How about this?
If there is a system/switch/interface in the real aircraft, as many as possible are modelled in the simulation, and the number of INOP interactables determines the quality of the simulation.
Some seem to get upset with he use of “study level” as well, but I think we all know what the gist is here, even if we can’t agree on a phrase to describe it.
That sounds like something I can support. I dońt like inop switches !
Bring on the system depth then !
When is its launch scheduled?
Before Christmas, but it may be delayed to after new year.
Thank you!
3/4 of the airport they go dont exist in the stock sim 
and you have to download mods to have all Northern Quebec’s airports
That livery is the old one, would be cool if they do the new one too
please stop posting screenshots, y’all are making me wanna buy this 
I’m sorry, but I can’t stop myself.
Now, here’s a test for you. Look at the picture below. If you think “why are people posting pictures of the floor in this thread?” then you can close the browser window and resume your normal life. If you find yourself thinking “Look at the detailing of the rudder pedals - oh wait, he is really low on fuel” then I’ll say: welcome aboard!
Understood.
I guess part of what prompted me to write my comment was that this release means that there will likely never be a full-fidelity DHC-6 for MSFS. After flying a more detailed version than what is promised here for several years in FlightGear, I was excited for an even better version for MSFS this whole time - maybe one that could utilize the full capability of the sim.
But if this has been Aerosoft’s MO for a long time and for these reasons, that is perfectly understandable and I retract my disappointment.
The reason why I like full-fidelity aircraft is (a) it feels cool (let’s not kid ourselves), (b) it’s interesting to someone who loves aviation, and (c) it increases interactivity in flight. I admit however that I am a casual simmer, and cannot compare myself to those who spend tens of hours learning every detail of a single aircraft, as much as I would like to be someday when I get time on my hands.
Tens of hours?
More like weeks 
But no rivet counter here, And I enjoy as much fidelity as I can get, but, this level is fine with me as well.
Aerosoft’s Twin Otter Extended for FSX featured a very accurate Collins AP-106 autopilot and FD-112V Flight Director, complete with manual and full autopilot modes, with the VS wheel mounted on the yoke just like the real thing. If that’s included in the MSFS version (and there’s no indication from Aerosoft that it isn’t) let’s all sit back and wait for the “Study Level System Depth” experts to post on here complaining that the autopilot doesn’t work because it keeps climbing past their selected altitude etc., etc.
You are really low on fuel.
Perhaps Karma unsealed his gas tanks and they leaked?
I’m not familiar with the Flight Gear Twin Otter. What I will say is that Aerosoft generally delivers a satisfying experience, even if there isn’t failure modeling, or complex systems interacting with each other. Something along those lines may be available elsewhere (the FSG Porter looks promising). But - with limitations as noted - the Aerosoft Twin Otter in its previous versions has always been very satisfying. You may not need to have a sim A&P always on call. But they do manage to deliver the experience.
I expect I’ll be having a lot of fun with it.
I just hope they continue to support it through the future updates.
we jumped it from 20k ft - the door doesn’t insulate and it get’s very cold if you’re sitting near that door, but the worst place is in the back, right handed seat 
Ahh so if / then with more steps… Unless you’re into simulating highly granular failures there is no real need for this.
Have you flown an Aerosoft aircraft before?
Generally, unless you’re a subject matter expert, they might as well be study level. There’s plenty of complexity in their CRJ, I expect the Twin Otter will be comparable.
Personally, I would only say the PMDG DC-6 is more complex than the CRJ is because you have to know how to treat those Double Wasps right, but someone who is more intimately familiar with the inner workings of one or both may disagree.
On the Aerosoft forum a developer said the launch of the Twin Otter has been delayed into January.
Bah.
I really would like to buy me another plane next week as chrismas present, but the CRJ has no weather radar no Carenado Cessna 337 Skymaster in sight and the Twin Otter freighter would be on top of the list.
