Most Realistic Twin Prop

Hi,

I have a home cockpit build for a generic twin prop and although I've been flying the BN-2 Islander for a year, I am looking for a very accurate flight model with great engine modelling too, if possible.

I have the Aerosoft Twin Otter Extended - I love this plane, I flew on one last year in Africa, its a working plane, which I like, but the cockpit configuration does not match my own at all, with those ceiling mounted quadrants.

I have recently bought the Realair Duke, which is gorgeous, but reading online the Duke seems to be a rich man's toy, its running costs way too high for air taxis, couriers and leasing companies. I'd like to use the aircraft with fsPassengers, and the Duke doesn't fit that category.

Recently I bought the Milviz Baron, a plsne used by air taxis, traing schools and leasing agents everywhere. First impressions are very good, does Milviz have a reputation for good modelling and realistic flight behaviour?

Obviously I'd love an A2A seminole or seneca, but I could be waiting for years!!!

Have you any recommendations?

Hi, does it matter if it is piston or turbo? Maybe the running costs for the piston Duke are lower?

Milviz is a pretty good developer, unfortunately I don't have the baron, but their 737, T3-8, Sabre and Phantom, plus some of the helicopters. Flight modelling and visuals are very believable, don't know about the depth of the engine simulation though. Their Cessna twin has a very good reputation too.

I have some of the Carenado twins. Those probably are a matter of taste. I like them, even though they may not be modelled to the deepest systems depth. But as I'm using external controller as well, aircraft models that do not use too many custom control modules are a good thing for my setup.

The F1 B200 is supposed to be pretty good.

And of course one of the best to date - the Majestic Q400. Even though it may not fit the air taxi requirements, it is just too good to not have it in the hangar.

Some good planes I can think of right now:

PMDG Jetstream 41

Razbam SA-227 Metroliner III

Milviz Cessna 310R

Digital Aviation (Aerosoft) Piper PA-31 Cheyenne

Carenado and Alabeo planes, as Nuikati said, don't sport as much systems detail as those listed above, but their visuals are beautiful (and their engine modelling isn't that bad either...) :

C Piper PA-31 Navajo

A Cessna 404 Titan

C Beech King Air C90 and B200

C Beech 1900D

C Cessna 340

Some of their smaller twins include the following:

C Beech Baron 58

A Diamond DA-42 Twin Star (Thielert engines)

C Cessna 337 Skymaster

C Piper PA-34 Seneca II and V

I have some of the Carenado twins. Those probably are a matter of taste. I like them, even though they may not be modelled to the deepest systems depth. But as I'm using external controller as well, aircraft models that do not use too many custom control modules are a good thing for my setup.

I too have a Carenado twin: the Seneca II, which is lovely, since I am using hardware I also need compatibility and everything in the Carenado range works perfectly.

I too have a Carenado twin: the Seneca II, which is lovely, since I am using hardware I also need compatibility and everything in the Carenado range works perfectly.

Sounds like you have/built a neat rig. How about you sending a picture or three? Also specs would be nice and a help for future builders too.

I have the C90 and B200 from Carenado, the FS2004 AFG B300, the Flight1 B200, and the current alpha version of the Milviz B350. The Milviz B350 is going to be a great addon but is not quite ready yet.

Not sure why the Flight1 B200 doesn't get the press it deserves. It is the most accurate KingAir simulation available at this time. Complete with engine damage and maintenance modeling. The FDE is spot on the POH for B200's modified with the Blackhawk turbine upgrades. You can use Navigraph databases with it, there is a SafeTaxi display that shows the location and movement of your aircraft superimposed on the airport layout AND there is an Android app for tablets that can be used to control the G1000 displays.

Sounds like you have/built a neat rig. How about you sending a picture or three? Also specs would be nice and a help for future builders too.

I hope I haven't posted too many photos here....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/lord_mithras/Aircraft/image.jpg1_zpsvglw9ku8.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/lord_mithras/Aircraft/image.jpg4_zpsu2frnz9r.jpg

Showing my ipod used as a GA GPS unit:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/lord_mithras/Aircraft/image.jpg6_zpsow5d9hmx.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/lord_mithras/Aircraft/image.jpg3_zps3plq8fyg.jpg

Hi good job with the 'pit!

