I'd like to hear people's opinions. I'm mostly interested in these things, ordered by importance:

1) Flight dynamics

2) Autopilot simulation

3) System depth

 

 

All of them.

Subjectively My favourite out of the 3 and possibly all round favourite of anything available in the sim right now would have to be the TBM 850. 

I'd also say the TBM has the most in depth systems and deep simulation of its period avionics. 

The TBM flight model is also very nice though I suspect the PC12 flight model WILL ultimately be the best of the 3. However at the moment it's a bit squirrelly on take off and landing , that as I understand it is not so much a fault of the flight model but a limitation of how the host sim implements it, hopefully a middle ground can be found, or techniques learned to mitigate that. 

I know my answer was a bit annoying haha.  But it's true - they all serve different purposes for me, and they all are quite different.

I'll list some pros and cons (of my opinion only) about each

 

TBM 850 

PROs:  Quite fast for a turboprop, beautiful analog gauges/plenty of clicking and pilot interaction, nice array of avionics, TDS/PMS/WT GNS/old school radios, plenty of failure options to go along with all the instruments, tons of custom interior sounds - it's one of the most immersive when I fly in VR, powerful livery dynamic registration (basically one can write their own registration and have it look good - the best addon I've seen so far in that regards), to me a decent flight model - I can land in a stiff crosswind with correct rudder and aileron input...a lot of msfs addons have issues for some reason.  Also has a lot of third party livery options!

CONs:  Default exterior sounds (doesn't really bother me much because the TBM930 is a similar engine), but the beta and reverse sounds are a bit meh, turboprop realism not the greatest - but does have features which tries to mimic the real one like hot starts/ITT behaviors - a good improvement over stock TBM 930 engine

 

M500

PROs:  Probably the most authentic systems for a modern glass addon, also the most authentic engine simulation we have so far, really nice vehicles and cargo loading when parked etc, very nice sounds inside and out -the beta and reverse is excellent

CONs: Quite slow for a turboprop, I want to say 260 KTAS or so is full steam ahead, basic dynamic reg system - just like default ASXGS style, cockpit interaction - the addon itself is wonderful just that it's so automated... imo it's kinda boring at times... however it requires a certain level of discipline so you don't break your plane

 

PC12 - so new that some of the bugs need to get worked out - the release feels a little rushed to me - but based on their discord I have high confidence they will fix everything

PROs:  Very nice modelling interior and exterior, sharp textures, excellent sounds, a nice array of different avionics (TDS/PMS/WT GNS) mixed with a nice analog/digital panel, plenty of things to click on while flying, the "middle" cruise speed of the three, excellent STOL capabilities - get into any runway type with ease

CONs:  No failure modelling, some basic bugs like issues with ILS intercepts, VOR/HDG while on AP (again which have been acknowledged by the dev team), some interesting rudder characteristics - as the real plane has a sort of rudder and aileron interconnect - it seems they had a hard time implementing it

 

As you can see, all three are good options.  I bought them all as I said I would when they were announced...  I really enjoy all of them - but for different reasons.

Nice comparison, ryanbatc.   I have the M500 and love it.  I may just try the 850 based on your comments.

I have all 3 with only limited time in PC12 so far.

Ranked in order....all my opinion of course!

1. FSR500.  I think overall this is the most enjoyable for me. The systems, the sounds, appearance, etc.  It does have the G1000 so if you are familiar with that it will feel like home.  It also has an EFB with everything you need on it including Navigraph charts, loading, and passenger comfort options. Flight dynamics are to-the-book and i has the best manual ever produced for a flight sim aircraft.  Hard to point out any flaws with this one.

2.  TBM 850   This is not far behind the FSR and it would probably be #1 if they had included custom interior engine/prop sounds like the other two have (it uses the default TBM sounds which are not very good with an annoyingly loud prop sound on the inside when flying). I worked around it with some engine volume changes, etc..  Otherwise, beautiful model and panel with everything working as it should.  I am partial to the older style analog gauge panels vs G1000 as there is more to do and it is what I learned to fly on.  Deep system simulation, really nice panel lighting at night, awesome flight model.....great overall airplane.  I think it is the most expensive of the three.

3.  PC12 - Like I mentioned, I have only have been in this for about an hour. I think SWS misses the mark on this one with the gnarly takeoff/landing/yaw behavior.  Takeoff was actually good for me (using a TM Boeing yoke/Logitech pedals) , trims all in the green but landing was a hot mess.  Watch a few of the videos out there and you will see it happen to almost everyone.  I get what they are trying to do here but it is just not going to work for the average simmer IMO, especially if you do not use a decent yoke and pedals.  It will cause frustration which then causes people to toss it in the hangar. You should not have to battle an airplane like that when taking off or landing. Yup, you need rudder in real aircraft but you should not be applying full rudder in both directions to avoid skidding and ending up in the grass in calm winds.  I would put it at the top for the sounds though, they are very well done.  There are some AP bugs using the GTN units which will be fixed at some point. I am currently using the default 530. You also cannot switch between different avionics without a reinstall which is strange.  Handling in the air is great, very heavy feel to it and vey stable.  Hand-flying felt great. Systems less in depth as far as failures, etc (no hotstarts). vs the other two.  It is a different type of aircraft, different mission than the other 2 so that is something to consider.  If they can improve the air/ground transition, it will be a winner.

