Stearmandriver

Sometimes, with some aircraft. They always seem to return to normal with a manual payload adjustment though.

Crash detection serves no purpose. It's like Bob said - it's never worked correctly in any sim. It kills you if you try to fly with a window open in a GA plane, if you run over the wrong blade of grass etc. You know if you crashed the plane. There's never any doubt about this lol.

You can give Little Navmap a try. Absolutely excellent freeware flight planning and tracking tool. I agree it should work on the in-sim map too, but LNM is a workaround if you need one.

If you're doing any scenery design, oh yes. I had a big CTD problem with any project open in the editor until I updated. For just flying, I don't think so.

They're releasing all the variants. It's been estimated on the PMDG forums that the -800 will follow the -700 by about 6 weeks. Makes no difference to me personally; even at work in reality, I couldn't care less if I'm flying a -700 or a Max9 on any given leg; they all pay the same ;).

I've never used an AH sim airplane I liked. I really, REALLY hope the Jahn/Visser C47 comes to MSFS eventually.

90s, longitude should not matter as they're all converged to one point at 90 degrees of latitude. So, 90S and any longitude value at all.

I likely am calling it the wrong thing; it was given to me, I didn't purchase it myself. It doesn't look quite like anything I can find for sale now from Track IR or Delanclip, but it's that idea: just a black plastic holder with 3 LEDs mounted in it, and powered by a USB plug. I just taped it to my headset. I am not fancy ;). I use it with a PS3 Eye webcam with an IR filter, and Open Track. Works great. I have to think any of the TrackIR or Delan options would work about the same.

Neofly is pretty good for shorter flights; it's great for a bush operation in Papua for instance. Not sure how well it scales to an airline operation, but has some fun evolution types for smaller aircraft. Free so maybe worth a try.

Agreed, once you get used to it, it's difficult to be without, in any type of simming. To clarify, I mean head or face tracking in general. There are many solutions these days; Track IR is definitely not the only game in town. I use a track IR light clip on my headset with the free Open Track software and it's perfect, even for merged dogfights in DCS. There is a cellphone app that can be used for face tracking that's very cheap and supposedly very good... so this doesn't have to be an expensive investment. But even if it was.. I still think it's worth it.

I'd do it in - surprise - the Stearman. 😉 My 3d modeling skills are very limited, but I can do scenery design. If someone built suitable arrow and beacon models in blender, I could maybe do some of the placement.

Try low-time aerobatic students ;). One great thing about the Kodiak is that it has a properly working AoA indexer, something all aircraft should have. It negates the need to adjust operations for different weights; on-speed AoA is ALWAYS on speed. You don't even need to reference airspeed. Now, what does make a significant difference is CG. You definitely don't want an aft CG.

1. As has already been specified, if it was a controller issue it would affect all aircraft in all sims, right? 2. Ever flown a Pitts? A Pitts is twitchy. It's supposed to be, and that's a positive in its case. A Kodiak is not supposed to be. (I mean an actual Pitts or similar, not Asobo's rendition.) It refers to the aircraft's lack of feel of inertia, or sense of smoothness. Any control deflection results in immediate and aggressive response by the aircraft, instead of a sense that your control input is gradually overcoming the aircraft's natural tendency to continue flying straight and level. The odd thing is that when MSFS aircraft are affected by this, it's always in pitch and yaw. Roll response tends not to be affected. I'm thinking it's something in the base sim that some FM devs work around, and some don't.

I do agree, I like the plane very much, and I'm sure some of this is subjective. The mod in question still works well with the most recent update. It's a little harder to find these days after the author removed his mods from .to following an idiotic complaint from Aerosoft, but they're still available on his discord. Dm me if you'd like to try it.

The majority of the ones I know personally, and have talked to on forums, are in agreement with me. Especially those of us that have flown similar planes and not just 4 or 6 place recips. I'm not saying you're wrong for liking it, but you also can't dismiss our position by attributing it to shoddy controls or lack of actual experience, I'm afraid.

