We did not, nor will we, model the rivets in 3D as this actually causes way more issues than good stuff, if, that is, you’re looking for wear and tear and grime… like you’d get in a real aircraft that sees daily or even weekly use. This is what we’re trying for. Used.
As well, though it would absolutely be possible to add more “detail”, we prefer to concentrate on systems depth and a great flight profile as well as great frame rates.
Thanks for your criticisms but, we’re not going to change our path for the moment.
Edit: there are, however, normal maps. And those do add depth. Perhaps you’re not flying it and seeing them when you’re turning in the sun…?
You know, there is that fine line you can walk in terms of graphical fidelity, which TO ME you are walking. Your aircraft looks great, I have ZERO complaints. But unlike certain other devs whom I won’t name your stuff flies and works the best it can considering any possible sim limitations. THAT is way more important to me, so for that, thank you. Like I said, even though I am not into military aircraft all that much, I am going to purchase those as well, simply because I know they will be great to fly when I AM in the mood to fly them and you will do them justice. I want to support devs like you as much as I am able. There have been way too many disappointing aircraft out already - yours never seems to disappoint.
Agree with you 100%. I’ve been a Milviz customer since the FSX days when I fell in love with the Huey. Immersion and aircraft systems/performance will always take priority when I’m shopping for an addon. Do I appreciate the 3D rivets and decal system in MSFS? Yes, I certainly do. However, I also think the Milviz Corsair is the most immersive, best looking aircraft yet available for the platform (don’t yet own the Porter - waiting for it to launch on Orbx). The lack of bumpy screws and rivets does not detract from the Corsair in the slightest! I too have never been disappointed by a Milviz product.
I would like to backup your observations. I have exactly the same issues regarding rudder control on take off and landing, to the point that I am getting a bit fed up. It feels as if, and your video shows it well, that corrective rudder input seems to work. The plane straightens up, and then the plane takes another swing, despite holding the corrective rudder position. You end up chasing a lagging, moving target that doesn’t settle down as speed reduces (or increases in the case of take off) and if the tail eventually drops to the ground and your pointing off the runway, you quickly release the tail lock and massively overcorrect to keep it on the runway.
The whole exercise is making flying the plane a little less than satisfying tbh.
Edit: I sound a bit moaney and wanted to add that I love the Porter for many many reasons and rate the whole package very highly.
Hell, i love this plane, it isso good and well done already.
BUT that is why it is sooo frustrating! I invested another 2hrs yesterday just flying circuits and do fullstop landings, all to the checklist. Once i tought “now i have it” and thext landing or takeoff it goes crazy again… Its a 20/80 chance.
It is as you said, theres the initial swivel, then you correct it, then it goes crazy to the other side, no matter how fine or strong the rudder inputs are.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, @Krazycolin
We dont want to moan, we are frustrated that we cant enjoy this bird, please try to find a fix for this.
The issue is, as soon as the tailwheel lifts off, the plane goes crazy and correcting it is just random, sometimes it works, mostly it doesnt…
Meanwhile, iput some more time into it and im slowly getting there.
The trick is, as an other user said above, to pull the yoke back on takeoff, till around 40-50kts. Then you can let it go, but be prepared to work the rudder immidiately! Depending on wind, it wants to go either left or right and it needs the correct amount of rudder pressure. After that it will fly away.
Landings are a bit more tricky, but go the same way:
Try to land as centered and straight as possible, pull the yoke back ASAP to get the tailwheel down and again, be prepared to work the pedals and apply brakes.
It feels it needs a bit too much workaround to get an acceptable takeoff/landing, but it can be done. Imho, a bit too much.
So very appreciative that you guys are looking into it!
As said, the aircraft otherwise is just amazing, so much character, well done! Cant wait for stage 2.
Must confess that I am still on the fence about buying this one.
BUT, as an old FSX fan of the PC-6 I discovered a great site by another Swiss fan who put the following website together.
Perhaps there is more than just a little humor in his comment at the very bottom of his home page? The PILATUS PORTER by Markus Herzig (pc-6.com)
Had a flick through those videos @HXArdito and I think it may be more an issue with pilot technique than anything. We all know that MSFS doesn’t model taildragger flight dynamics perfectly, particually the transition from tailwheel in contact with the ground to flying level, however the swerving left and right did seem rather excessive in some of those videos and in the last clip from TrainPlanesim, he definitly forgot to engage the tail wheel lock.
For reference, below is a recording of my last takeoff and landing in the Milviz PC6. Only gentle dabs of rudder are required to correct the p-factor when trimmed correctly. (Note Gyro, P Factor and Torque are all set to 100 in Flight Model options and take off auto rudder turned off under assistance)
Yeah mines got a lot better meanwhile, but it is still like playing russian roulette. Especially on uneven grass strips, especially there, where the PC6 should shine.
Might be the sim to some extend, but the devs will look at it again, im sure it can be improved, its sub par and unrealistic right now.
Are there any other taildraggers out there that don’t exhibit the pivoting tendencies out there that you have flown then? I would be interested to do some test flying comparisons if there are.
