Just purchased the plane. I think that it has the same issue as Kodiak used to have - that is after the autopilot disconnect the trim gets reset and the plane requires pretty hard push on the yoke to keep it from nosing up.
I am so ready for this purchase, I have been using the Carenado PC12 with its lousy ground handling, I just can't wait to buy the SimWorks Studio version, thanks..
im NOT gonna comment on the landing, but, take this video as a fun jumping in kinda video. the videos to come will def be more by the book. heres the cool thing about this plane. its fun. you can do it by the book and its fun, or just whip it and be fun. cant wait to see the landings get better! (if theres any gear left to land on)
The flights from St Barts to Juliana are often carried out at around 1 000 ft, you're way too high and you're wasting fuel by going to 4 000 ft. Also after departure you're supposed to do an immediate left turn over the bay. The landing was terrible as you pointed out. It makes me wonder if there is something off with the flight model of this one. I know their Kodiak also is extremy nervous on the approach so it could be a SWS thing.
as you are correct about the alt of flight there (as im currently flying there) the wasting fuel part really isnt. youre talking pounds of fuel. the plane is very good at climbing and being efficient. so wether he goes full speed higher or slower at lower speed, that short of a flight doesnt make a difference. (hence why islanders, caravans, and twin otters do the flight not a pc12). id be less harsh about his landing since most ppl who first flew the kodiak put it in the dirt on takeoff since they didnt know what they are doing. and most ppl will do the same here in the plane on landing. its not the flight model, as it took months to get it just right (with some sim limitations in there). he was way to high and too fast, but he knows that now. alot of it is knowing how a plane is configured and set up. and the pc12 can do anything. but you have to have it set up correctly. hope this helps! anymore questions, ill be here or in the SWS discord
Thanks for the wonderful response! It was my assumption that the low altitude was due to saving fuel. Even if you only save a couple of pounds per flight it would be logical to me to fly in the most efficient way considering the amount of flights a company does per year. That's the case in airlines at least, to always fly as fuel efficient as possible.@@hostettervideos
totally get that! julliana airspace is a very busy place at times. with or without radar some days as well. so any aircraft that can go VFR under the FIR (which starts at 2500) makes their day easier and can be slipped in. when it comes to fuel, also some what true esp for pistons. turboprops are.. interesting with that, if youre doin a short flight like that, itll probably only burn about 300-400 pounds MAYBE with start taxi flight and landing. (in the PC12 atleast). @@mrmisterno1
Pro Tip: Learn to fly the approach with the aircraft fully trimmed up. That way the aircraft's nose won't porpoise... also, then you only need to add or remove power to control the rate of decent and NOT pitch of the aircraft.
I believe the main reason failures aren’t included is because Pilatus weren’t happy with them being included by default. I think it’s with Pilatus now for review.
Man, I'm very much still around 30% toward purchasing this product. I'm 100% satisifed with my TBM8. Yes, IRL they are used for different purposes. However, as a casual simmer, I'm not pretending to do anything as much as I am just flying around for fun. I will say, however, for $10 less than the TBM, you can also get the Piper M500 with more features (Yes, I know, it's a little slower and flies a little lower(Don't chew my head off warriors)), but they are generally in the same category when it comes to performance (In my opinion). I really want to see the pricing of both the base and failure package. If they are charging $40 for thee base and $20 for the failures, their reasoning, well lets say, not fully forthcoming. With all that said, looks like a great product for the SWS and PC12 fans! For me though, Black Square beat SWS to the market.
The M500 is a very introductory aircraft to the turboprop. Very light, much less horsepower and complexity. The TBMs are pretty much the top tier to the light end turboprop. Much more complexity, horsepower, range, utility, etc. Both carry 5 passengers. PC12 is a longer version which carries 9 passengers. It is heavier and greater utility but is slower than the TBM, but is still faster than the M500. The M500 is something a low time pilot can get into without having problems finding insurance. Not so with the TBM or PC12.
Your glide on final was perfect, not high at all. your VSI shows 500ft/min, you were at 50ft above the threshold and the runway perspective was what you expect on landing (real life). It looked a very good approach to me, however the plane was not trimmed that's why you had a hard time landing.
I blew my first one about as badly as yours. I don't know what is with the porpoise as the speed drops off but that is what it is. Perhaps more like reality? I don't know. Also, noticed a massive lack of directional control on roll out. I too was using a joystick in place of rudder pedals. That has a lot to do with it.
