3 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Now interestingly, I found myself fighting the C208 more in terms of getting it to go down... it seems very floaty. Even at low torque settings it wants to float forever it seems. So I switched back to the Kodiak, and that plane is the opposite... it drops out of the sky at low torque so I need to be much more careful with the throttle. So pick your poison I guess.

 

That can be due to the beta range on the Kodiak (not sure if the C208 has this moddeld). When moving the throttle to idle the Propellor is going to a flat pitch. 

IRL it works slightly different. The engine is already idlle but the prop isn't yet. IRL there will be a small gate the throttle goes through into Beta range, whereby it only changes the prop and not the engine power.  

When the prop is moved in a really flat ptich and because it is spinning, it acts like a big plate, therefor introducing suddenly a lot of drag. this will cause that drop out of the sky. 

Try to check prior flying where your throutle position is versus what the plane shows in relation to BETA. Aim to only go into beta once the wheel touch the ground. 

 

3 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Thanks again to all that chimed in with some tips and advice... much appreciated!

It's amazing how much knowledge there is on the forum!!

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by bigifooti

Quite a few things will help.  Hardware.  You don't realize how much hardware matters until you get something decent.  Personally, I find a good yoke important, along with pedals.  I can do the Airbus thing with a side stick, but it's not the same for some reason.  Also, some aircraft are horrible with the flight dynamics.  The A2A Comanche is a very difficult plane to land imo.  I've only used it in 2020, but the wind effect is not easy to deal with, and speed must be dialed in perfectly.  I don't find it too enjoyable because it is so difficult.  

Also, I find 2024 to be much better in terms of wind control and centerline tracking.  Now the default Cessna 408 seemed to be decent for being forgiving.  I've flown it once, I just dislike the G1000/3000 integrations.  I like the Cessna 404 as well.  The Cessna 152 is decent too, although I can tip over in turns (not exceedingly unrealistic).  The Longitude and CJ4 are great.  Haven't messed with anything else default to comment much.  I know the C208 was a floating joke in 2020, so I doubt it's changed.  

I really like the Black Square flight dynamics, but they have only released the Starship in 2024.  It is a slightly harder plane to land, as you can't kill power and not float forever or drop like a rock.  I love the Starship myself.  The Black Square developer is working on a new Baron and C208.  Those will be great.  Hopefully the Duke will be ported over to 2024 as an official update.  It's a phenomenal add-on in 2020.  His planes are more complicated though.  I heard the COWS is a great add-on as well.  Not sure if it's 2024 compatible yet.  

I also advise against land-rate monitor tools.  They seem to be very unrealistic and set unrealistic expectations.  Looking at an outside replay is a much more reliable way to just see how the landing appears.  

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by Orlaam

13 hours ago, jon b said:

There’s a lot to be said for the circuit.
I spend most, probably 75% of my sim time just flying circuits in different aircraft.

At the moment, 100% of my flights are circuits. However, they are wider than a normal circuit, and I climb to 6000 feet. Final approach is generally around 12NM with ILS/IAN/Visual as required (yes, I prefer IAN to RNAV) Take offs and landings are the best parts of any flight, so I just rotate through my list of ~100 airports at different times of the day/night. These are nice, short flights that I can fit in at almost any time of the day.

Anyone can takeoff but it requires real skill to land any aircraft. The bigger it is the more difficult it can be.

Even with 30+ years of owning sims I still don’t get it right on occasion. It’s frustrating when the rest of the flight went fine. Using a Landing Rate Monitor does help. Apparently anything below 200fpm is classed as a good landing. Occasionally I grease one at 60fpm but don’t ask me how I did it! 🤣

Whilst I can land small aircraft okay as well as a B737 the most challenging by a long way is Concorde.

Approach speed of 190kts on an aircraft with no flaps so you pitch the nose up to 11° so the delta wing acts as a speed brake. Engine thrust is still 90% to prevent a stall. At 500ft you set autothrottle to 160kts for landing.

The autothrottles stay on until 15ft at which point they’re cancelled. You flare the nose for landing with the aircraft’s speed close to 170mph. Reverse thrust is engaged on all four engines once the nose wheel is down and the inner pair cancelled at 100kts, outer at 70kts. A 10,000ft runway can be eaten up very quickly.

It’s a challenge like no other. Master than and you’ve cracked landing all aircraft. 😁

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It’s a challenge like no other. Master than and you’ve cracked landing all aircraft

I’d love to see a quality concorde in MSFS 2024 … or Space Shuttle (a glider with landing speed around 220mph

Actually, the takeoffs are a LOT more critical and complex and dangerous than landings.