You should open a "Show your deskpit" thread in the Outer Marker. Some good ideas there.

Btw a little tip in case you have not tried this: setting the outer monitors a little back and behind the center screen, so that the bezels get halved, can produce a nice faux-3D effect when looking around (at least with TrackIR)

What is the F1 King Air like on frame rates?

On my older AMD base computer, I was getting 30fps locked. My settings for that computer on my website. For my new Intel i7 computer, unlimited frames for it vary but stay about 50 for the most part. The setting for this computer are also on the website. Use the "System" link.

Fantastic 'pit!! BTW

https://uchisworld.wordpress.com

GREAT PIT!

I agree moving the side monitors back a bit makes a huge difference.

Thanks for sharing, and there are never too many pictures! The row 1 passenger sign is a hit all by itself!

Thanks for the comments, I'm off to Rome tomorrow, but when I return I will look into posting a breakdown of my sim cockpit. I cant do electronicss, or carpentry so if I can make that, anyone can!

Just set up my Nvidia Surround to compensate for setting the side screens back a little. On first glance it looks nice, a real 3D trick of the eye. I'll need to do some more flying before I decide whether or not to keep it. Thanks for the tip!

Just remembered I bought the Carenado Seneca II a while ago, and that is a nice rendition on the aircraft. I'm just not sure how accurate or realistic some of the Carenado models are. It certainly seems to fit my homebuild cockpit well... Accufeel helps to improve matters too.

Hi, I don't let Surround compensate at all, because I don't like the scaling effect - degrades image quality. With TrackIR there is always movement and I don't notice the 'broken' horizon anyway. Even compensated I would have it, what with turning my head all the time. So only triple full HD for me, no scaling allowed.

Just getting the bezels halved by setting them behind each other was already worth it.

Hi, I don't let Surround compensate at all, because I don't like the scaling effect - degrades image quality. With TrackIR there is always movement and I don't notice the 'broken' horizon anyway.

Hi Nuikati, Just got back from Rome ... Could you just elaborate for me.... I have three monitors and use a GTX 760 with NvidiaSurround. I set my cfg to Widescreen=True, this sorts out the cockpit view, but does leave stretching on my side monitors. I don't use Track IRbecause it makes no sense with my homecockpit. My standard view is a custom camera set just outside the front windscreen.

Would you do anything different?

Hi Nuikati, Just got back from Rome ... Could you just elaborate for me.... I have three monitors and use a GTX 760 with NvidiaSurround. I set my cfg to Widescreen=True, this sorts out the cockpit view, but does leave stretching on my side monitors. I don't use Track IRbecause it makes no sense with my homecockpit. My standard view is a custom camera set just outside the front windscreen.

 

Would you do anything different?

Welcome back...

Different? No, not necessarily. My post was about the bezel correction feature of NV Surround, which I didn't like at all. It gives you a custom resolution, that stretches your image to reduce broken lines that pass from one screen to the next (horizon, dashboard etc.) But this comes at a price, because the GPU has to scale the picture to fit it onto the native resolution of the screen, which is higher. I found this picture to be fuzzy - but this will probably only matter if you try to read dials in the VC. And I thought that it degraded performance a little bit. So I omitted the bezel correction completely and simply run everything at the full native resolution (5760x1080). With TrackIR I don't notice that lines are "broken" - without it, but you probably will. To a certain degree this can be adjusted by moving the screens.

For the stretching effect: there is not much that can be done, except zooming in. Above 1.00 - 1.15 the stretching will be reduced. Again, with TrackIR you won't notice anyway, because the stretched part moves away when you turn your head, it always stays on your peripheral vision where it belongs ... AFAIK there are ways and tools that get around this effect somehow, but it is quite a challenge to set up from what I understand.

Ha thanks, I see what you mean now - I' m always on the look out for improvements to the cockpit, but it does run smoothly month after month so I shouldn't play around too much, for fear of breaking something!

Thanks for your advice.