Every video I’ve watched of this one has had a crazy landing with skidding on the ground. Might wait on the first patch for this one. Outside of the first class toilet modeling they seem to forgot a few basics.
Not at all but this is a VERY valid observation. The main problem with these landings was that touchdown was 20-30kts too fast, which will make MSFS think that the plane is in "flight" mode still and therefore you skid. Also the plane seems to have been trimmed center for landing (56:27), which will make reverse pull you left and have to fight harder with the pedals. We are looking into ways to make this easier, though.
@@SimWorksStudiosthanks for the reply. That is an important detail. I know msfs isn’t the best on ground handling so you don’t have that going for you.
Someone help me please. If the rudder settings are too twitchy and one wants to tone them down, what does one do to the sensitivity numbers? Do you increase or decrease them? Thanks.
I have a 4080 graphics card like you do. Have a question do you lock your frame rates at a certain frame 40,50 60? Or do you keep your frames unlocked?
Guess my next video? Lol 👍A lot to take on board, but it looks like a winner.Don't be too hard on yourself it was your first flight in a highly detailed model.Slainte Mike 👍 ❤
How is the system load / fps hit compared to TBM850 and perhaps the Carenado PC12? I have both, and while Carenado PC12 impacts my fps more than some airliners and rendering it unflyable in dense scenery areas, the TBM850 despite all it simulates is lighter than many Asobo "default" aircraft and is so far the best complex-ish planes in msfs I have.
@@hostettervideos I only have 2070 OC running 1080pi, where the Carenado PC12 was a no-go, while the TBM850 is running 40fps lock on Ultra setting just smooth even on KLX etc. That's why I'm asking 😁
Comparing the TBM850 with the PC12, you mention that the two aircraft "play 2 different roles in the aviation industry", but you fail to mention what those 2 different roles ARE. Can you elaborate a bit here...what ARE those 2 different "roles" exactly?
@@DanBirasithat doesn’t make any sense. Why do walkarounds, yeah I get. But why don’t follow checklists? There are countless cases were Pilots didn’t do their checklist and crashed although there were no failures.
Well said with the comparisons of both aircraft, Because the questions here are unexperienced. Both aircraft are completely differnet are design to do different jobs. It is like comparing apples with pears. No need to ask when both are not the same !!!
Did you check the assistance settings? Since rudder is affecting ailerons, maybe there is some sort of rudder assist or something like that turned on? It happens from time to time that these settings are changed automatically, where some assist suddenly turns itself on and confuses the h*** out of you. hehe. Had that happen to me a few times where the airplane didn't want to do what I wanted to do.
@@OverkillSimulations At the end you mentioned you're using the Airbus sidestick with twist grip, check axis assignments. I have done the same rookie mistake multiple times when changing sticks, and forgetting to check the assignments. Likely there's a conflict somewhere.
its an awesome tool that the PC12 has. it makes flying it very nice. taxiing not so much. (my poor knees) but yes it is on the real plane but the sim makes it... interesting. we can seperate the yoke from the pedals whenever we want. IE IRL if i turn the yoke on the ground i look like a kid imagining hes dogfighting on the plane and MX yells at me. but in the sim itll turn the plane on the ground due to limitations of asobo. hope that helps!
@@hostettervideos Interesting, I have never heard of any airplane with an interconnect between rudder and aileron like that, will be interesting to try that once it releases. Thanks for clearing that up, I certainly hope they inform about that though to stop a huge influx of bug reports about it. Hehe
Sure I am lead to suppose this one is coming base at 14.99 then...otherwise, its an easy pass! There is plenty around to chose from without this schemes to squeeze money out of people!
Just purchased the plane. I think that it has the same issue as Kodiak used to have - that is after the autopilot disconnect the trim gets reset and the plane requires pretty hard push on the yoke to keep it from nosing up.
Wonder when this is going to be released? Beginning to lose interest. I'll just get the m500 instead.
yes, they are showing videos of a plane just to not release it.
