why the Kodiak was flipping on release has been explained many times: a 10x increase in rudder propwash slipped into v1, combined with P-factor which made climbing gentle slopes impossible and aggravated this further. It is "just a typo" with spectacular results. Daher tested a version like the patched one.

2) Snaking: reported, known and will be one of the first things fixed

3) CCM: What I wrote on Discord stands. We try to work with data and constructive criticism. Where possible with type rated pilots. If not possible, we play it by ear like CCM does. What will not fly is attitudes like his - and there is a long backstory. In the interest of not saying things behind him, I will leave this here.

His mod is a best guess and I can easily debunk it using his own numbers. It improves some things, it breaks other stuff and does not hold up to the data and feedback we have. This is why it was not done by us, but a 3rd party and that is totally fine. Mods are meant to cover differing tastes and are a blessing.

What isn't OK is his attitude, which shows in his own words and the reasons are known by me, him and a couple more people that were there in the beginning.

 

Edit: All said, we are a business and while receptive to feedback, we are protective of our work, licensors and testers. As you may notice I go into length explaining the design decisions that lead to a feature, in hope of people understanding the process and giving me info to take to the team. Stick time in a type is good, proven data tends to go in faster, though. This approach is what makes the Kodiak so well received by the overwhelming majority of its buyers, despite the shortcomings it admittedly has.

 

  Thank you Alex, this thread was making me tired. Any time I’ve dealt with you and SWS you’ve been very honest, even if it wasn’t what I wanted to hear. As far as your new Kodiak goes it is by far the best plane for MSFS yet, you guys have truly raised the bar. In fact, it is one of  my favourite planes of all time, in any of the sims. Great product(even if you updated it 2 weeks after release), great communication.
  Now gimme my float version!

Notice where this very experienced Kodiak Pilot sets his rudder trim for takeoff. 

 

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I

Well you have something else  that is not right then, I have no idea what it is, but around 95% of my approaches are ILS and Rnav, and I don't see anything like you are describing. 

For me the Kodiak also hunts back and forth all the way down on an RNAV and ILS. It is very apparent, and it is annoying. You are lucky you don't have it. Using the NXI mod of course. 

1 hour ago, flyinpilot212121 said:

Msfs 2020 must have been really bad to you, you’ve reverted back to fs2004 😂😂

Haha! 😁