I just got the new Kodiak but noticed some of the gauges had no labels so was wonder if this was supposed to be like this?’
Is the Kodiak 100 not using the standard Garmin 1000 glass cockpit?
The GitHub G1000 overhaul mod should change these gauges to their almost real counterparts, and the engine gauge should look correct too.
If the GitHub Garmin1000 mod does not change the displays on the Kodiak 100 well I am sure there will be superb realism and Garmin display overhaul mods released very soon because the Kodiak 100 is a beloved and superb high quality add-on 
The Kodiak (supposedly) fully supports the G1000 NXi mod which is pictured in the screenshot. However as you can see there are no labels for the gauges
1 Like
Oil pressure
Oil Temp
Amps
Volts
From top to bottom.
https://manualzz.com/doc/51603298/garmin-g1000-nxi--quest-kodiak-100-cockpit-reference-guid…
See page 9 for a full description of the unlabelled gauges.
Agreed though, it is a shame they have not been labelled but maybe space was an issue.
2 Likes
Here is a screenshot from the missionary pilot channel, and this engine gauge should be redone (by a real good modder) because in real-life the engine parameter bars have a description above them:
The gauges say:
TRQ FT-LB (torque delivered to the propeller)
ITT (interstage turbine temperature)
unreadable, vid resolution too blurry (but probably propeller RMP)
unreadable, video is too blurry (probably turbine power in percent)
FFLOU PPM (or whatever, the video is very blurred - I don´t know what this is)
OIL PSI (oil pressure)
OIL °C (oil temp)
AMPS (electrical power delivered by the generator)
VOLTS (volts on the bus)
FUEL QTY (fuel quantity)
AID
FUD (I can´t read these clearly, but on the botton are probably trim settings)
A good modder should overhaul the Kodiak gauges to absolute perfection like it was done with the Cessna 152 or the Cessna Citation CJ4 
Give it time, and it will be. Working Title seem to be about as good as it gets.
Take a look at the NXi via the Marketplace, and ditch the GitHub version as that will likely see no further development.
this is the marketplace version
Thanks for the handy link.
I also hope someone is overhauling this incredible unstable and uncontrollable standard flight physics of this airplane.
Surely there are many people out there who have flown this plane in real-life, what are they saying about the simulated flight dynamics and flight characteristics of the Kodiak 100?
They’re working on improving the sketchy takeoff characteristics when you have a more aft CG, which is where the main issues are. They do have a real Kodiak pilot that’s been helping with testing.
Check the SWS Discord as there has been a lot of discussion there about it.
Excellent - having a real pilot who is testing the flight characteristics is always perfect!
Well I have flown it only four times and yes I have tested the cargo, but the aircraft was not that fully loaded (I think it was only 3500kg and the maximum take-off weight is about 4400kg, it was only 10-40kg cargo rows, way less weight than a ~77kg passenger on every seat would weight). But still it was behaving strange and super unstable, but not because it was overloaded.
As soon as the new HOTAS arrives there will be more test-flights of this beautyful yet unstable plane. At the beginning I had problems learning to fly the Hind-D too because it was the opposite of “stable” and had many tail rotor blade stalls - but if it flies it can be learned to fly properly with enough patience
the more loaded it is the more nose down trim it needs to keep it stable during takeoff is what they have been saying so try that in the meantime. I don’t doubt the real thing also needs the nose down trim but I do doubt the real thing will crash as easily if the pilot forgets to put enough nose down trim.
1 Like
It does. If you watch some of the Missionary Bush Pilot videos where they show the MFD you will see that there is a white arc marked TO that is very nose down. I hadn’t appreciated at the time that they tend to take off then stay in ground effect until they build some speed then pull up.
I assume that with that much torque, they need to build some airspeed to gain some rudder authority. You can see what happens if you don’t in some YT videos of the SWS Kodiak where they are trimmed up instead, rotate, pull back to climb then the plane spins to the left, and crashes.
If you want a good example, have a look at this. Check out where the trim wheel is set too. Time code should be 01:22:50.
That setting is dead opposite of where I usually have mine trimmed @ 30-31 CG - I usually am about 10:00 o’clock on the trim wheel… flies right off the runway at 65-70 kias with 20 degrees and 40-45% payload and very gentle rotation.
1 Like
I think those showing this behaviour are all doing the same thing incorrectly: trimming it like its a 172.
2 Likes
Yes, trim up on takeoff is a recipe for disaster. The Kodiak (and the 208) require nose down trim.
A look at the real plane’s G1000 trim indication, it is clearly visible. Yet, the streamer either didn’t see or didn’t apply it. I guess lesson learnt!
1 Like