softreset

I no longer feel Avsim is an appropriate and welcoming place to visit on the Internet. Please close/terminate my account immediately. Thank you.

Where do you keep coming up with the $1000 price point? I walked through a real world GTN update last week and it set us back $310.00 https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/shop-by-accessories/maps/avdb/gtn-worldwide-navdata-database/prod91245.html Even the annual subscription is less than $1000. Do you know for certain I didn't pay for a legitimate copy? How do you know for certain?

Fantastic, Marcel. Thank you!

Thanks Marcel, hope you can improve upon. The current night lighting as boeing indicated is pretty "hot" and bright. I'll often times just fly with the dome lighting on.

Agreed, I picked it up several months and have been using it. Much preferred over the default sounds.

Circling back on this as I recently did a clean install of Prepar3D and moved to 4.2 which also meant a clean install of the PC-12. As d.tsakiris mentioned if I used the Carenado Cold & Dark panel setting I had issues starting the aircraft and had the massive torque surge on start-up. If I used the Ready for Taxi panel state the aircraft started up just fine, no torque spike and the pumps and ignition both remained in Auto. So I created a new default aircraft load state using the Beechcraft King Air 350 that's included with Prepar3D and configured it with the following conditions: Batteries off Avionics off Throttle at 0% Condition levers at 0% Prop levers at 0% All lights off Main door open (Saved it as default, restarted sim) Now when I load the PC-12 (directly from the menu, not loading another aircraft first) I have completely cold and dark aircraft with the door open. But I still had the startup surge issue and the fuel pumps requiring the ON position vs the Auto position. So I went back to my default King Air and set the Prop levers to 100% (everything staying the same). I now have zero issues with the startup of the aircraft. No torque surge and the fuel pumps/ignition remain in Auto.

KSYI F28 (KRQO) M33 0M4 5D3 3CM I used ADE to flatten and then Vector was fine.

Can you elaborate on the "few" part? Specifically what region or area of region you're referring to? I fly to a lot of smaller airports and I'd say there's 75% chance that they'll have elevation issues that the tool hasn't found. For example, of the last 8 I've visited in the US, 6 of them had issues not detected by the tool and required work in ADE to rectify.

Frank Schilling or Kevin Ham? There's been a lot of "most powerful man in the world" with regards to domain squatting. I suspect Lebron doesn't care about the domain, otherwise he would have gone after Under Armour by now. Kudos to them for making it point at Steph Curry's shoes. I was arguing that Jim mentioned that these websites are violation of their name copyrights. But I'm unable to find any evidence to support such a claim and none have been provided. It would be like saying: "You cannot link to commercial websites of flight simulation products unless they support the page."

Are you unfamiliar with cybersquatting? In this case if Lebron James owned the trademark (not copyright, trademark) he would be well within his right to sue under ACPA. Intent is fine, fearmongering is also fine... right?

Ironically I got a message that the Incommon certificate expired for avsim.com just now. NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID

Isn't a name considered a trademark and not a copyright? Secondly the only trademark in the USPTO database is this one - http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4803:1338ie.2.1 Which does not appear to be registered to this website. Can you clarify the remark: "violate our name copyrights." With whom is this name copyrighted?

They've got 29,886 days left to meet that tagline.

1900D, DO228 and Fokker 50 are going to the bigger birds from Carenado. They have a Saab 340 in the works too.

Ray - Sure, that makes sense. Unless you simulate a charter/carrier that requires two pilots? Both of the PC-12 carriers in California require a pilot & co-pilot. YMMV but for me, I usually fly between 8,000 - 25,000. But some of that is because 98% of my PC-12 flights are with FSEconomy and to maintain a minimum of 45 GPH fuel flow, I can't go much higher unless I unrealistically modify aircraft.cfg values. I also do 100% of my flights in North America and in referencing flightaware for PC-12 traffic I've observed that they rarely fly much higher than FL250. Considering some of the winds we've had up there, if I'm flying east-to-west in the US right now I'll rarely go above 16,000. The other night, for example at FL260 I would have had an 80kts+ headwind. I've flown on a couple of PC-12s (IRL) and the ratio that two different pilots gave me was - Distance / 10 + 2000 as a rough estimate. So my 440nm flight last night was flown at FL210 (as I was headed east in the US).

Certainly. Wasn't sure of the answer myself (off the top of my head) but I recall seeing it somewhere in the manual when I first setup the app. I personally never fly at the flight levels they recommend but everything else about the tool works great for the PC-12.

Payload Payload is the sum of the weights of passengers, their baggage and cargo. Passengers, of course, are not individually weighed. The standard weights of an adult, a child, an infant and their baggage are used to calculate the pay-load. Cargo, carried in the aircraft‘s hold is weighed separately. Other items like crew, oil, catering and galley equipment do not count as Payload and are included in the Empty Weight. Page 54, PFPX manual http://www.flightsimsoft.com/downloads/Manual_PFPX_en_web.pdf

I found these two videos - One of them is London City which we all know is pretty aggressive on the approach angle in the first place but it definitely looks to be a pronounced nose down on final. What remains to be seen is if the model needs some tweaking, similar to the PC-12 which required a little modification of the flaps setting in the .cfg. My experience, at least with Carenado's DO-228 & PC-12 is if you're too fast the nose down attitude will be very pronounced. But those are both STOL aircraft. Hoping to pick up the F50 this weekend to give it a try.

Found a stream someone did of it. Looks like no VC integration, there's a click spot on the lower pedestal.

Thanks for actually doing a legitimate review. I was worried we'd get to a dozen posts before someone commenting actually had owned the product. Where is the GTN installed? It's not in any of the promo photos.

That's default answer on Avsim when you mention Carenado: "Limited systems simulation and lots of bugs."

The link is for updating navigation sources in FSX/P3D. I'm unable to provide any insight on how I was able to take Navigraph data and update the GTN, AVSIM doesn't approve.

It's relevant to have the latest data if you fly online with Vatsim or Pilot Edge. I previously ran 1611 with Little Nav Map without any issues prior to updating the GTN to 1802. So it's absolutely possible and worked just fine. Having the updated nav points from this site is also needed - http://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids3.html

https://ucdavis.box.com/v/PC12performance Page 284 - 300 I set climb power to between 36-36.5 psi of torque and keep IAS between 120-140. That PDF is from Pilatus, I just hosted it on my personal Box.com account so I always knew where to find it.

I brought it up a couple of months ago on the forums - I reached out to Carenado about it as like Bert indicated, IAS hold is funky. What's odd, though, it works exactly as described on the Cheyenne III and so far is the only Carenado plane (that has IAS mode) which works as described.