I wouldn’t say fighting the controls exactly, but it does love to float. I was doing landing practise last night at Meribel, to the West of Courchevel.
I’ve always found this one challenging to get right. It’s a pretty short runway, with a very short flat section then a hill at the end of it.
Coming in at around 90kts, I find I have to enter my flare quite some distance before the threshold to land as early as possible to slow down safely.
The controls feel fairly sluggish as the best of times, but at those speeds its really mushy.
I also notice that when in level flight, the rudder seems to have little effect unless you apply quite a bit of pressure.
interesting - do you need to run some kind of mod to get any ffb effects?
I have the old microsoft sidewinder but always been told it will either not work with MSFS or I need to run a mod to get any ffb effect?
I agree on the float. I am certainly no expert on landing a 414 but I would think that with gear and flaps out, pulling the engines to idle at approach speeds would result in the aircraft slowing and descending with a little more enthusiasm than we currently experience.
It seems to descend well enough, but picks up a lot of speed as it does so. As you reduce power the nose only needs to drop a small amount, and it picks up speed really fast, even at full flaps.
Hopefully they won’t go the way of the Twin Otter, and cheat in a spoiler.
Yes, hopefully not. That’s what they’ve done on the C310R as well to “adjust” for out of range flight performance. You wouldn’t normally expect it to be “active” in a plane that doesn’t have one but It has been reported that if the spoiler/speed brake command is unknowingly programmed to a switch, an “invisible” speed brake can be inadvertently deployed without you being aware of that, causing the plane to be slower than it should be. But shouldn’t be an issue if you know what your controls are doing.
Almost everyone does this to simulate situations the flight model and SDK isn’t prepared to handle. Few mention it publicly. MilViz is quite clever with their use of invisible spoilers. It is how you get things like that trademark shake just before a stall.
The 310 is a bit cheaper and clunkier in real life.
Both are excellent add ons. In spite of their similarities they have quite different flight envelopes. I think most folks would prefer the 414’s envelope and prefer the 310’s systems modeling, and unscheduled, random failures.
It is hard to fly one without longing for it to have what the other lacks.
Indeed! These Milviz planes have some very interesting system features like passenger comfort temperature when handling these often very clunky and overloaded heating devices older Cessnas have - with various levers and knobs to turn. Imagine a car having four long levers and at least three knobs on the heating panel!
Everything that is simulated makes the plane more interesting.
But … I personally hate the handling and flight characteristics of the C310, it´s similar bad like the Kodiak. The elevator is way too agressive and I have the feeling the airplane is trying 4g curve maneuvers when only slightly pulling the joystick backward… The handling of the Cessna 310 is rather unpleasant and uncomfortable.
The Milviz Porter and the Flysimware C414 fly very smooth stable. The Milviz Porter has the same awesome engine failure feature when flying with too high ITT too long, and the sound when the turbine is getting a core-lock because of overheating is gorgeous!
Well unfortunately this ends the flight but the sound the damaged turbine makes is truly epic. No one wants to hear that in real life.
It´s really nice too see that even smaller GA planes get so many interesting features like circuit breakers, pilot (and/or passenger comfort) based on heating and air conditioning, cabin pressure, and engine failures when overstressing the engine. With the most epic core-lock sound ever made in any simulator.
I don’t have the 310 or the Porter. But I do have the Kodiak, and the 414.
For me the 414 feels quite sluggish compared to the Kodiak. I suspect what you experience is down to pitch travel, and resolution of you controller/yoke/stick. You experience will vary from plane to plane, and if the plane feels twitchy to you it is probably down to elevator effectiveness, or whatever the parameter is called.
I also suspect that I wouldn’t find the 310 all that twitchy. That may be why you find the 414 better.
I bought the 414 yesterday. Spent an hour in the circuit (pattern for you yanks). I think it feels very fluid and realistic. I have time in a Seneca in real life. The 414 feels like it has weight, and in real life when on final with some wind you are making lots of control inputs. I found the same with the 414 in the sim… and I could get it down smoothly pretty naturally. I have 35 ish hours on the Milviz 310 and have yet to get a smooth landing lol. I think one tweak I would make is perhaps a bit less float/more sink when off the power and flaring. Its not bad at all though, nicely done. I think I will be putting some hours under my belt with this one.
I do wonder, is there any way to customize a tail number with a livery? I would like to represent my country. Also, with the PMS GTN setup, I would love to have 1 750 and 1 650 ,is this possible. The two 750s seem like overkill, and I like the “default nav” numbers on the 650. Cheers.
I mean its range of operable flight, like speeds and altitudes. The lack of a pressurized cabin means you may need to keep the 310 pretty low. The 414 can hop pretty much anywhere.
Everyone I knew who has flown the 310 said it felt like a little sports car and really liked it. Personally, I hated flying it, especially it’s incredibly sensitive pitch, just as you mentioned.
I much preferred the handling characteristics of the 402C (simply an unpressurised 414). Whilst definitely a lot more mellow than the 310, the stability and balance particularly made hand flying in IMC a dream.
If you are having problems with both of these aircraft you ought to look in the direction of your controls as @hobanagerik suggests. I have no such issues. They both feel stable and are a joy to fly.
What I find with the 414, on pitch, is that input doesn’t translate into instant movement. The plane feels like it has some weight to it. On flare I have had a tendency to over rotate because of this.
I have no idea whether this is accurate to the real plane, but I am getting used to it.
I have earlier versions so I may fire one of those up at the weekend to compare.
Latest version is the best yet imo. Most AP problems have been sorted as far a I can tell and the Flt model is just really stable. Feels heavy, but it should…its a beast. Outstanding stuff from FSW.
.