Unlike Ford, you can have it in any colour except Black. 
1 Like
A lot of this thread (and some others) be like:
Chill out folks, it’s just a plane built on the moving target which is the MSFS SDK.
They all have issues to some degree, it’s not something that needs to be overanalysed or defended to the nth degree, especially if the developer themselves (at least the good ones) are open about where and why it falls down under certain conditions. eg:
They’re just models of reality to varying degrees, they are not reality. And unless specified otherwise, they need to be built to suit a wide range of input controllers, because that’s the reality of the user base.
2 Likes
Well I think MSFS dumbs down landing in general. Every plane, (especially the Kodiak), seems easier to land to me than they do in other sims.
Maybe, but they are also generally harder to land then the same aircraft in real life. That is more to do with you relying almost entirely on vision in the sim for situational awareness.
Agree, Sims are almost always harder to fly than real planes in my experience.
Well its vision irl as well there is not a lot of gs in an kodiak on approach. But yes the collision physics is non existant in msfs. You can perform carrier landings in mach 2. You can land on water and I dont know aqua plane to the runway. Fenches, poles etc are not physical objects etc.
VR makes it way easier to judge distance and its vision is one on one what you get irl though less fov 
I like flying the Kodiak. I too, hope that the FM is actually improved and not “dumbed down” to satisfy the vocal minority.
The Caravan (plain Asobo version) is just about what you’d expect: rather simple, easy to fly, and incredibly boring.
In the end it all boils down to what you enjoy flying and how you like to fly. In real life I’ve never flown either aircraft or even seen a Kodiak on the ramp. So for me to argue more realistic or less? I have no basis in fact. I just know which model I enjoy flying the most in MSFS, with my unique computer hardware.
1 Like
I think you have a serious misconception of how aircraft are supposed to be flown.
“Even if a 182 is the only airplane you’ve flown, the Cessna Caravan will seem easy to fly. Caravan operators appreciate the consistent reliability provided by this proven, time-tested airplane.”
You don’t need to wrestle a modern aircraft in order to control it. These are not supposed to be F104 “Flying Coffins”, where you buy a lottery ticket every time you go up to see if you’ll live. This misconception that unless an aircraft demands constant hand flown corrections in order to tame it and be “in control” they are “too easy” and “boring” really needs to be put to rest. Change the weather and the workload will rise accordingly, then you will really see the benefits of the design.
They are designed to help you do a demanding job easier, not make it more difficult for the pilot to do an already demanding job. That’s why Kodiak’s, Caravans, and Porters (among others) are regularly used for the most demanding STOL transport tasks on the planet, in a variety of weather conditions.
Want a challenge? Simulate a skydive drop at 14K, and beat the jumpers to the ground. That takes some skill, and jump pilots do it 10 to 20 times a day.
Watch some of Zehr air’s videos, and note how most of the time he flies with his fingertips on the stick.
Good advice here too, from a Real life & simulator aerobatics instructor.
"In the simulator; about controllers.
Just a word or two here about controllers for you military aircraft sim enthusiasts who will end up enjoying flying a display flight in the Cloud 9 Aermacchi MB339;
I’ve been instructing real pilots in high performance airplanes most of my life, and I can tell you that if there’s one thing that relates to both real life and flying with a controller in the simulator, it’s HOW the controls are used.
Flying a high performance airplane is done with extremely subtle PRESSURES, not control movements per se’. You literally caress the stick in a high performance airplane, and this method of control usage in real life can be directly carried into your use of a controller in MSFS.
When you use a controller in MSFS to fly a high performance airplane, you have to think soft subtle pressure rather than movement of the controller. In fact, I would suggest you try flying with your fingers. Put a VERY light hand on your controllers for this type of flying. Think “pressure” and not movement!!! Be gentle!!! Actually, this is the way you fly ANY airplane, but for low altitude aerobatic work, smooth, gentle controller pressure is an absolute MUST!
The result of this “soft approach” is a corresponding reaction of the aircraft on the screen that more truly duplicates what the airplane would be doing for you in real life.
For those of you who might have a tendency toward handling aircraft in the simulator in any other way…RELAX…slow it down a bit…think PRESSURES not movement, and you will find your general sim experience instantly more correct and enjoyable and your ability to handle a high performance airplane like the Cloud 9 Aermacchi MB 339 instantly improved by leaps and bounds.
Also on controllers and display flying in MSFS
Naturally, to fly a display properly in the simulator, the better your controller setup, the more accurate and realistic the experience will be for you. Personally, considering the quality of the flight experience being made available to us these days by developers like Cloud 9, I think it’s worth the expense for the serious simulator enthusiast to consider a good stick, a separate throttle, and a set of good rudder pedals. The total sim experience available today I believe warrants this. The proper equipment completes the package for you and allows you much added immersion and realism.
“A Tutorial on Real World Air Show Display Flying and How to Create and Fly a Display Flight in the COMPLETELY NEW Aermacchi MB339 Pan by Cloud 9 in MSFS”
Dudley Henriques
Retired Demonstration Pilot
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship"
3 Likes
Private Pilot since 1978; over 4,000 hours in the left seat.
I find the Asobo Caravan to be absolutely boring. IN MSFS.
In real life? Who knows: as stated, I’ve never flown one.
