A magic tablet that fixes the plane…
I know what my imagination comes up with.
What does that look like/mean?
Not very excited about this SWS release. It is probably going to be better than the Carenado PC12 but not that great, not near the level of the Comanche.
Having things like better engine simulation, realistic flaps (flaps!) or the weather radar planned for the future are huge downsides to me, I prefer a complete plane from day one as the Comanche and then fixes and improvements but not major things left behind. I totally hate the idea of an “expansion pack”. Sounds very similar to “early access”.
I will probably get it on day one anyway but I’m already ready to be disappointed.
5 Likes
There isn’t anything held back, other than WX RADAR. Realistic flaps for this airplane are simply not possible with what MSFS took away after SU3 and MS/Asobo don’t seem to understand the problem. The failures expansion is something only few people want -the pricing and developement strategy was explained above.
Regarding early access: there have been products missing entire parts of the aircraft on release, but that is far from where we set the bar. If the WXR is missing on launch, I don’t see why it makes the plane feel half-done.
It is a feature we need to do properly to avoid crashes, but at some point we must get the plane out the door too. On top of it, the PC-12 will match and probably surpass the Kodiak when released, so I don’t understand the sentiment. Granted, I did lose sleep over it when deciding, but no more.
Regarding the Comanche, Accusim is a mature technology that has been iterated on for over 10 years. On top of realistic component simulation and wear, it features a custom flight model that can do things MSFS and even FSX can’t natively do. To put it in perspective, the MSFS flight model is a home toolbox where Accusim is a mechanic’s workbench. We just don’t have the tools or 10 years of know-how.
Lastly, we will be happy if we disappoint your preparedness to be disappointed. 
16 Likes
I appreciate the answer, the delivery also.
I’m still stuck on your comment above…something about magic…tablet…broken plane.
Still confused.
My interpretation is that SWS does not want to repair engine damage via a tablet, but more organically on the airplane, like clicking a panel on the engine or something.
2 Likes
Roger that.
Would make sense that way.
Thank you for replying.
I will be delighted to get disappointed about my disappointment!
Rock it out of the park!
1 Like
Why would you buy an aircraft that you believe will disappoint you. Surely once you reach that conclusion you leave it.
1 Like
I can’t wait regardless. I have A2A’s Comanche but what is there to worry about. Most of us don’t own a real plane anyway . The Comanche is based on older technology such as AP. The Comanche as far as I am concerned is enough to contend on my end. It too is affected by the trials and errors in MSFS ( based on the flap limitations that was mentioned in other posts regarding the PC 12). For the Comanche air turbulence needs a work around adjustment . I am too still dealing with other things . The only reason why I was on this website and then I found this and got sidetracked a little bit. I was looking for Rudder trim for the Comanche . They did have a knob in the cockpit for rotor trim, but I’m not sure if it was for an older model or for the 250. I can’t find a control knob anywhere ; it has to be somewhere or it just doesn’t have it . It has pitch trim, but so far no rudder trim I can find to keep it from rolling a bit since there is no aileron trim. Must be missing something. If it doesn’t exist a Comanche will be certainly a task to fly. While the PC 12 being more modern and like the 3rd party developer mentioned it’s like designing a airliner but at least it has a sophisticated AP while the Comanche doesn’t. I like the Comanche only because it unique in MSFS . It forces you to step back into the past where pilots were close to real navigators using skills that most don’t have today , that used paper and pencil and did a lot of calculations before flying snd possibly while flying . They used VORS and more . The PC 12 on the other hand has both modern tools and older . Plus it’s more relaxing to fly it in comparison to the Comanche. I like challenges and the Comanche is a challenge but I do like modern cars too . Hey at one time eons ago you had to crank up a car . Most of us today wouldn’t be too keen on that task. Yes it would be a blast to do that one time and say ‘ I started up an old jalopy ‘ but not when you are nearly late for work and it’s a necessity to drive . No way can’t go back to those days knowing a car can just start with a push of a button and has less maintenance pains. The A2A Comanche is what it is and the upcoming Simworks PC12 is what it will be. It will be better than what we had prior and I will be there to help with SIMWORKS R& D time investment & investment by buying it . If I had a bit of money to easily afford both the actual PC 12 and COMANCHE , I would buy both but the Comanche would be in the hangar more so. When I said afford I mean easily affording fuel and maintenance. I would fly the PC 12 more so. Sorry I was using speech to text to compile this. I am sitting in very very slow moving traffic and could not type but at least dictate this reply. But if I have time when I get home, I will try to find if there’s any Rudder trim for the A2A Comanche. I just couldn’t find it in the pit. Unless someone here in this Post knows better especially since there were some here replying to the PC12 development and referred to the Comanche a number of times . Let me know somebody . There is very limited info in the MSFS community about the operations and surface controls for the Comanche including in A2A forum.
For the Simworks Studios developer— I can’t wait for the PC 12 and many others that comment and I hear on that famous streaming video channel alot of us watch . Hint hint hint. Simworks Please stick to your development plan . Oh do the TBM 93O one day too. Hey the PC 12 is close match to it. On a marketing and development perspective in comparison to the PC 12 it is a close match .
Hint hint save funds on development.