 

 

Edited December 8, 20232 yr by Flic1

Just as a little extra, I'd like to throw the Blacksquare King Air into the mix (I know it wasn't OPs original question, but I feel the KA is in the same category as the three mentioned planes):

- First things first: The FTSim sound pack is an absolute must have, it really elevates the plane to the next level (fingers crossed we get one for the TBM, as well)!

- Really cool panel with little automation, a real hands-on airplane

- Hand-flies really nice. Not as nice as the PC 12, but close

- A fast cruiser (a little slower than the TBM, but not much) 

Negatives are of course the stock 3D model (--> Doors don't open) and the sub-par turboprop simulation. Maybe BS will update the engine logic to be on par with the TBM.

But overall, I must say I've really fallen back in love with the KA thanks to the FTSim sounds. It's a real step up in complexity compared to the TBM, what with having to manage two engines and all.

4 hours ago, Flic1 said:

Takeoff was actually good for me (using a TM Boeing yoke/Logitech pedals) , trims all in the green but landing was a hot mess.  Watch a few of the videos out there and you will see it happen to almost everyone. 

You are not supposed to trim in the green for landing (the green marks are for takeoff, and it’s an agressive right rudder trim to compensate for the engine torque at takeoff power).
It’s true that the landing in the PC12 requires practices, but when you spend time learning and get the feel for it everything get very smooth. the flight model in this aircraft is amazing, really and it will only get better

oh, no offense to the TBM850 but I can’t stand it’s external 3D model, the wings are waay too thick, at least twice as thick as they should be (I know it’s stupid but🤷🏾‍♂️…)

Edited December 8, 20232 yr by cyril972

Quote

the sings are waay too thick, at least twice as thick as they should be (I know it’s stupid but🤷🏾‍♂️…)

You know what?, I would never have noticed but now It just jumps out at me.

I wouldnt say twice as thick but certainly too thick.

 

37 minutes ago, cyril972 said:

It’s true that the landing in the PC12 requires practices, but when you spend time learning and get the feel for it everything get very smooth. the flight model in this aircraft is amazing, really and it will only get better

This is true, I went from being all over the shop yesterday on landing to  flying circuits this evening with a 15kt crosswind touching down right on the centreline every time.

14 minutes ago, Lonesome Cowboy Burt said:

You know what?, I would never have noticed but now It just jumps out at me.

I wouldnt say twice as thick but certainly too thick.

 

I hope not having ruined the plane for you...In my case when I see a modeling error, I just can't unsee it. the TBM850 seems cool but this just .... Anway the PC12 is a cooler and more versatile plane, it fly tons of mission around the world and this already amazingPC12 from SWS will only get better

14 minutes ago, jon b said:

This is true, I went from being all over the shop yesterday on landing to  flying circuits this evening with a 15kt crosswind touching down right on the centreline every time.

Same here, when I loaded it at release I could'nt understand why the nose was pointing rignt when the wind was coming left. Also my landing where..not good at best. But I learned, I searched I practised and now this plane just feel incredible 

1 hour ago, cyril972 said:

 

oh, no offense to the TBM850 but I can’t stand it’s external 3D model, the wings are waay too thick, at least twice as thick as they should be (I know it’s stupid but🤷🏾‍♂️…)

What?  I don't think so... you're certain you're not just looking at the wingtips?  They sort of flare upwards.  The wing looks fine to me after comparing with other TBM 850s.

I think it is hard to say what one is best, and it certainly depends a lot of the criteria you are basing that recommendation on. For me it is a toss-up between the M500 and the 850, which I seem to be flying in equal measure these days. They are also the only aircraft I am flying these days. For me, failures are important, both failures that occur because of negligence or basic MTOW failures that can occur. Both the TBM and these M500 have these but unfortunately the PC12 launched without them. Once they are there, I will reconsider purchasing that aircraft., But it also depends a lot on the kind of mission you like to fly. I

All three aircraft seem to be excellent, and I would say the best single-engine turboprops we have had in the MS lineage of flight simulators. I find the two I have realistic and immersive. All three have some issues, the TBM its sounds, the M500 the lack of backup instruments and a working master fuel cut off, and the PC12 the absence of failures, but all three are committed, talented developers who have said these will all be addressed in coming updates. Really, you can't go wrong with any of them. 

1 hour ago, cyril972 said:

oh, no offense to the TBM850 but I can’t stand it’s external 3D model, the wings are waay too thick, at least twice as thick as they should be (I know it’s stupid but🤷🏾‍♂️…)

If you are comparing to the asobo TBM, I suspect it's black square who is correct, because I'm noticed while (attempting) to do my own repaints that the asobo model has a big bump in the wing, presumably when they found the landing gear wound not fit. I can't unsee that one in sim now, like the backwards Baron propeller blade.