1 Like
Why is it “boring”? I’m genuinely curious as to exactly what you mean.
I use inverted comma’s, because as you should know any aircraft can turn around and kill you in a heartbeat if you treat it as a given.
If it’s just the FM, use the performance mod. Many of the base aircraft FM’s and systems are a bit tame and underdeveloped, and can benefit from one of the community performance mods. I had to uninstall the Asobo Porter, it doesn’t compare well to the Milviz Porter. Looking forward to the FSG Porter, wishing the devs best of luck (now all fighting for Ukraine).
One man’s (or woman’s) boring is another’s predictability perhaps.
Which is basically my beef with the current Kodiak FM. It was predictable, and still very fun to fly (it had power out the whazoo), but devolved to a squirrelly FM a couple of releases back (and lost power). I can still fly it, but the predicability/power of the Caravan/Porter make them better to fly in riskier areas for me.
5 Likes
Boring is good. It’s the way it should be. If you want a challenge switch to landing fighter jets on a carrier.
2 Likes
This 100 times. You said exactly what I was unsussessfully trying to convey in my posts (also in Kodiak thread).
4 Likes
The history of flight is littered with dead pilots who flew non-boring aircraft, sadly.
“But there were many accidents as we were getting trained to fly the 210. The plane would just suddenly drop out of the sky. Nobody could understand what was going on. Our casualties in training were as bad as when we were in Russia. Pretty soon, the people in Germany were talking about it, because they could see what was happening to the airplanes. So they took us away, and moved us to France for more training – near Tours. The same thing happened there, and pretty soon people were talking about it over there, too. So they made us stop flying those planes.”
That is not a challenge at all (in MSFS and DCS) compared to landing or taking off in Kodiak from some airstrips in PNG that Kodiaks operate from in real life.
2 Likes
If you hold Dudley Henriques in high regard it just so happens he did a review of the Fulcrum yoke. His words right there confirm the difference a quality controller can make. This was simply the point that was previously being made.
1 Like
That argument is the same one gamepad/KBM racers regularly hear in the simracing community from wheelies. “WHY YOU USE GAMEPAD? MUST USE A WHEEL TO SIMRACE SILLY”
um, No.
We all know a wheel/yoke might be “best”, except for the many planes that are stick driven, of which there are many and a yoke is also not suitable. Non-yoke users are not stupid, they know a higher quality controller would be nice to have.
However, there are many reasons people don’t or can’t use wheels/yokes/pedals etc:
. Cost
. Disability eg: Xbox Adaptive Controller | Xbox
. Space
. Personal preference
. Controllers vary based on aircraft: Yoke, stick, sidestick FBW, Ultralight, etc
. [insert here]
Sims are designed to work with a variety of input methods and controllers. That’s why they say “Full Controller Support”, not “Yoke Support”. That’s also why there are different configuration settings to support various controllers.
If a dev designs a plane to work only with one type of controller, that’s within their rights, but then they should declare that in the sales and marketing info. Otherwise, it’s made for general use and needs to work correctly for general use. If it doesn’t work properly under those conditions, they either need to change stated requirements or put the work in to make it perform properly under all usage scenarios.
3 Likes
Um. Yes.
No one claimed it was a prerequisite to purchase just that it can make a big difference. This guy said the same himself.
That post totally flew over your head, which is the exact same response from wheelies in simracing. Whatever.
ps: What DH is saying in his quote here Kodiak vs Caravan - #69 by Sonicviz is independant of the type of controller, btw.
pps: How do I use that full throw “must have” yoke with my minimal throw sidestick FBW controlled plane?
You create a profile for the specific aircraft.
BTW - I had the impression real life FBW sidesticks are pressure controlled rather than movement based but I have never flown an Airbus so might be wrong on that.
Regardless. Essentially this developer calibrated the aircraft for the sort of people that appeared the most likely to fly it - bush pilot simmers that used yokes. This would of course require people with joysticks to create a profile for the Kodiak, no big issue.
EXCEPT the joystick people simply refused to recalibrate and create a Kodiak specific profile to load when they fly it and made a lot of noise. It seems a lot of joystick users like to have the one default calibration they use for every single aircraft in the sim regardless of whether it is a tubeliner or a bi-plane - far from optimal but apparently that is how they fly - go figure.
SO - the dev is now recalibrating the plane to be more suited to joystick jocks. of course this now means the Yoke fraternity are likely to need a Kodiak profile but overall they are a less whiney lot and more likely to create a profile, so hopefully the new patch will settle down all this complaining.
1 Like
It seems to me that there are multiple issues with this aircraft that keep getting conflated…
There’s the fact that the devs designed this plane for a long throw yoke. That’s fine. A Honeycomb yoke should work just as well, it will just require half the physical movement to equal the same authority. Joysticks will be even more sensitive, but again, nothing that a person with some reasonable dexterity can’t compensate for. I really haven’t seen anyone here complaining that their yoke is the problem. I only see defenders of the plane suggesting that others get a longer yoke.
The real issue here is the flight model, which SWS has acknowledged both here and on their Facebook page - HAS ISSUES!!! This is the real issue! I really wish folks would focus on this rather than bickering about who’s yoke is longer or constantly suggesting I get yoke augmentation! 
2 Likes