GrummanDriver

You shouldn't need to reduce the power, just not advance it any further. There will be climb torque for the PC12, I am un sure of what it is in a PC12/45, but lets call it 3700lbs. As the aircraft climbs the torque will reduce, therefore the pilot will need to push the power levers up to keep the same climb torque ( just has he or she would in a CSU equipped piston aircraft as the manifold pressure reduces). Every time the power levers are pushed up and the torque is increased the ITT will rise, eventually the engine(s) will reach a point where you have increased the power to the ITT limit, from that point onwards the ITT will remain constant but the torque will drop away as torque can no longer be increased by pushing the power levers up as the engine is 'temped out' so to speak. The issue with FSX and its simulation of the PT6 engine is that it incorrectly has ITT decreasing as the aircraft climbs, therefore the engine does not 'temp out' in the climb as torque is increased to maintain the climb setting. This gives an inaccurate indication of climb performance as the engine is able to be kept at its full climb torque all the way into the high flight levels. If it could be altered at that ITT does not decrease in the climb, a much more realistic simulation would be had as climb performance would correctly drop off as the aircraft temps out. I believe the F1 B200 simulates this. The use of engine anti ice / inertial separator also plays a part in this combination of torque/ITT.

Indeed, given Carenado's past turbine modelling efforts I also fear you may be correct! I will wait and see!

You are correct in that even the early PC-12s will limit takeoff torque. However this is achieved through a torque limiter ( through the use of a governor for memory ). This is similar to a turbo normalized piston with a variable wastegate preventing the engine from overboosting. FADEC is a profoundly difernt system to a governor / limiter. Think of say the C510 Mustang. The power leavers are simply a computer input devices, the power levers talk to a computer, the computer then controls the engine(s)

My understanding is that only the PC-12/47E (NG) has a FADEC system. Meaning that it would be unlikely for the Carenado aircraft to have this featured. The King Air range is also sing pilot certified with no FADEC. Not that hard to manage really, just don't push everything full forward and be cautious with the use of engine anti-ice with high cruise torque settings.

Totally agree, at least a /47 (non NG). That would have kept the option for 3rd party GPS integration, but allowed for a more modern aircraft. The /45 is a dog by all accounts. Underpowered, bad climb performance and a lower MTOW that later models.

Actually they do have FMS's. Took me 2min to find two for sale alone that do, there will be plenty more off the market. http://aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=153760&listingType=true&IsInternal=True&pagingNo=1&searchId=13712206&dealerid= http://aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=152647&listingType=true&IsInternal=True&pagingNo=1&searchId=13712206&dealerid= One would also note that ASO also have a 550 for sale with a Garmin 600. While it is true they did not come factory standard with an FMS unit ( or a Garmin600!! ) there is a large variation in what avionics is out there, especially given the private aircraft nature of the aircraft in question. Also important to note that the FMS shown above ( the Universal UNS-1 ) is the same variant used in Carenado's Beech 1900D, along with an autopilot that is far from a standard B190 configuration ( usually no AP and a KLN GPS ) however there are a number of 1900's out there with Carenado's configuration especially those tailored to the private end of the market.

The latest photos show it with the "Biglets" that were a feature on the old PC-12/45. So you are looking at, possibly an early 2000s aircraft with the old avionics. Regardless however, the raked wingtip is a feature of the PC-12/47, and does not necessarily mean it is an NG variant. The early development shots they released showed the newer raked winglet, but showed no other features to tell between a -47 or 47E(NG).

Looking at the new photos, its now has the winglets of the old -45 series. Either they have changed variant mid development, or being development photos they are not fully correct, or they are providing two options in the package.

Take it you mean the Flight1 forum? I couldn't find the answer there? I am also interested if it is the /47 or /47E (NG) series.

Was an update for this every released? It's been a while from the initial release.

Never flown a 210, but most variable pitch singles can't feather, as there is little need for them to.

As do most light twins, every Baron, Seneca and Aztec that I have been in have had a mirror. Most often you will find checking the mirror is part of the landing checklist related to gear extension.

Flown a bunch of 152's and 152 Aerobats in real life, as well as PA-38's and AA-1's that are also powered of O-235 engines. 2150 is low. Normal cruise RPM would be 2300-2450 in most cases, depending on the operators SOP's and what type of flight you are doing. I would be gob smacked to see a 152 with an 0-235 (or any other aircraft using that engine for that fact) do 100knts IAS (TAS maybe at a long shot, up high) at 2150 especially with the age some engines are these days. Then again general aviation often gob smacks me. Double check that the 152 you fly in real life is 0-235 powered and what prop it has.Regards, Scott

Wow we really have some great light twins around now, Duke, Islander, C310 and now this. Can't wait, what are the changes of a release this year? Now all we need is a Cessna 400 series twin..........

Nice!!Is it likely that this will be out before the end of the year?