Tecnam P2012 is Here

And I have to say, I am glad I did. Compared to my other planes in the hangar the flying sensation feels great, it even surpasses the BN-2 and JF Arrow for me. No curves or nothing on the sensitivity, the plane can easily be trimmed for desired speeds and short looks at a chart or the instruments do not result in a 90° death spiral dive, just as you would expect. No twitchyness when trimming or handflying. So one of my favourite flight models in the sim so far.
The addon seems quite polished, its rocket ship characteristics are scheduled to be toned down, there is a bit much of ballooning on flaps for my taste, but overall a great experience.
The AP is a bit quirky in regards to key bindings compared to other addons, but I manage with dedicated ON/OFF/Disconnect buttons.
I really much like the sounds and the headphone mode, allthough there are some sudden pitch changes when certain rpms are met. I’d loved a smoother transition, but I have no idea how the thing sounds irl so I can live with it.
The default seating position is very zoomed in, too low and into the face, but that is easily remedied with saving ones own viewpoint.
The included tablet does its job, though I do not use it too much, cargo and fuel are set by onair, the walkaround is rather a gimmick in my eyes, as I do not do that in a sim when sitting infront of a yoke with no mouse in reach. There is simbrief integration though no flight plan download. There are maps that can be viewed, however I use an external tablet for that.
The documentation is very very good, having all the necessary information for normal and emergency operations as well as the needed performance charts. Most of the variables used are exposed and well documented. This is great!
The passengers are a bit on the uncanny valley side of things, but it is better than always travelling in an empty plane. With it you get a plethora of different interior styles (medevac, cargo, passenger and mixed) and liveries. I could not spot my own registration on the blank white one, which is a bummer, but at least there is a cockpit placard :smiley:
I’d say easily worth it.

EDIT:

Correction:

Just a correction. You can easily download simbrief flightplans with the navigraph plugin. Just go to flightplan and there use the fms knob to go to flightplan catalog and there you will find your flight plans to download. I presume this will work with all g1000 airplanes and the plugin.

5 Likes

How well is the FADEC implemented ?

We all know that the MSFS modeling of power/mixture/fuel-flow, is pretty bad. A2A have overridden it well… for normally aspirated. I believe this airplane is turbo-charged, to boot… which would make a realistic FADEC system, critical to the model’s overall realism…

…i.e… simply availing the built-in MSFS auto-mixture, would not work…

On second thought… not being pressurized… you’d probably never reach the turbo charger’s critical altitude… but I’d still question the MSFS auto-mixture power/fuel-flow, at cruise/descent power settings…

I lack experience with modern FADEC systems. Gun the throttle, see it boosting and then adjust speed with the prop levers, leave the FADEC to do the rest. There is a fuel consumption reaction as well as the soundscape and changes in boost when it is used. To me it is good enough. Someone with more experience needs to chime in. Also as per your second post, at least for me all flying is below critical altitude. At 13k the turbo does its job well.

2 Likes

Yes, FADEC is simulated.

It’s difficult to answer your question better than that because the nature of FADEC is to simplify engine operation to an extreme.

In this aircraft, you start the engines with a push-button, perform the run-up with another button* …then for takeoff you push the levers full-forward. After takeoff, you reduce to climb or cruise power by simply reducing the prop levers to the RPM desired. You usually don’t need to touch the throttles until descent.

*My one gripe with the engine simulation is that you really can’t see or hear anything happening during the engine pre-flight test. There should be fluctuation of 100 RPM or more as the test cycles through ignition, etc, but you don’t see that with the FSS P2012. I have only ever seen a 10-20RPM fluctuation which is easily within the realm of noise on my throttle device. I was told on the discord that I should be seeing 100 RPM drops during the test, but I have not.

1 Like

Agree, you get very little feedback, audio or visually, that the self-test is happening. Other than the little yellow light of course. I expected more engine sound fluctuations at least. This could be true to real life though!

1 Like

You can’t see the instruments in this video but you can definitely hear a big change in RPM.

The Master Switch implementation has changed on the update so be aware that whatever you may have setup currently will not work. Still amazes me why simple switches can’t just work off the bat and with standard bindings. Liking the aircraft in many ways but changing and non standard bindings are a long standing pet hate.

