Confusion,Disappointment, and possible Hope...Famous Flyer7

[David B 53]

Being succinct is not one of my better traits folks.

Lets get this out of the way right off the start.
The standard statements that many of folks must interject.
"It was only....", or "If you don't like it...." totally not necessary.
Also, let's make this clear, I bought the MU-2.
 

OK, the Confusion. Frankly, my confusion comes from the Community, Asobo and IniBuilds.
I read a lot of threads here and elsewhere. I see a lot of glowing reviews and some really picky reviews and input. I saw a lot of positive reviews on IniBuilds Airbusses,airports,scenery etc.
Then threads regarding the fantastic Blacksquare TBM 850, along the lines of was this thing even beta tested?  Among others. Being that several of the Local Legend and Famous Flyer aircraft were up to par with a fairly realistic rendition of those aircraft, I was confused on the responses and product of the MU-2. IE, getting a lot of praise for the most part, when the plane isn't even close to an MU-2 other than looks. Which leads me to disappointment....

Disappointment...When I was at FSExpo in Houston, I had a very brief talk with Jorg and Seb. 
One of the things I mentioned, would you please consider doing an MU-2 as a FF or LL.
I showed him pictures of the MU-2 that I had flown, both the N and Marquise model MU-2's which I have a few hours flying. He acknowledged the plane. Moving forward, I received a few texts from friends showing me the MU-2 announcement. So excited! Till product was released.
Let's face it folks, based on the other INiBuild releases, this plane was essentially "phoned in" The MU-2 was a fast plane! Particularly the short bodies. They advertised this as a 205 kt plane!! Also, looks like they modeled the D or DP model MU-2. Folks, there were only 18 D models built. There is no existing manual for the plane or the plane for that matter! Where did INiBuilds get the data, on a non existent plane? The MU-2 is unique in it's operation, those that have/had the FSW Marquise or the Tom Kyler MU-2 Marquise know what I mean.  There is essentially no system modeling in this plane.  Yet, we have the Beech18 with Denarqs mods that makes the plane almost study level.
I see that planes can be made better. I already know some developers that would love to correct a lot of issues within this plane, but they can't, due to Asobo/INiBuilds controlling the code.

 

Which brings me to the HOPE part of this message.
Folks, I have already written 2 messages to Zendesk about my feedback on the MU-2. I don't post on forum, not enough brownie points. They have responded, and said they would pass it on to the developer. I also gave them contact info of an MU-2 expert that has over 20,000 hours in the plane.
I can assure my message wasn't about a takeoff speed correction, removing glossiness from the panel and the avionics stuff. Little more specific and in depth than those issues.

I have also posted on the INiBuilds forum, some folks there told me if we wanted to see the MU-2 improved, we needed to let Asobo know.

That said, the HOPE comes from you the Community. If you want the MU-2 to be fixed properly, let Asobo zendesk know. Also, encourage Asobo/IniBuilds to release the files so that other developers can help INiBuilds/Asobo bring this plane up to their standards.

Another possible hope too. There were several messages posted on FSW discord server.Mark was rather surprised at the love for the MU-2. Being as he's working on the Lear, he offered to set up a development section for the MU-2 Marquise to bring it into MSFS. He needs developers to help with that project. If interested, let Mark know on the discord server.

MY friend Jim Goldman, some of you will recognize the name from FSD days. Working together, have tried to make some "freeware" modifications to the IniBuilds MU-2. We tried our best to emulate a K model MU-2. Jim created templates of the accessible cfg files, and put them in the Community folder. He did a cool paint scheme and modded the exterior and interior. Performance much better!

The file has been uploaded to flightsim.to. PLEASE READ the pdf file. Explains everything!
Lastly, You can take the time to hassle me, flame me whatever....or you can use that energy to send a message to Asobo, and hopefully they will listen, and we can have an MU-2 to really have some fun flying!

If you use add on linker, makes it a breeze to use Jims mod. 
Thank You
David
 

 

[ryanbatc 12,932]

Here's the addon too

Seems like a great fix

https://flightsim.to/file/68999/mu-2-cosmos-and-improvements

[reecemj 151]

2 hours ago, David B said:

Another possible hope too. There were several messages posted on FSW discord server.Mark was rather surprised at the love for the MU-2. Being as he's working on the Lear, he offered to set up a development section for the MU-2 Marquise to bring it into MSFS. He needs developers to help with that project. If interested, let Mark know on the discord server

Thanks David. You have said all that I wanted to say and more about inbuilds mu2. I bought but it was not on level as in P3d. I really hope FSW brings it to MSFS. Thanks for the mod. I may fly it now. 

[Rattso 58]

As one who has survived several thousand hours in Mu2's I concur - I found the first take off unusual to say the least - also stalling behaviour was very average - as for the panel there was a bloke who did a panel mod on fligtsim.to that helped a little - but it was very hard to see the lubber line on the DI which made hand flying ILS's pretty hit & miss - would have loved have have used it as my goto airplane for ILS practice - but have gone back to the C414 - am starting on the Lear for my jet practice & it's good fun to say the least.

having said that I am now gonna go fly the flightsim.to one that was just posted ( maybe after I have a go in the XF-11)

[Donka 653]

I'm a fan of this aircraft but it definitely needs some love. Will check out the mod this week. Shame we can't have more modern equipment in this aircraft - would love the GTN750. Take off requires a lot of back pressure then a sudden snap into the air. Even visual things like no light source for the landing lights.

[JYW 2,985]

Purely in terms of flight modelling and handling characteristics, the MU-2 is the worst aircraft I've ever flown in MSFS.   I know the MU-2 is unique in several regards but whatever INI were trying to do, it didn't work.  From rotation to touchdown it's just odd and really unpleasant to fly.  I've uninstalled it and written it off, unless at some point we here that INI have undertaken a full, comprehensive update of it.

Edited February 12 by JYW

[tpete61 228]

Good luck with your wish!

 

[Rattso 58]

well have flown both the XF-11 & the Mu2 - the XF-11 has the turning circle about the same as the Queen Mary & is very pitch sensitive on approach - but a great fun airplane.

The Mu2 I have a query about take off - I advance the throttles to the bottom of the red on the EGT & that only gives me about 65/70% RPM & torque is really way down - advance the throttles fully & the EGT goes way way over the red band - is this a problem with the engine modeling? I'll have a go @ the stock one tonight & see if the same occurs

[Matchstick 1,888]

On 2/12/2024 at 2:30 PM, JYW said:

Purely in terms of flight modelling and handling characteristics, the MU-2 is the worst aircraft I've ever flown in MSFS.   I know the MU-2 is unique in several regards but whatever INI were trying to do, it didn't work.  From rotation to touchdown it's just odd and really unpleasant to fly.  I've uninstalled it and written it off, unless at some point we here that INI have undertaken a full, comprehensive update of it.

The engine modelling as well is a complete joke.
Turboprops aren't exactly MSFS's strong point but even so ini display a total lack of understanding of the differences in operation between the single shaft turbine used in the Mu-2s engines and free-turbine engines like the PT-6.