First look at the Shrike Simulations PA30 "Twinkie" in Microsoft Flight Simulator

Today we take the PA30 "Twinkie" by Shrike Simulations for a fly from Kern Valley in Southern California. It's being marketed by Milviz / Blackbird Simulations via their new label "Shrike" as a low-cost, low-fidelity aircraft for the less "study level" crowd. I like it. The only downer in my opinion is the flight model, which seems dumbed down somewhat (probably intentionally). Of course I may be wrong - a pilot of the real thing may tell us that it's wonderfully accurate :)
#msfs #flightsimulator #shrikesimulations #milviz #blackbird #pa30 #twinkie #firstlook #testflight #kernvalley #california #usa #flight #flying #aviation

[@garysmith5256]

For several years back in the 90s I owned a 1958 J-35 with original panel. The only change had been the addition of a primitive "autopilot" in the form of a wing leveler. One day my aerobatics instructor rode along with me to retrieve it from Beechcraft in Hayward CA, where it had been left for its mandatory every-1200-hour constant speed prop overhaul. We were 5 minutes off Hayward about 3000 ft above the endless urbania of the San Jose valley when to my horror I noticed streams of fresh oil coming up over the cowling. Jim managed radios getting us through Charlie airspace while I nursed throttle/pressures at the minimums needed to get us back down at Hayward. When we touched down the entire windscreen was covered with ripply translucent oil and I'd had to plant my head against the fortunately out-curved side window plexiglas in order to see adequately to land. Thanks to the good Lord above we got down fine no damage done, and had a fine time chastising the Beech mechanics. Not that I'd ever want to repeat anything like that real life, but that's an example of what owning and flying vintage aircraft includes. Milviz/Blackbird has made significant headway toward actual simulation with their 310. Hopefully the upcoming Comanche 250 will be another step in that direction. I wish success to the creators of these budget "toy" airplanes for those who play FS as a game, and those players lots of joy. But as far as I'm concerned the development of truly realistic modeling of FS aircraft has hardly begun.

[@jonbeckett]

Completely agree. Great story!

[@indrajitsg]

WB-SIM and Black Square have done awesome job so far to create near study level sims. I am also hoping Airfoillabs create something in the same lines of what they have done for X-Plane.

[@SolRayz]

I love how piper put the fuel selectors in a position that allows your kids in the back to play with. Nifty...

[@jonbeckett]

Hah - I never thought of that :)

[@coriscotupi]

A 737 pilot once told me that back in the days when passengers were allowed in the cockpit, he allowed a cute mom and her 5-year old son into the cockpit. While the chat with mommy was all fun and colorful as you would imagine, he heard his first officer scream "no, no, *_NO!"_* When they realized what was going on, the FO had grasped the child's hand just in time to avoid him closing BOTH fuel shut-off valves - he had already pulled them out of their detents. Such a mood breaker. That was probably the kid's way of telling mom that it was time for them to return to their seats.

[@rlnay]

This is the PA-30 "Twin Comanche", same family as the Apache and Aztec. I never got a chance to fly the Twin Comanche, but I expect it flies like they do. I will defiantly purchase this since the others aren't available in MSFS 2020. The "heavy handling" is realistic relative to airplanes like the 172. I don't like the Primary Instrument layout in this airplane; it will defiantly be harder to fly "on the gauges" because they are not tightly packed and positioned like the "standard 6 pack" of gauges!

[@steven-nb6rt]

I agree about the gauges. I like the artificial horizon gauge directly in front of me. I also like the gauges packed in tighter.

[@GumperVanLier]

You’ve been busy today. I think I’ll hold on this one.

[@Chuttanooga]

A quick and nice one. Again I got the desire to jump into a cockpit.

[@nuversion8673]

I kept going back to this plane in the sim market and ended up buying it. I'm not completely disappointed with the purchase but the flight model really bugs me. I noticed it straight away during rotation. Perhaps the intention was to make it feel heavy in the air, but it certainly takes away from any realism. I do like the overall looks of the plane, but now that you've pointed out the spinner blur... anyway, I suppose I'll still lug this thing around for a bit and hope for a few good updates. Thanks for posting this.

[@philipwilson4671]

Jonathan, thanks for reviewing this aircraft. The exterior looked good, but I noticed from the pilots seat, the spinners had a weird looping animation that really threw everything off. I agree that the flight model is nowhere near where it needs to be, even for a "budget" aircraft. I'd rather pay more for a higher quality package. The panel/interior on this PA30 is almost laughable. I feel Carenado does much better on the graphics, and where they fall short is harder to find. I agree with Managed, someone needs to bring on the Navajo. I had the Just Flight C421 for FSX and loved that plane. I'd be happy with either the Navajo or 421.

