22 hours ago, JYW said:

This has been brought up so many times.

The issues that myself and many other people, both here, on the Discord and elsewhere are nothing to do with the aileron-rudder interconnect.   They are issues concerning low speed, high lift (flaps) yaw stability in flight.  (In other words typically on approach). SWS have acknowledged they are working to improve this.

But please, don't tell us that this aircraft flies appropriately to the real PC-12 and that we're just not getting it.  Because that is just not true.   There are issues with the SWS PC-12's flight dynamics in yaw.  Period.

My learning curve on the SWS PC12 jumped when i started reckoning the physics of it. (i'm no expert on it but made sense to me). i've seen many comment about P-factor but i think it is actually the propwash pushing the tail plane. My reckoning is that the PC12 needs to find a new balance between the direction stabilisation of the tailplane and that propwash pushing against when transitioning form +200kts to 100-120 kts on approach. 

Now i can't comment why the yaw damper can't keep up and if that is real or not.

What i also have wondered how developing/(beta)testing actually works. All developer/tester have a certain yoke or joystick and they will probably report back from how that particular control setup feels compared to real life. But that might be different to my simple CH yoke and how i perceive the FDE feels. 

36 minutes ago, bigifooti said:

. i've seen many comment about P-factor but i think it is actually the propwash pushing the tail plane. My reckoning is that the PC12 needs to find a new balance between the direction stabilisation of the tailplane and that propwash pushing against

Naaah this is prop wash (image below)! What you are referring is spiraling slip stream 🙂

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

Repeating talking points ad nauseam doesn't make them any truer unfortunately. Care to tell us how exactly Fenix are "struggling" with the MSFS FDE? Oh wait, let's actually hear from Fenix's lead Aamir on this flight model topic and also A2A's custom one: 

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/636158-accusim-2-level-of-flight-dynamics-in-msfs-2024/?do=findComment&comment=4990988
"This thread is hilarious. People complaining about a £59.99 piece of home entertainment software (MSFS) not having incredible globalised flight modelling when even £30m+ level-D sims, specific to type, built from real aircraft test data, don't feel like the real thing. 
A2A had to go external in places to build it to their standards, which is understandable, because they're brilliant and build a brilliant product. What I don't get is people taking that and spinning it into "Asobo sucks!", yeesh. We had to go external on our engines and a portion of our flight model too, in this next update. It doesn't mean Asobo sucks. It means we, as developers, have specific needs and requirements from our product that we want to see - and that we can go build it ourselves. I don't think anyone railing on Asobo understands what a monumental task it is to have an FDE that is just bang on perfect for every single type of aircraft out there - including helicopters, gliders, etc, out of the box by default, and globalised. Insanity. 
p.s if anyone manages to do the above, perfect globalised modelling, and it's capable of running on anything less than a super-computer in real time, you're probably sat on a few billion dollars in training contracts - forget the piddly consumer market 🙂"

Fenix are still working on their enhancements update given they are doing custom engine work and the various other bits Aamir has already outlined. And sounds to me like he doesn't find the platform inflexible and not at all like they are "struggling".  And ya in the modern age of software, the platform evolves faster as opposed to fixpacks with years between as legacy sims did.. 

And yes A2A, like they have always done previously with P3D, ported their heavily customized and external AccuSim framework to MSFS for their new birds for that platform (no surprise). Such is the amount of choices a dev has, as Aamir says above.

There are other "top dogs" in the industry like iniBuilds, Milviz, FSReborn, SWS, JustFlight, etc etc all using the MSFS core FDE. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how the MSFS FDE is indeed light years ahead of the FSX/P3D as Matt says above. iniBuilds have gone out of their way to laud the MSFS FDE and especially its CFD tech to help with their FMs, and rate it on par to the sim platform they were developing for before.

The one area of the MSFS FDE known for issues and in need of improvement is ground handling, and that is being reworked in MSFS 2024 with a backport coming soon to MSFS 2020.
 

Well said.

One exception is that A2A Sims are rather insistent that AccuSim for MSFS is so far ahead of what it was for FSX/P3D that it simply cannot be called a "port".

MSFS v2020's flight model is significantly better than its predecessor. There is simply no arguing it.

1 minute ago, UrgentSiesta said:

One exception is that A2A Sims are rather insistent that AccuSim for MSFS is so far ahead of what it was for FSX/P3D that it simply cannot be called a "port".

Oh yes very good point, they have enhanced and re-written a lot of AccuSim for MSFS compared to the P3D incarnation.

Here is an idea and I will steal a word from Austin. "Plausible" The PC12 is not anything close. The visuals are incredible the rest meh.  I actually waited a month or so before buying which I usually dont do. You can say that A2A had to use external coding to get theirs to work but what about BS TBM, FSreborn, etc. They got it.. Plausible. Along with others. It has nothing to do with rudder-aileron connection. I just dont get why they released it, and to add more to the confusion, had 5 youtubers SAYING how great it was. To solve it, Release a trial, we are intelligent enough to be the judge. I think we all know the answer to this. And to think people were disappointed because it did not have failures...I guess ground handing was too much to ask too?