Hey I shared another marketing and sales HINT on the Comanche . Are they ahead . Red - Black on the R& D side verses their investments. Read my haphazard message above. The hint is there. I am looking for answers but there is silence on the web. Because its appeal is directed to a specific targeted audience and limited info. For the most basic aircraft designs on MSFS and elsewhere there is plenty of info because tge audience is simply casual. A lot of questions. The pc 12 you are designing I feel will appeal to a larger audience. I just can’t find some one who has commented on the Comanche roll behavior and a pit controller for rudder trim since it doesn’t have aileron trim. No one has commented on that aspect of the craft and how to balance it the best a real pilot would have in its hey day. Does it have it or supposed to have a control in the pit or not. Or is it done by physically controlling the yoke at all times especially during up and downward air flow conditions . No answer I can find so the sell and audience is limited . For sure. If this was a highly sort after aircraft in MSFS community there would had been questions about this mist certainly especially after reading a lot of topics and questions myself about other birds —but not one I could find over this past weekend regarding the over coming the natural tendency for the Comanche true to life rolling/banking issue . But this from me is a hint to their limited audience. To Simworks Studio third party developer — Be smart and stick to plan for the PC 12. Please don’t let others force you and your team to compare . I am a buyer and a somewhat casual user and a Virtual pilot that likes to pretend I have the real actual plane. Hey I may be olde but I do have an imagination and feel like while in front of my monitors I am actually flying. Still a kid at heart I guess. More I do compare the best developers out there that sell they products in the store. I do only go for 4.0 rated products in MSFS STORE but not just 4.0 I go with how many people give a craft a 4.0 before I invest. NOT Five, 20 or fifty but above 100 . The survey says Buy it based on rating and responses by the Msfs public. . I believe the Simworks Studio pc 12 will get good reviews and thus buyers like myself — both serious - not serious and casual users. I also think your next strategy should be on the TBM 930. Like I shared above for both business reasons and responses and inquiries about that particular product from the audience out there ( forums , popular streaming video developers and other info. Surveyed by me, myself and I) lol. Traffic is starting to move. Good night all . Ending my long boring post. Enjoy the moment and this day 7-14-2023.
Oh like others who commented in this topic I have all of Simworks Studio Kodiacs air and water rudder type . Just wonderful. Still waiting on other survey( my survey) on the Simworks Studio RV aircraft and needed fixes before I invest that I read about from every user who posts on any forum out there.
It’s also not fair to just compare everyone to A2A and the Comanche. Yes, it’s a great aircraft but they’ve also built upon years and years of tech and their dev owns the aircraft IRL.
There are other great devs too and they build great products as well. Might not have all the bells and whistles the Comanche has, but they can also just be as great. SWS is one of those devs.
I’ll have as much fun flying the PC12 as flying the Comanche. Probably even more to be honest, as I’m actually more interested in the PC12 than the Comanche from an aircraft’s perspective. AFAIK there’s no A2A PC12…
4 Likes
I can just express my very own opinion: I was looking forward to the release of the PC12. I have the Kodiak and I like it and even though it would be nice to have it on the same level as A2A . This staged release though is an absolute dealbreaker for me and in the planned initial release I just don’t see how this greatly differs from Carenados version. Again, you don’t have to agree, but that is my personal view on this.
1 Like
Are you suggesting that the Carenado PC-12 will be on par to the SWS at initial release? From what I can tell it will be similar to the Kodiak as far as features and quality and the extra stuff will be an optional extra later. I can’t see the harm in that. It basically saves anyone who would just turn off the failures etc from having to pay more for something they don’t want. We see this pay more get more features in many other products so why not let the consumer decide.
You can like it - i don’t.
I can answer that! First of all I will skip the different interiors and extra functionality of our PC-12 as that can be indifferent to some people and stick with two points:
First of all, we had hands-on time and instruction in Fly7’s Pilatus training center at Lausanne for a week. We did 12-16h days in it learning the plane and putting it through all kinds of scenarios. To top it off, we were flown in the plane and were able to “feel” its inertia and reaction in flight. We also know what can and can’t be done about it in MSFS
Secondly, we have recorder a total of three PC-12s (NG and Legacy), inside and out, four and five-bladed.
I can give more, but that goes beyond the point, which is that we are dead serious about getting it done right and, given the opportunity, we will go the extra mile. We could release a half-baked product sooner and hold your $$$ hostage until we patch it. There’s enough of it if we do it right too, so we can wait.
26 Likes
You’re not pizza.
I wouldn’t worry too much about making everyone happy. You’ll always find somebody piping in about what they don’t like about whatever subject it is you want to discuss.
You’re doing what you think is best for you. Stick to that and you’ll be fine. But thanks for the info!
I can’t wait. But I accept that I have too 
4 Likes
Sorry if this has been answered before but when is the NG releasing? I am sure the analog variant will be awesome but I’m really excited about the avionics suite of the NG model so I will be holding off until that one releases.
At minimum a year after the legacy version considering the Honeywell avionics suite will have to be coded from scratch, which is a massive task. I expect it will take well over a year. The legacy version is coming literally a year later than the original prediction by the developer too.
4 Likes
A very good guess.
Don’t know if this can help give an indication of progress and timeline
2 Likes
Oh that’s depressing, lol. I guess it will be released for MSFS 2024 then.