JYW

I reckon it's CIA chemtrails that's slowly destroying Asobo's minds and causing this delay! There's definitely something up!

You'll have the same outcome - disabling the interconnect makes almost no difference, except I believe in the animations of the yoke and pedals moving together. There is no discernible difference in the flying characteristics. Probably because the rudder and yaw damper are so ineffective in this model.

Then it is these aspects that you "attempted to fix" that are making it fly like a pig! Look on this forum, look on Reddit, look across the internet... it is not just me that finds this model absolutely awful to control and fly. And give it up with the whole "it's user error" gargabe. I'm a licenced pilot. Translating a living, flying, aerodynamic machine into moving pixels on a screen is an art as much as it is a science. Just because you have some simulated numbers matching up, does not mean it's a good, convincing analogue. I'm guessing you're the guy that has been telling hundreds of people on the SWS Discord that they are all wrong and stupid too? Well perhaps, just perhaps, it's you that's got this wrong - in the fundamental design of how you will depict the PC-12's unique control achitecture. It flies like a pig. Search AVSIM for the SWS PC-12 and users saying "I won't be buying SWS products any more" - directly as a result of their experience with the PC-12. I said it and I can count at least 5 others who feel the same. That cannot be the right outcome for SWS! It is a simulation and as a simulation, the PC-12 is just distinctly odd, unnatural and unenjoyable, in yaw, at low speed. The real PC-12 is none of those things. The real PC-12 does not float it's way - almost sideways - to the runway - with no wind present, with a defective yaw damper and rudder pedals. Stubborness rarely leads to positive outcomes.

Thanks @mikethe6th I think it has just come up because yes, I have just tried again and got in. I'd been trying since yesterday morning. So the subscription is cancelled but here's the next issue. It is not possible within the Pilot Portal to remove any financial data (eg. card details) from your account. So SI just keeps your bank details on their system forever. Certainly under UK & EU General Data Protection Regulations this would be be non-legal. Data subjects must be provided with the ability to edit or remove financial data from organisations that use it for automated recurring payments. I guess such protection doesn't exist in the US? This has left a really sour taste in my mouth. Not the SI product, but the lack of clarity in the wording on the sign-up page of their website. In the add payment method screen (you can add payment methods, you just can't delete them), there is tiny text that states "SayAgain can use your data to take recurring payments". It really is deliberately tiny text, right down way under the fields where you add your details. Who would agree to subs, if you don't have neither proper control nor trust in the company you are entrusting to dip into your bank account at any time they please? 👎😠

Hi guys, A cautionary warning; When I signed up for Say Intentions, to use with MSFS for a month, what the wording suggested I was buying was 1 month of subscription. I did not feel I encountered anything that suggested that I had agreed to recurring payments being taken from my bank. I know how subs work, but in many cases, it's possible to use a subscription service, while not utilizing automatic recurring payments. In other words, one must make the payment manually each month (via Paypal, etc). This is what I feel the wording suggested I was signing up, on SI. I decided some weeks ago not to continue using SI, due to the lack of localisation (constant US controllers in the UK and all ATC chatter consisting of "UNITED 001 DIRECT LA GUARDIA!" etc), and assumed my 1 month sub would expire. I found out yesterday that SI took a further payment from my bank on 17th April 😶 Worse than this..... I have been trying to access the "Pilot Portal" for 2 days, with no access and a Bad Gateway:- If there's one thing worse than an unexpected recurring payment, it's one that you cannot then cancel, due to their website being down.

There's just no comparison. The TBM flies like a dream. This PC-12 for me (after the update) feels like the problem has been improved by around 10% tops. As someone else said, in my opinion, "it still flies like a pig", and with the exceptionally heavy feeling flight controls and slow, delayed responses on all flight controls, it feels more like flying a 747-8. I'm out and I will never buy another SWS product again, due to the comment from them in the screenie above. It's one thing to have problems. But to deny those problems... all is lost. Over and above small piston singles, SWS just cannot configure a reasonable flight model. Period. Dismissing the issues as being down to the complexities of flying the real PC-12 straight, level and in turns is just Grade A 'BS' or a head deeply buried in the sand. SWS guy 1: "Darn it, we just cannot get this right, any idea what else to tweak in the CFGs?" SWS guy 2: "Not a clue" SWS guy 1: "Ok, we'll just swear blind it's meant to fly this way. We'll blind them with pseudo-science"

I'm so with you on the new G3X appearing in more planes that use the old version soon! Apart from the RV-10 and -14, also the Orbx Blackwing and Airfoillabs Bristell and others. Cannot fly them with the old G3X in anymore, having tasted how much better the new version is.

Apologies, my bad.

Oops! 😄 ...but you didn't fancy adding the correct thread? 😉 Now corrected.

Already a thread:-

Yes.

This is what I'm most looking forward to. Not interested in the added PG for the area but a nice, custom Friedrichshafen.. yes please.

Hahah, I had completely forgotten about that.. what a blast from the past 😆

That thing looks like a narwhal wearing floatation aids.... in an entirely GOOD way 😁

He's making something out of nothing whatsoever - for clicks - as always. Talk about a tenuous link, for Jorg's comments constituting a release date. Just IMO. Not a credible source of info.