I believe it's due to a mental "artifact" that we humans are more afraid when time to land comes...

I remember whenever flying a new glider, the worries with the landing were / are always my main concern.. 

But actually most of the really dangerous / fatal sometimes, accidents, even in gliding, take place during the takeoff phase of flight.

Most of the time takeoffs are uneventful, but when the going get's tough... the tough get's going... and sometimes, even the more experienced pilots fail to be fast and effective enough in their decision making process...

A simulator like FS 2024, thanks in good part to the level of detail of the scenery, can be used to train emergency scenarios during the takeoff phase. In soaring I use it also to train "landing out" scenarios.

 

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by jcomm

45 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

I’d love to see a quality concorde in MSFS 2024 … or Space Shuttle (a glider with landing speed around 220mph

The FS Labs one is coming. Arrival date unknown. The best there is.

9 hours ago, bigifooti said:

That can be due to the beta range on the Kodiak (not sure if the C208 has this moddeld). When moving the throttle to idle the Propellor is going to a flat pitch. 

IRL it works slightly different. The engine is already idlle but the prop isn't yet. IRL there will be a small gate the throttle goes through into Beta range, whereby it only changes the prop and not the engine power.  

When the prop is moved in a really flat ptich and because it is spinning, it acts like a big plate, therefor introducing suddenly a lot of drag. this will cause that drop out of the sky. 

Try to check prior flying where your throutle position is versus what the plane shows in relation to BETA. Aim to only go into beta once the wheel touch the ground. 

 

It's amazing how much knowledge there is on the forum!!

Both the C208 and Kodiak model beta and reverse thrust as well. I was not going into beta with either. It seems the consensus is that the SWS Kodiak flight model has issues at lower torque setting (below about 700). It’s obvious when you fly it… if your torque drops below that, it will slow down immediately and stall quickly thereafter. I believe they are trying to model the drag of the prop at low torque but it’s way over done. You can find real-world videos of Ryan landing the Kodiak at like 300 torque… so it’s an SWS issue.
 

The Asobo Caravan can remain airborne at much lower torque settings but it seems to me that it’s got the opposite problem where it just wants to float forever. Neither of them seem to be modelled accurately, and they are not even in the same ball park 😑

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by Virtual-Chris

Basically before learning how landing is airplane pilot need to posses some fundamental handling skills. Fundamental flying skills includes ability to maintain desired speed, altitude, pitch (descent/climb/turn). After that we can talk about landing. I can break landing in several phases:

1. Approach. Straight in, standard, and modified (direct to numbers and so on)

2. Round up

3. Touch down

4. Deceleration

I thinks most people get approach fairly quickly but do struggle with round up and touch down. Environmental conditions also may complicate learning process as learner can easily become easily overwhelmed with wind turbulence. 

So the bottom line. Key factors for successful landing are: on speed, stabilized , side picture for round up, power  setting at touch down, directional control after landing 

3 hours ago, jcomm said:

Actually, the takeoffs are a LOT more critical and complex and dangerous than landings.

I believe it's due to a mental "artifact" that we humans are more afraid when time to land comes...

I remember whenever flying a new glider, the worries with the landing were / are always my main concern.. 

But actually most of the really dangerous / fatal sometimes, accidents, even in gliding, take place during the takeoff phase of flight.

Most of the time takeoffs are uneventful, but when the going get's tough... the tough get's going... and sometimes, even the more experienced pilots fail to be fast and effective enough in their decision making process...

A simulator like FS 2024, thanks in good part to the level of detail of the scenery, can be used to train emergency scenarios during the takeoff phase. In soaring I use it also to train "landing out" scenarios.

 

Maybe in a glider takeoffs are dangerous… in an airplane it’s basically firewall the throttle and pull up! 😝 Of course I’m over simplifying but landing has a lot more variables at play… vertical, ground, and air speed, pitch and attitude, heading and runway alignment, throttle and power, it’s a lot more nuanced. 

1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

Basically before learning how landing is airplane pilot need to posses some fundamental handling skills. Fundamental flying skills includes ability to maintain desired speed, altitude, pitch (descent/climb/turn). After that we can talk about landing. I can break landing in several phases:

1. Approach. Straight in, standard, and modified (direct to numbers and so on)

2. Round up

3. Touch down

4. Deceleration

I thinks most people get approach fairly quickly but do struggle with round up and touch down. Environmental conditions also may complicate learning process as learner can easily become easily overwhelmed with wind turbulence. 