Or... you've just accepted it as is and gotten comfortable operating it as such. That's fine; it's certainly not unflyable as-is or anything. It can deliver an enjoyable experience in its stock state, as long as you aren't trying to compare it too closely to the feel of a real aircraft. Which of course is always a bit of a fool's errand in desktop simulation - it's never actually going to feel like flying of course. But when you're accustomed to other aircraft models in the sim that achieve a certain level of feel, it's a bit jarring to find one that feels like this. Look, I like the Kodiak. It's my go-to IFR platform on Vatsim right now (admittedly, I prefer the FM mod.) I'm not saying it's bad. I'm saying there's room to improve, and we'd all win in that case.

Well like I said, if an individual user is happy with it, that's all that matters to them. But it IS understandable why many of us find it twitchy, and why this opinion seems prevalent among users who have flown similar aircraft.

Yeah but I'm not experiencing this on a short throw cheap stick with pots. I'm experiencing this on a nice stick with hall sensors. It still exists even with a stick extension that results in a larger field of movement than your fulcrum. And as pointed out, there are other aircraft in this sim - and most aircraft in other sims - that don't exhibit this behavior, with the same controls. The issue isn't just magnitude of moment over a given distance of control deflection; it's the way the moment is introduced, all at once with no sense of inertia at all, like the aircraft is weightless. This is a different issue from control sensitivity and is more difficult for individual users to adjust their control sensitivities for. It's the type of thing that reactivity is supposed to compensate for, but doesn't always. Asobo seems to understand that they have issues in this realm. They've recently brought an aerodynamicist / test pilot on board full time... so hopefully we see improvements. The sim is certainly capable of not flying like this; there are several aircraft that don't exhibit this behavior, and mods improve it on many others. So I'm confident it'll get sorted out.

Well, not exactly. I'd consider the Kodiak more of an air taxi / night freight kind of a platform.... more 135 than 91, using U.S. regs. There is a bug in SU8 that likes to delete / reset control sensitivity settings every time the sim is launched. Doesn't happen to everyone, but it is widespread. Worth keeping an eye out for it. That said, a good argument can be made that the Kodiak is still too sensitive in both pitch and yaw, with a rudder trim that moves too fast and is too effective. These are the things the community mod tones down, though I still add some extremity dead zone to pitch on top of that. This isn't a controls setup issue; if it was, this problem would exist on every aircraft in this sim (it doesn't), and in other sims like DCS (it doesn't). This dovetails with the other discussion, that there are some weird default flight dynamics in this sim currently. They can be worked around, but it doesn't always happen. None of which is to say that you shouldn't be happy with the plane. If you like the way it flies as-is, that's all that matters for you. But it's understandable why some feel the plane to be too "twitchy", especially if they're used to flying actual aircraft.

Little Navmap can be started before or after the sim, provides full functionality either way. I believe it can be set to autolaunch with the sim too (or the sim with it, I forget). Very fast launching app too, if that's helpful.

There is, or was, an addon that pops little navmap up in a window in the sim. But what's even better is the webserver option built into Little Navmap. It allows you to view the map, with (or without, you can turn it off) ownship position, in a browser window on any tablet or phone or any other device that can open a webpage. You can also view your flight plan, information about airports etc. It basically functions like Foreflight for the sim. A free addon gives you more maps, including all VFR sectionals and TACs and all IFR low enroute charts for the states, if that's where you happen to be. And all for free. It really is amazing what this program does!

Still far too sensitive in pitch, and the rudder trim has more authority than the rudder! Dm me if you're interested in trying the mod though.

Exactly; like there's no inertia at all. It affects both the stock aircraft and many 3rd party aircraft. And yet, other 3rd party aircraft have wonderful flight models and feel correct; and community mods have fixed other 3rd party and stock aircraft. So the sim is obviously capable; the correct base physics are in there somewhere. It's just puzzling why they're so hard to find lol.

Yes. Little Navmap is the final answer for any and all sim planning. VFR/IFR, a complex route or just a quick course distance measure, or anything in between. It's astonishingly good.

Duplicate.