December 6th
No!!! It’s a different mission!!! 😂
I am so ready for this purchase, I have been using the Carenado PC12 with its lousy ground handling, I just can't wait to buy the SimWorks Studio version, thanks..
im NOT gonna comment on the landing, but, take this video as a fun jumping in kinda video. the videos to come will def be more by the book. heres the cool thing about this plane. its fun. you can do it by the book and its fun, or just whip it and be fun. cant wait to see the landings get better! (if theres any gear left to land on)
The flights from St Barts to Juliana are often carried out at around 1 000 ft, you're way too high and you're wasting fuel by going to 4 000 ft. Also after departure you're supposed to do an immediate left turn over the bay. The landing was terrible as you pointed out. It makes me wonder if there is something off with the flight model of this one. I know their Kodiak also is extremy nervous on the approach so it could be a SWS thing.
as you are correct about the alt of flight there (as im currently flying there) the wasting fuel part really isnt. youre talking pounds of fuel. the plane is very good at climbing and being efficient. so wether he goes full speed higher or slower at lower speed, that short of a flight doesnt make a difference. (hence why islanders, caravans, and twin otters do the flight not a pc12). id be less harsh about his landing since most ppl who first flew the kodiak put it in the dirt on takeoff since they didnt know what they are doing. and most ppl will do the same here in the plane on landing. its not the flight model, as it took months to get it just right (with some sim limitations in there). he was way to high and too fast, but he knows that now. alot of it is knowing how a plane is configured and set up. and the pc12 can do anything. but you have to have it set up correctly. hope this helps! anymore questions, ill be here or in the SWS discord
Thanks for the wonderful response! It was my assumption that the low altitude was due to saving fuel. Even if you only save a couple of pounds per flight it would be logical to me to fly in the most efficient way considering the amount of flights a company does per year. That's the case in airlines at least, to always fly as fuel efficient as possible.@@hostettervideos
totally get that! julliana airspace is a very busy place at times. with or without radar some days as well. so any aircraft that can go VFR under the FIR (which starts at 2500) makes their day easier and can be slipped in. when it comes to fuel, also some what true esp for pistons. turboprops are.. interesting with that, if youre doin a short flight like that, itll probably only burn about 300-400 pounds MAYBE with start taxi flight and landing. (in the PC12 atleast).
@@mrmisterno1
Pro Tip: Learn to fly the approach with the aircraft fully trimmed up. That way the aircraft's nose won't porpoise... also, then you only need to add or remove power to control the rate of decent and NOT pitch of the aircraft.
I believe the main reason failures aren’t included is because Pilatus weren’t happy with them being included by default. I think it’s with Pilatus now for review.
They have been saying "waiting on Pilatus many times. Makes me wonder if they are even confident releasing it.
No, it is a business decision.
I really like the idea of the "optional failures" feature, thanks.
Man, I'm very much still around 30% toward purchasing this product. I'm 100% satisifed with my TBM8. Yes, IRL they are used for different purposes. However, as a casual simmer, I'm not pretending to do anything as much as I am just flying around for fun. I will say, however, for $10 less than the TBM, you can also get the Piper M500 with more features (Yes, I know, it's a little slower and flies a little lower(Don't chew my head off warriors)), but they are generally in the same category when it comes to performance (In my opinion). I really want to see the pricing of both the base and failure package. If they are charging $40 for thee base and $20 for the failures, their reasoning, well lets say, not fully forthcoming. With all that said, looks like a great product for the SWS and PC12 fans! For me though, Black Square beat SWS to the market.
$40 is too high. We're looking at 25-30€ which means $26-32 or so.
I can get behind that price range@@SimWorksStudios
The M500 is a very introductory aircraft to the turboprop. Very light, much less horsepower and complexity. The TBMs are pretty much the top tier to the light end turboprop. Much more complexity, horsepower, range, utility, etc. Both carry 5 passengers. PC12 is a longer version which carries 9 passengers. It is heavier and greater utility but is slower than the TBM, but is still faster than the M500. The M500 is something a low time pilot can get into without having problems finding insurance. Not so with the TBM or PC12.
Your glide on final was perfect, not high at all. your VSI shows 500ft/min, you were at 50ft above the threshold and the runway perspective was what you expect on landing (real life). It looked a very good approach to me, however the plane was not trimmed that's why you had a hard time landing.
Thank you for the tips! I appreciate that very much!
I blew my first one about as badly as yours. I don't know what is with the porpoise as the speed drops off but that is what it is. Perhaps more like reality? I don't know. Also, noticed a massive lack of directional control on roll out. I too was using a joystick in place of rudder pedals. That has a lot to do with it.
Don't feel embarrassed. Perfect landings are boooooring for the youtube audience 😊, thanks for the chill!
Every video I’ve watched of this one has had a crazy landing with skidding on the ground. Might wait on the first patch for this one. Outside of the first class toilet modeling they seem to forgot a few basics.
Not at all but this is a VERY valid observation. The main problem with these landings was that touchdown was 20-30kts too fast, which will make MSFS think that the plane is in "flight" mode still and therefore you skid. Also the plane seems to have been trimmed center for landing (56:27), which will make reverse pull you left and have to fight harder with the pedals. We are looking into ways to make this easier, though.