So the bottom line. Key factors for successful landing are: on speed, stabilized , side picture for round up, power  setting at touch down, directional control after landing 

What do you mean by round up?

23 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Maybe in a glider takeoffs are dangerous… in an airplane it’s basically firewall the throttle and pull up! 😝 Of course I’m over simplifying but landing has a lot more variables at play… vertical, ground, and air speed, pitch and attitude, heading and runway alignment, throttle and power, it’s a lot more nuanced. 

Yes, unless your engine fails, sometimes the only propelling your aircraft, right when all or a good deal of it's power was needed... That's what makes takeoffs a LOT more dangerous than landings, across pretty much the full spectrum of aircraft types... specially when around the airfield a place to land safely is difficult to find...

With age, whenever I travel in an aircraft I feel "respect" for the takeoff... OFC other phases of flight have their potential problems too, but the takeoffs are particularly critical.

I work right in the middle of Lisbon Airport, and believe me, each time I see a heavy A342 taking off from rw 20 I think to myself, what if ....

As a glider pilot IRL I evaluate and try to know very well all my options for each airfield I operate from and type of launch I can use. As a simmer I used to enjoy playing engine failures and other critical failures when taking off from airfields situated in tricky places if you need to find some spot to land in an emergency. It's a very interesting type of challenge, that you can play with in FS 2024 thanks to the very detailed scenery, pretty much all around the World.

Edited July 24, 2025Jul 24 by jcomm

1 hour ago, Virtual-Chris said:

What do you mean by round up?

Round up when you transition from descent to touch wheels down. In other words, you bringing airplane nose up reducing descent rate and touch your wheel. If  you "round up" to late airplane may land hard with excessive speed start bouncing or porposing . In contrast, if you "round up" too early you may ending up floating or bleed too early airspeed and stall 

1 hour ago, jcomm said:

Yes, unless your engine fails, sometimes the only propelling your aircraft, right when all or a good deal of it's power was needed... That's what makes takeoffs a LOT more dangerous than landings, across pretty much the full spectrum of aircraft types... specially when around the airfield a place to land safely is difficult to find...

With age, whenever I travel in an aircraft I feel "respect" for the takeoff... OFC other phases of flight have their potential problems too, but the takeoffs are particularly critical.

I don't think it's that clear-cut.

Let's take a look first at GA. Here's the NTSB's GA accident dashboard for the period from 2012 to 2021:

https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/data/Pages/GeneralAviationDashboard.aspx

At first glance, takeoff does seem to be more dangerous than landing. While landing is the phase with the greatest total number of accidents, takeoff has far more fatal accidents (145) than landing (67).

But if we look at how the phases of flight are defined, we see that the landing is defined to start at the beginning of the landing flare. (Similarly, takeoff is defined to end when the aircraft reaches 35 feet above the runway.)

A lot of the dangers of landing, however, are in the final approach. Consider, for example, the stall/spin on the base to final turn, still one of the depressingly common types of accident in GA. So let's instead compare takeoff and initial climb against approach and landing.¹

For takeoff and initial climb, there were 505 fatal accidents, while for approach and landing there were 428 fatal accidents. Takeoff and initial climb is still more dangerous, but only slightly so.

By the way, although many pilots are rightly concerned about the possibility of an engine failure, the dominant cause of fatal accidents in GA is loss of control in flight with 976 fatal accidents, compared to engine failure with 214 fatal accidents.

Let's turn now to the airlines -- or more precisely, "commercial jets", but that's a good approximation. Here's a report from Boeing for the years 2015 to 2024:

https://www.boeing.com/content/dam/boeing/boeingdotcom/company/about_bca/pdf/statsum.pdf

Fatal accidents by flight phase are on page 16. There were 11 fatal accidents during landing alone and another 3 during the final approach, compared to 4 fatal accidents during takeoff, 2 on the initial climb, and 3 on the subsequent climb to cruise. Taken together, final approach and landing together account for 14 fatal accidents, compared to 9 fatal accidents for the takeoff and entire climb to cruise. So in commercial jet operations, it's certainly not true that takeoff and climb is more dangerous than approach and landing.

---

¹ The initial climb is defined to end at "the first prescribed power reduction, or until reaching 1,000 feet above runway elevation or the VFR pattern". The approach is defined to begin at the Initial Approach Fix for IFR or "the point of VFR pattern entry, or 1,000 feet above the runway elevation" for VFR.

The current Fenix A319 Will test your skills.