Unless you hit the brakes too hard on landing and put the plane on its nose!
1 Like
It is THE bushflying adventure aircraft par excellence. The 3D modelling and texturing is OUTSTANDING (no hexagonal-shaped low polygon fire extinguishers with some blurry not readable label on it! And no other low poly low resolution trash anywhere in the cockpit but FINEST AAA graphics quality.) You will nowhere find better cockpit graphics in GA airplanes with no flaws.
The cabin offers cargo or passenger variants (even a skydiving variant is possible) for your immersive flight adventures.
The outside 3D model is superb, it is an overall perfect airplane for bushflying. The black cockpit layout looks modern and everything is flawless.
I highly recommend this airplane, it´s absolute superior compared to the stock Cessna 208 Caravan or the Pilatus and others.
And in my opinion it looks so much better than the Cessna Caravan, better design better aerodynamics and liveries.
(Oh and only in the Kodiak 100 you get these cool bear-claws design on the rudders, absolutely iconic and screaming “I am the plane that will give you the wildest and most rural wilderness adventures and wild animal encounters!”)
5 Likes
You forgot to mention the sound, which I think is among the best soundsets (if not the best) I’ve heard in the sim so far.
2 Likes
Reape timely you can flip that question. It’s all what you like the look of. That’s what it comes down to. Plus what types of flying you do.
The Kodiak is fabulous. The C208 model is very simplistic by comparison. Looking at my logbook I have fifty-plus hours in the C208 since the release of the Garmin NXi. All I can say about the Kodiak is that I will most likely have fifty-plus hours over the next ten days or so. The only other model I’ve flown that intensely post-release is the PMDG DC-6.
The level of detail and the “feel” of the flight model are both excellent. I like the fact that I crashed on the first three attempts at takeoff. For me, when you have to really “get under the hood” to properly fly the airplane, that’s what brings a model to the next level. I know I’ll need at least another twenty hours or more flying to and from familiar airstrips before I venture over to PNG for some real challenging bush flying. That’s what makes the Kodiak so much different than the C208: you can’t just hop in and fly.
I guess the bottom line is the effort needed to get really proficient at flying a given model. Most of the Asobo aircraft seem to be “dumbed down” so the casual simmer won’t become frustrated trying to get airborne. The Kodiak is absolutely not in that category. Just add 150 pounds of cargo weight in the last station and watch what happens with the CG; you need to dial in nose down trim to get off the runway without huge forward yoke effort. That’s reality, well modeled and nicely done. Fully loaded handling is sluggish, as you would expect. Again, very well done.
The Kodiak is one of the very best models released to date, IMHO.
8 Likes
That made me laugh!
I’ve always said the C172 (in which I have the bulk of my IRL time) feels like a pregnant 150.
1 Like
Perfectly said.
1 Like
I bet these casuals even play Dark Souls III with cheats!
Joke aside 
yes I do for example…
Many real pilots have said that flying an airplane (a small high-winged airplane of course, like a typical Cessna 172) is more easy to fly than driving a car is.
So in real-life it seem to not that difficult steering an airplane.
And we all know that this is what every real airliner pilot is secretly dreaming off while going daily through the same boring checklists following strictest routines to the letter and flying the same strictest pre-determined local routes every day with another complete stranger in his cockpit (being his pilot or copilot). 
It is so wild out there that the bisons eat the kodiak and grizzly bears when the grass is getting too dry and hard during the winter time and not vice versa.
The Kodiak 100 is perfect for everyone who thinks the Cessna 208 is not wild enough.
4 Likes
Steering the airplane isn’t the hard part. This is the hard part.
Alex did say that due to limitations of MSFS they are not able to but they are continually working on modeling hot starts if it becomes possible.
The Kodiak 100 is highly unstable and for a high-winged tail unrealistic unstable and ultra difficult to fly.
It has zero stability at all.
Is this the case in a real Kodiak 100, I don´t think that a high-winged plane has zero stability.
I never had so many difficulties controlling an airplane like I had with the Kodiak 100, this plane is the first airplane I would consider almost impossible to control, and to start without crashing, and being able fly in a straight line. It crashes every second flight, and with a little wind or during thunderstorms it becomes absolutely impossible to control.
Even when it seem to be flying straight ahead after doing some good trimming - zooming to the autopilot and pressing some buttons in the virtual cockpit is long enough to get some “stall stall!” warnings or one wing going down until an almost 90° bank angle, or have it crashing in every imaginable other way.
In my personal opinion I don´t think this is realistic, all high-winged airplanes have a very good stability. Low wing with T-tail is know to be a little bit on the difficult side to control, but high wing planes normally fly super stable.
I’m not so sure:
1 Like
Hi
I think you have to learn how to handle this bird.
Read the manual, maybe wrong CG values? Maybe forgotten the auto-trim system of this bird?
it isn’t unrealistic, it is very realistic.
I wonder about your post - see your last post 3 days ago. … What happened? Frustrated in learning a aircraft to handle?
1 Like
Auto-trim occurs when changing flap settings. It’s almost certainly too much trimming up I expect.
Not in all aspects. The notable one being its difficulty in navigating inclines at low speeds.
maybe look at this thread with explaination:
simworks-studios-kodiak-100-one-the-best-aircraft-for-msfs-2020 - post #44
or
simworks-studios-announced-development-of-kodiak-100 - post#253
Try with YD ON only (without AP ON), if it does change anything on the stability and is handled properly, in any case and just to make your own idea before restrying full manually
PC-6 just takes ages to get anywhere, and Kodiak is faster. Which leaves C208, and if you’ve flown it from the release, you might want an alternative. On short hops, PC-6 is probably a better choice, especially if you like taildraggers.
I’ll be flying the Milviz PC-6 when I want steam gauges and tailwheel (when they update it with steam gauges) and I’ll be flying the Kodiak when I want a glass cockpit and nose wheel. Porter also for beta mode dives, which are always fun and unique.
I am very impressed with this Kodiak by SWS. I have their other products, so I expected quality, but they’ve hit this out of the park. The plane is beautifully modeled and the sounds might very well be as good as any available plane right now. The passengers and cargo are outstanding additions too, and the cargo even fills up as you load the plane with SkyPark. I haven’t yet tried it in VR, but will give that a go tomorrow if I can spare the frames for it.
2 Likes
You’ll love it in VR. I save a few fps by shutting off the co-pilot PFD and the alternate small glass screen on far left side using the 2 fuses (seems that does save meaningful load which helps in Vr). It’s now my favorite VR plane for use in just about any scenario (save the high speed stuff in the Vertigo).
Imo I find none of these single engine turboprops appealing and the same goes for the KODIAK.
Patiently waiting for the Twin Otter from Aerosoft. That Aircraft does wonders into tiny airfields although on the slower side. What I would like to see is more twin engine turborops.
1 Like