Bought it.  Flew it for ten minutes.  Disappointed.  For me it’s too much effort required to use and understand what should be a fairly modern aircraft.  I will chalk up my disappointment to Ver 1.0 blues and revisit the plane after its first patch. For now it will go in my queen hanger.

-B

Edited July 14, 2025Jul 14 by btacon

14 minutes ago, btacon said:

Bought it.  Flew it for ten minutes.  Disappointed.  For me it’s too much effort required to use and understand what should be a fairly modern aircraft.  I will chalk up my disappointment to Ver 1.0 blues and revisit the plane after its first patch. For now it will go in my queen hanger.

-B

To me, it would have been a much better seller if they'd have modernized the autopilot.  The RW airplanes come with all kinds of configurations.

Any other reviews...? 

On 7/11/2025 at 8:50 AM, MPL said:

https://inibuilds.com/products/inibuilds-f406-ii-msfs

 

IMHO there’s too much overlap with the Black Square Turbine Duke for me to go with this. 
 

if I was heavily into Career mode, I’d consider it, tho. 

So, from the reviews in this thread, all im seeing are things like “too difficult to fly, already have other turboprops, or smells fishy…” 

the 406 is one plane that is very dear to me. Unfortunately I won’t be able to try it out for another few weeks, but I’d appreciate some more info other than the minor complaints above. How does it handle? Are hot starts modeled? Does autofeather work? How’s the engine simulation? How’s single engine performance? Did they model disc/beta? Any other hidden features?

51 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

Are hot starts modeled?

I can test it out. 

What EGT readings do you need to get down to to avoid a hot start?

There's a video where they shut down one of the engines and the plane didn't respond at all, no yaw or roll changes at all.
 

Not good but not exactly a surprise either.

Edited July 15, 2025Jul 15 by Matchstick

56 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

There's a video where they shut down one of the engines and the plane didn't respond at all, no yaw or roll changes at all.

Yeah, just tested that last night.  Prop does feather but zero input required to the aircraft in order to continue level and direction.

The only exterior lights to work were the landing lights.

Key error in the start checklist, missing return fuel to run position instead of leaving at cutoff.

After engine shutdown, restart was easy, perhaps too easy?  

Taxi really well.

Sounds are great.

Modeling is very good, both interior and exterior.

The breakers work.

Feels heavy, perhaps a tad too heavy but I have zero real world experience with the F406 II.

Didnt have time to test AP.

Needs a patch for sure, but worth $27.

A shame as I would have liked this sort of aircraft, but it looks a bit mediocre despite the glossy marketing so I’ll not bother.

Got this. Like it. Possibly more suited to the likes of myself as I don't care about "realism". For me, it looks great, flies perfectly fine and was a reasonable price.

I'm increasingly realising that I'm way out of synch with most of the folks who post here, although I don't know how true that is of the larger MSFS and other sim population. I read some of the posts here where people critique all sorts of really specific details about some of the aircraft and I just don't inderstand why some folks put themselves through the apparent pain of flight simming. Each to their own, I guess, but me, I just wanna have fun (as the song says)

17 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

Got this. Like it. Possibly more suited to the likes of myself as I don't care about "realism". For me, it looks great, flies perfectly fine and was a reasonable price.

I'm increasingly realising that I'm way out of synch with most of the folks who post here, although I don't know how true that is of the larger MSFS and other sim population. I read some of the posts here where people critique all sorts of really specific details about some of the aircraft and I just don't inderstand why some folks put themselves through the apparent pain of flight simming. Each to their own, I guess, but me, I just wanna have fun (as the song says)

That's kind of me as well.  I spent countless hours flying the Carenado PA31T (kind of similar airplane). that I don't think anybody else liked.  I do have criteria for what I'll buy but, if it suits me then I get it.  My biggest criteria is "would I want to fly this plane in the real world".  If I bought it in the real world I'd see if I could replace the autopilot.  If not, I wouldn't buy it.  A plane with this kind of power can get ahead of you in a hurry and you're trying to fly it IFR single-pilot so I'd want a better one.  If I couldn't replace it, I'd keep shopping.  Otherwise, it looks like a nice plane to me.  Great visuals, nice gauges, nice sounds.

53 minutes ago, andy1252 said:

I just don't inderstand why some folks put themselves through the apparent pain of flight simming

I agree on “to each his or her own” and I think the iniBuilds F406 II price point is well suited to my expectations.  But for some, the depth of aircraft simulation is not “pain” it’s a challenge and that’s what motivates them.  There certainly is nothing wrong with hoping to get more depth for $27 but statistically higher levels of “simulation” will cost more.

26 minutes ago, Gregg_Seipp said:

A plane with this kind of power can get ahead of you in a hurry

I imagine it can, but this simulated version is VERY easy to fly.  I’ll post a video where I drop down from 10,000 ft or so about 5nm out from the runway and have no issues making a reasonably good landing.

On a side note, I would have enjoyed a $50-60 version of this aircraft with more simulation depth … bring on the pain 🙂

Rob.

Edited July 15, 2025Jul 15 by SayAgain

1 hour ago, andy1252 said:

Got this. Like it. Possibly more suited to the likes of myself as I don't care about "realism". For me, it looks great, flies perfectly fine and was a reasonable price.

I'm increasingly realising that I'm way out of synch with most of the folks who post here, although I don't know how true that is of the larger MSFS and other sim population. I read some of the posts here where people critique all sorts of really specific details about some of the aircraft and I just don't inderstand why some folks put themselves through the apparent pain of flight simming. Each to their own, I guess, but me, I just wanna have fun (as the song says)

Sticking to high fidelity aircraft helps me spend less money and be more satisfied with the ones I do get 😁

that said, I’ll happily take a reduced level of fidelity IF the addon is of historical interest, eg the Dornier do 31👍

Auto feather works well, and the plane had some yaw to the left when I shut the port engine down in cruise. Definitely pulls left trying to take off with just the right engine, in my one attempt I couldn't  straighten it up for take off, although also had a fairly strong right to left crosswind. 

Exterior lights work in M32020 (not sure about the beacon/recognition light though). 

I like that it has the GTN 650 option, not seen that before. Good to have a larger ga twin that's fairly quick and good for passenger and cargo operations.   

 

Just as SayAgain says, it's the challenge of the realism and being close to RW ops that is of interest for me. I don't see the point of having a CTRL + E and just wang it around the sky for a bit kind of addon, because that's not really 'simulation' in my eyes. Thank you for all of your input so far, and any more reviews welcome if anyone has it in them. I'm increasingly thinking this ain't for me, however.