@@SimWorksStudiosthanks for the reply. That is an important detail. I know msfs isn’t the best on ground handling so you don’t have that going for you.
@@twifosp1tell me about it... 🤣
@@SimWorksStudios So how is the plane supposed to be trimmed for landing? I cannot get nice landings at all.
Someone help me please. If the rudder settings are too twitchy and one wants to tone them down, what does one do to the sensitivity numbers? Do you increase or decrease them? Thanks.
Increasing the numbers of memory serves well reduce the input in the lower axis range
That would have absolutely collapsed that nose gear in real-life lol
Oh definitely... I made the ground crew absolutely angry!
I have a 4080 graphics card like you do. Have a question do you lock your frame rates at a certain frame 40,50 60? Or do you keep your frames unlocked?
Unlocked. I found weird issues when locking it
Great video, but PLEASE, include Timestamps in videos such as this. Makes it so much more usful and convinient. THank you!!
Guess my next video? Lol 👍A lot to take on board, but it looks like a winner.Don't be too hard on yourself it was your first flight in a highly detailed model.Slainte Mike 👍 ❤
How is the system load / fps hit compared to TBM850 and perhaps the Carenado PC12? I have both, and while Carenado PC12 impacts my fps more than some airliners and rendering it unflyable in dense scenery areas, the TBM850 despite all it simulates is lighter than many Asobo "default" aircraft and is so far the best complex-ish planes in msfs I have.
i have a 3080ti, and its fine on frames. i dont see any issues with it at all.
@@hostettervideos I only have 2070 OC running 1080pi, where the Carenado PC12 was a no-go, while the TBM850 is running 40fps lock on Ultra setting just smooth even on KLX etc. That's why I'm asking 😁
@@matyxcz im sure itll do just fine then
@@hostettervideos thank you, sir 👍
Comparing the TBM850 with the PC12, you mention that the two aircraft "play 2 different roles in the aviation industry", but you fail to mention what those 2 different roles ARE. Can you elaborate a bit here...what ARE those 2 different "roles" exactly?
TBM is more of a business aircraft while PC12 is utility/business. PC12s are very popular as air ambulances.
Love this! Hard choice - what do you think: this versus the TBM 850?
Keep watching.. we talk about it after the landing.. but both is my answer lol
Both !
TBM all the way. What sense does it make to follow checklists when there is no failure system?
@@DanBirasithat doesn’t make any sense. Why do walkarounds, yeah I get. But why don’t follow checklists? There are countless cases were Pilots didn’t do their checklist and crashed although there were no failures.
@@DanBirasiThat makes no sense lol
Well said with the comparisons of both aircraft, Because the questions here are unexperienced. Both aircraft are completely differnet are design to do different jobs. It is like comparing apples with pears. No need to ask when both are not the same !!!
I feel sorry for your passengers. 🤣🤣🤣
Did you check the assistance settings? Since rudder is affecting ailerons, maybe there is some sort of rudder assist or something like that turned on? It happens from time to time that these settings are changed automatically, where some assist suddenly turns itself on and confuses the h*** out of you. hehe. Had that happen to me a few times where the airplane didn't want to do what I wanted to do.
I have my settings set as true to life... so I'm not sure
@@OverkillSimulations At the end you mentioned you're using the Airbus sidestick with twist grip, check axis assignments. I have done the same rookie mistake multiple times when changing sticks, and forgetting to check the assignments. Likely there's a conflict somewhere.
@@Skauber actually I have discovered this is legit...
Rudder Aileron Interconnect
Exists in the real aircraft
its an awesome tool that the PC12 has. it makes flying it very nice. taxiing not so much. (my poor knees) but yes it is on the real plane but the sim makes it... interesting. we can seperate the yoke from the pedals whenever we want. IE IRL if i turn the yoke on the ground i look like a kid imagining hes dogfighting on the plane and MX yells at me. but in the sim itll turn the plane on the ground due to limitations of asobo. hope that helps!
@@hostettervideos Interesting, I have never heard of any airplane with an interconnect between rudder and aileron like that, will be interesting to try that once it releases. Thanks for clearing that up, I certainly hope they inform about that though to stop a huge influx of bug reports about it. Hehe
Sure I am lead to suppose this one is coming base at 14.99 then...otherwise, its an easy pass!
There is plenty around to chose from without this schemes to squeeze money out of people!