3 Likes

I have trouble controlling the plane under full load. How do I determine the take off pitch trim setting?

It really is a problem… it would take minimal effort by developers… to keep cockpit builders… and even custom hardware users, in mind, when modeling system controls…

3 Likes

Can you have a look at the fuel consumption too please? I was flying at ISA conditions @10k and according to the manual I should have used 170l/ hr @ 2200rpm and 73% power. The TAS was spot on the fuel consumption however was not. I was getting 110l per engine and hour. So 220l combined and thus roughly 30% more, which almost landed me in the drink :smiley: Thank god for reserves. This makes it also hard to get anywhere near the ranges the plane should be able to go.

1 Like

It’s that pesky, MSFS engine modeling… engine power is directly tied to fuel-flow (or vice-versa)…

If, for example, a non-turbo-charged engine … as you climb, forgetting to lean… the not optimal mixture, power loss, shows up as REDUCED fuel-flow…

It gets goofier … if you then LEAN towards optimal mixture, fuel-flow goes UP … peaks at optimal… THEN goes back down… almost like a bizarre EGT gauge.

With a turbo-charged engine that’ll never see critical altitude… it’s not so bad (if auto-mixture is availed)… but the underlying bizarre-ness (erroneous fuel-flow) is still there, at reduced power (for cruise/descent), where you would lean (or auto-lean)…

4 Likes

Yeah it was the same with the dc 3 but playing with the scalar and other parameters was a quick fix that got it closer. And eventually making their own logic, duckworks got it pretty close, so it seems possible. I was just putting it out there just in case it was missed in testing.

1 Like

Yeah…it’s very possible… A2A… has it nailed.

2 Likes

Anyone else having issues that once you disable Autopilot you can’t reengage it? I am, so are others. If you are too please get in their discord and let them know.

Currently the few of us that are having the issue are being told be either are using the wrong bind, a bind, a hardware device that’s conflicting, an addon that’s conflicting etc and it’s simply not the case. With nothing else in the addon folder and only using the switches and buttons in the VC it’s now broken…

I’ve got a bug open with them and could use some noise from others experiencing it. From the feedback I’ve gotten from their “community” I’m expecting a “you’re doing it wrong” response instead of actual support on this…time will tell.

1 Like

Fuel flow does go down with altitude, so part one of your example is correct.

Part 2? I agree that’s wrong.

For a normally-aspirated engine, optimal fuel-flow at altitude is less… but it doesn’t get there, unless you lean… The MSFS model, decreases it dramatically if you don’t lean, as means to lower power… then increase it, as you lean (utterly erroneous)… peaks at optimal… then (if you lean too far), it starts going down, it’s just weird.

With a turbo-charged engine, fuel-flow does not decease meaningfully with altitude (nor do you need to lean) as the the turbo is maintaining manifold-pressure… until critical altitude. But with the MSFS model… you must lean - to maintain climb power - (via their aforementioned, screwy model), even with a turbo-charger… again, just weird.

All (MSFS) auto-mixture does, is simulate you doing the leaning… again, via their goofy model.

This aircraft is turbo-charged… and for the sake of operating within its limits… will not exceed critical altitude. If the FADEC simulation consists of MSFS auto-lean… it will be wrong… the leaning will occur during the climb, when it should not… and will be “less” wrong during cruise/descent… but wrong, none-the-less.

3 Likes

Which is also visible in the manual. FF is the same at sea level as it is at 10k, the only factor is the power setting. IIRC it also is like that in the sim, so it stays the same, it is just too high

1 Like

Even though I’d argue, that this model is spectacular enough, to justify some custom-coding for the engine… especially as it’s a hybrid-turbo-FADEC… if overall fuel-flow average is close enough for realistic flight-planning (and at least resembles reality through all phases of flight)… it’ll be in my hangar… as soon as the power (through takeoff and climb) and fuel-flow, are updated. It’s the ideal airplane, for how I like to “fly”… :slight_smile:

1 Like

Sounds like you really need a fast mover instead of the Tecnam :thinking: :wink:

1 Like