[@jonbeckett]

Completely agree.

[@Senor0Droolcup]

Love the exterior, but the flight model looks like it needs a lot of work. Thank you for saving me time and money!

[@jonbeckett]

You're welcome :)

[@TheFlightLevel]

Gotta say, they have pulled the true flight model characteristics back on this one. I'm sure it will get an update. Yes, this is a heavy plane, but you should be able to keep the nose light with slight back pressure on the yoke on roll-out for takeoff. I don't know the exact rotation speed, but I would guess around 90 kts indicated keeping the aircraft light on the nose. You should not have to yank the yoke back at liftoff. Should be nice and smooth. Roll rate appears sluggish also. This plane is not super agile but also not as heavy and slow to control surface inputs that appear in the video.

[@jonbeckett]

I'm pretty sure if they don't update it themselves, the community will arrive with a mod :)

[@kokoeteantigha389]

Thanks for this, Jon. I'm looking up to you to keep me abreast with new releases like this and through your pre or review to know which machines to purchase and which to skirt past. I would also say keeping us in touch with updates would be nice. I only just discovered the Blacksquare Bonanza had a recent update. The Baron hasn't had one, neither is there any for the other fares from Blacksquare. Would love some caring Content Creator doing the heavy-lifting for the Sim community with such monitoring, please.

[@jonbeckett]

I do go back to planes when I know they've had a big update - unfortunately many of the developers are *really* poor at communicating updates.

[@shanesdiy]

We have a real twin Comanche and it's definitely not as much of a "pig" as the sim models it as. I purchased the Shrike PA30 and it is pretty good for what it is. Looks great although I'd like to remove the tip tanks as we don't have them on ours. I found that it just needs up trim rather than neutral for takeoff and it feels much better. Trim at neutral and it's very heavy to get off. Main issue I have with it is when I have engine damage enabled, I can't get it off the runway more than a few feet and the motors fail. Checklist says fuel pumps on, full rich, props forward, and full throttle all the way through climb but every time I've tried that the motors fail. Finally just had to turn off engine failures and I then had a good time with it. Anyone else keep blowing their engines with engine failures enabled? My prop spinners don't "wobble" as bad as yours were, perhaps a graphics setting or framerate difference? One thing I found that was nice, it has a "rudimentary auto pilot". If you set your desired heading on the "Piper Course Selector" and click the "HGD Hold" amber light it will hold altitude and the heading you set.

[@rolanddutton]

I'm not their target market, but it looks fair enough for less than £15. I'd rather skip a few coffees and get the Blackbird 310 though.

[@jonbeckett]

Yep

[@victoraatg]

I don't understand how you can be so adamant that the flight model is "wrong" without having flown the actual aircraft. I did my CMEL in this aircraft, only 15 hours, so by no means an expert, but one thing I remember very distinctively about it was how heavy it was in the pitch, before landing we used set the trims to neutral, which ended up requiring quite a lot o forward pressure on the yoke on final approach, we did it anyways so we'd have enough authority on the flare. It seems the behavior you're seeing makes sense, I haven't tested so I can't be sure.

[@managed9348]

All we need is a Navajo now

[@rodneybuckland4140]

I'll ad to that, really want a good navajo

[@michaeltrusnov3863]

Thanks for the review. I think, to be "Carenado style" plane you need to be absolutely flawless with visual model and texturing. I cannot see it in this plane. It looks...okay? But nothing to write home about. Maybe the plane itself has a little bit "boring" look (especially dashboard), but it was their choice after all. I think they could choose more visually impressive plane for first Shrike product, considering systems are default level.

[@jonbeckett]

I think it's a bit of a cash grab.

[@jamesdouglas3631]

About the stiffness if not trimmed properly, the 172 I used to fly would take a fair amount of back pressure with 0 trim , I could only imagine how stubborn a twin would be.

[@jonbeckett]

I imagine it will get updated in pretty short order.

[@depj1000]

The Comanche would sink like that in a stall. It will not drop its nose till you force it too.

[@Bullhead_JW]

Yeah, it's kinda a Piper thing. That big stabilator won't stall before the wings do, leading to a stall where it just mushes out.

[@ziva-ot8zv]

How many first looks is that today, I've lost count! How about a couple of revisits... 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@microsoftflightsimulator2052]

This should be quite a fun re-engineering project. Just a few Cfg parameters tweaks will fix the thing...😊

[@jonbeckett]

Fingers crossed :)

[@pouetpouet941]

You were at 4000 feet when you checked your MP. It wont give you the max manifold pressure.

