Very welcome! Thanks for watching!

Thanks for watching! It is a little rocket ship and I have done some 5hr flights in it which is a testament to how much I like it as I usually stick to less than 2-hour flights.

@@sprocketsimulations Wow! I tend to stick to shorter hops, although sometimes it's difficult considering I do most of my flying in the northwest corner of North America. DistancesThat's a big part of the reason why I am so interested in the Mooney. It's fast for a GA aircraft, and it has fantastic range too. That's perfect for most of the flying I do.

@@dillank3240 I usually fly around Southern California doing the same sort of flights because I usually don’t want to take a slow aircraft on a long flight. But this can go FAST for a single engine. I did a flight from Sedona to either Santa Anna or Santa Barbra the other day with live weather and that wind was ridiculous heading west. I think my ground speed was down at 115. Same day going east from LA to Vegas my ground speed was as high as 215.

Thanks for watching! I haven’t flown the PC-12 in a while so I’ll make that my next review and see if I can figure out what is going on there. It is Carenado’s worst rated on the marketplace so we’ll see…

@@sprocketsimulations oh, that'd be great! The PC-12 and the Cessna 337 are my most flown aircraft. And yes, at launch the PC-12 had a bunch of bugs and performance issues, but with time they were being solved, I think the bad rating may be due to a combination of said issues and some people having the wrong expectations from a Carenado product. In my opinion the aircraft is exquisitely modelled, and it flies wonderfully. I think it's very important for reviewers to re-review products after some time in order to find out if issues were corrected. Greetings from Buenos Aires!

@@lvwpy I agree! I usually buy all Carenado stuff as it is such great value. Sure, there are more in-depth aircraft, but these are probably some of the best looking and still have enough immersion. I have found the flight models to be pretty good as well. I have all of them so stay tuned for more as I will continue to add all the older and newer ones as they come out.

You got it! It is fairly straightforward once you understand it. A quick example is the numbers on the dial 2/4/6/8/10... is your elevation. The stationary one above is your current temperature, Line your altitude up with your temp and it will then reflect your true airspeed on the outer dial. Sometimes it is hard to get it to be EXACT but you will definitely be in the ballpark. If you are at 10,000ft and it is -10c out. Take the 10 and line it up to the -10c mark and you are good to go.

@@sprocketsimulations I was confused with the markings for the elevation. I noticed there are 4 ticks under each even number. What if I were to fly in 5,000 ft. These elevation markings are hard to understand. Maybe I am reading too much into these, like you said, it just needed to be in the ballpark.

@@dixonmak Go halfway between 4 and 6 at your OAT and you'll be on the money.

@@sprocketsimulations Thanks for taking time to answer my noob questions. Cheers!

@@dixonmak not a noob question at all. That little gauge was one of the last ones I figured out. It is confusing to look at and rotating just feels like you’re going the wrong way! Appreciate you reaching out!

While that used to be the case. Their aircraft now are no longer just eye candy. Are they PMDG level? No, not at all. I own a fair amount of aircraft along with many Carenado. Their performance numbers are always spot on, and flight models are good. Their latest 182RG II got amazing reviews from a lot of reputable channels and reviewed. They are also one of the only developers that continue to update ALL their aircraft when Asobo makes a change that affects systems and flight characteristics. Just about all their aircraft have been updated to have the option for the GTN750 as well. All with eye candy included. Back in the FSX days I’d agree with you but currently they are great value. Definitely not study level with complex failures built in but they also don’t claim to be.

Ok, I rescind my previous comment. I actually wound up buying the PA34, PA44, and M20R since that comment and I've never been more wrong. 😅 I looked at their website and have become obsessed. They've got an insane number of planes that I've been wanting in the Sim, and judging by their history, it's only a matter of when they'll bring those products to MSFS. I'll be picking up the 182RG soon enough.

It is a shame the 750 isn’t on Xbox, but a great excuse to build a PC! That is awesome that you had a Mooney and the real life experience! Thanks for watching!

@@sprocketsimulations yup I'm just about to order an AMD 7800x3d right now. I got the Xbox for free but it has too many limitations

Awesome! The X3D processors definitely help MSFS in busy environments!

What issue are you having? You can either use the way I show in the video to level off at a desired altitude, same with the descent in the video or you can simply click on the ALT mode on your AP when you are at your desired altitude, and it will hold.

If you go to your content manager on the second page over from the main startup you can see all your installed content. If there is any updates available it will say. But usually the little bell/notification menu will let you know when there is anything that needs updating so you might already have the current version.

This is percentage not actual. So you are getting 98% power. You might be able to get the extra 2% buy playing with your mixture.

@@sprocketsimulations oooh ok i got you. Thanks lol. I couldnt figure that out for the life of me.

No problem! Keep in mind as you climb you will have less and less horsepower as the air is thinner. The blank areas on the performance chart are areas that are not able to be set and gives you a good idea of around what percentage of power you should see at those settings. I’ve found it to be roughly in the ballpark but as far as settings for mixture/manifold pressure at a published altitude and temp it is accurate for the speed.

Haven’t flown it in a while, I’ll check it out this evening and let you know how it is going for me. You’re going off the visor or the POH? They should be the same but one might have been updated and not the other.

I just took it out, everything matched up with in a very small margin of error. I went to 6,000, OAT 3C, MP@22.8, leaned to both fuel burn (15.6) on the chart and also 50 degrees rich of peak, they both were very close to each other, and I was getting ~174KTAS. Make sure to let your EGT settle before leaning, or you can lean it to the charts fuel burn and be in the ball park. I think most pilots will lean for burn vs temp but they should be very close to each other. Make sure you are getting temps correct and adjusting as needed. Weight can affect it as well.

@@sprocketsimulations Wow, I appreciate the quick reply! I'll try your same altitude and OAT later this evening. I was flying KLAS to KABQ in live weather... 30.12 altimeter setting, 14,000 ft, -7C OAT, 65% power (2500rpm, 17.9" Hg, target of 14.1 GPH but leaning with EGT got me around 10.1). My IAS was also around 130kts (TAS of 160kts). Flying on autopilot altitude and heading hold so no trim issues or anything. Using the POH chart, not the visor, but from what I can tell they are the same. And the chart indicates that you should adjust manifold pressure for non-standard OAT, but I'm doing that and still unable to hit target GPH or TAS. Also on Xbox Series X if that could have anything to do with it. Happy flying.

@JarglemyYarbles try leaning for fuel instead of your egt and see if that gives you your TAS. Where are you calculating your TAS airspeed from? The gauge can be tough to get accurate, the garmin does ok. That is what is used. But also confirmed using Navigraph telemetry data.

@@sprocketsimulations Max GPH it was letting me reach was 11, so I couldn't hit the target of 14.1. Was using the gauge to calculate TAS. GPS said 190kts, which I thought seemed wrong.