[@jonbeckett]

(it's not realistic lol - you saw the flight model) :)

[@pouetpouet941]

@@jonbeckett If it is not the turbo version, actually this looks somewhat accurate. I did my multi on a Twin Comanche a while back and I remember the max MP will decrease with height. We would need to check the perf charts. We did not practice the power on stall with that plane, we only made the stall buzzer go off before exiting the situation. I did power off stalls though and it actually stalls gently. Also i don't remember the plane with such high angle of attack/attitude approaching the stall speed (both power off and on). I m not sure they really put enough effort to justify buying this plane when you can have the black square baron for around that price.

[@jonbeckett]

@@pouetpouet941 My thoughts too.

[@tonyduff-forbes5748]

flew these for real in the eighties, my recollection of these and the piper aztec was that they were very stable and not responsive like say a baron, sluggish and tended to be terrible on one engine lol. maybe the flight model isnt that unrealistic? I will give it a go, might bring back fond memories of low performance and sinking feeling with high payloads and density altitudes!

[@jonbeckett]

See - this is what I wondered about - maybe the real thing really is a bit of a lead sled ? :)

[@donaldholman9070]

Pipers are great.

[@rlnay]

Takeoff Trim settling should cure take off problem...

[@jonbeckett]

It's a fault in this version of the aircraft :)

[@XCougar85X]

Thanks for the review. Have to say that the plane sure looks nice. I hope they fix the FM

[@jonbeckett]

Me too

[@forzaelite1248]

It looks like it almost has fly-by-wire; it should be fairly docile but this is closer to being on meds, otherwise it behaves somewhat familiarly to the Warrior I fly so they seem to know what they're doing and might've just chosen accessibility over realism.

[@jonbeckett]

My thoughts too.

[@carenthusiast6748]

Could you review the Piper Seneca from Carenado?

[@jonbeckett]

I'm pretty sure I've flown it in the past - if you search my channel you'll find it.

[@falcony100]

I hope carenado release the aero commander soon,… I miss that plane

[@jonbeckett]

They said they are going to release their entire back catalogue eventually didn't they ?

[@falcony100]

@@jonbeckett not yet Jonathan🤷🏻‍♂️

[@gregmerryman7939]

I really wanted a PA30. But will hold out for a more realistic version that will hopefully come out.

[@jonbeckett]

Fingers crossed :)

[@rlnay]

??? Looks and sounds a lot like the Piper Apache of the '60's... Lot of flight time teaching Multi Engine Students.

[@andrewstraatsma3136]

Thanks for the video Jonathan, Off topic for a moment, what ever happened to the Cockspur Cessna 510? Nobody seems to fly that plane ? Just wondering. Thank you.

[@jonbeckett]

I have the Cockspure 510 :) And yes - haven't flown it for ages.

[@nicknicholson1268]

I am too poor to buy this cheap thing, as they say. I will wait for updates, if lucky, and then I will think about it again. Many thanks for this great presentation, Jon!

[@Qosmokid]

The manifold pressure seems right for 4000 ft

[@mikecoffee100]

Another Good video as usual but this aircraft is deffo not on my radar

[@jwilson0514]

Looks like they didnt even touch the flight model. Well looks like ill stick to the High fidelity flight models.

[@jonbeckett]

It really lets it down.

[@jamesleicher]

waiting for someone to make the Chieften

[@indrajitsg]

Nice review. Developers should strive to make GA as study level as possible. They are less complex and hence need high fidelity

[@jonbeckett]

That's your opinion of course :) There are a lot of people out there that enjoy just jumping in an approximation of a plane, and going for a fly. If we all had to spend half an hour doing a full check of the aircraft before getting going, and some days discover we couldn't fly because something needed servicing, it would get pretty tiresome :)

[@indrajitsg]

@@jonbeckett Wouldn't that be awesome if the simmer had to take out his toolbox and sit to unscrew this and that and take a whole day to fix the plane just because he did a bad landing in the last flight :D

[@ZiggyAir]

I wonder if you can adjust that on the control settings and make it more realistic.

[@jonbeckett]

Well... it's not really the controls - it's how it reacts to the control inputs.

[@buikhan]

$19 is not cheap and no support.

[@jonbeckett]

it's cheap compared to payware aircraft before MSFS came along. Five years ago, a PMDG 737 would have cost you $120.

[@jjstevenz]

def a Twinkie lol

[@droge192]

The no autopilot thing is absolutely ridiculous and completely unrealistic. Every PA-30 made came with a Piper Autocontrol 2B. I get the idea they are skimping, but I think they're essentially celebrating crapness, if it means you don't even get an AP where one should be in every aircraft.

[@johnglubney3228]

Seems like these developers are pushing out junk for profit. Stock sounds, unrealistic flight models. Complete nonsense