My Carenadol Baron 58 STALL tech support email.

[Guest CharlieP51]

Carenado's reply ----We tested the aircraft with real C340 pilots and they approved the final dynamics included in the package.This is a “heavy rock” aircraft, using one pilot’s word, so is more difficult to control after a stall and the landing speed should be exact in order to achieve a good landing.Carenado--end ofCarenado's reply------ my original support request------From: Charles Johnston [mailto:legba@live.com] Sent: 11 May, 2011 5:03 AMTo: support@carenado.comSubject: Baron 58 stall issues - takeoff and landingSeveral Carenado cusatomers have posted on AvSim about this matter including an active Baron 58 real-world pilot. This Carenado purchase has been a real let-down..even with BOTH sp's applied. 2 QUESTIONS - Do you know about this stall bug and is it going to be addressed? TY - signed Mr Let Down.------end of my support request ---So....... The --Baron 58 -- has no stall issues because the-- C340 -- pilots signed off on it. .amd besides, it's a 'heavy rock' airplane anyway...how hilarious!! Will the real "heavy rock" airplane please stand up!Well then does the Carenado C340 II have well-known stall issues too? Message text and subject clearly say "Baron" Incidently I also own the Carenado C340 IIHD and to my way of thinking is a great flyer and performs during stalls..in a typical manner. Nothing unexpected or untypical in it's flight characteristics. subject line typo I can't edit and unintentional.

[Paul_Smith 92]

Carenado's reply ----We tested the aircraft with real C340 pilots and they approved the final dynamics included in the package.This is a “heavy rock” aircraft, using one pilot’s word, so is more difficult to control after a stall and the landing speed should be exact in order to achieve a good landing.Carenado--end ofCarenado's reply------ my original support request------From: Charles Johnston [mailto:legba@live.com] Sent: 11 May, 2011 5:03 AMTo: support@carenado.comSubject: Baron 58 stall issues - takeoff and landingSeveral Carenado cusatomers have posted on AvSim about this matter including an active Baron 58 real-world pilot. This Carenado purchase has been a real let-down..even with BOTH sp's applied. 2 QUESTIONS - Do you know about this stall bug and is it going to be addressed? TY - signed Mr Let Down.------end of my support request ---So....... The --Baron 58 -- has no stall issues because the-- C340 -- pilots signed off on it. .amd besides, it's a 'heavy rock' airplane anyway...how hilarious!! Will the real "heavy rock" airplane please stand up!Well then does the Carenado C340 II have well-known stall issues too? Message text and subject clearly say "Baron" Incidently I also own the Carenado C340 IIHD and to my way of thinking is a great flyer and performs during stalls..in a typical manner. Nothing unexpected or untypical in it's flight characteristics. subject line typo I can't edit and unintentional.

So your typo is OK and theirs isn't? What is the purpose of this post?

[pager94 4]

So your typo is OK and theirs isn't? What is the purpose of this post?

The point IS Carendo is telling it's Baron customers your SOL!!

[crosswind 825]

Which is sad. As a former pilot of the Baron 58 I had hoped that they would have gotten the aircraft as close as possible to its real world counterpart, but I keep forgetting that Carenado has a tendency to partially finish a product. Visually they appear as a shining star, but they have lost that touch of going the extra mile to make it a "knock out" product. I am not venting, just stating a fact. One could say that I threw away thirty odd bucks, but that is not the case I do enjoy the aircraft as it has brought back many fond memories of my charter operations flying in the Caribbean.Now when you make a statement that claims that you used C340 pilots to test/sign off a Beechcraft Baron aircraft that puts everything into perspective. The aircraft has not been truly tested by pilots who actually flew the 58.....SAD

[pager94 4]

Which is sad. As a former pilot of the Baron 58 I had hoped that they would have gotten the aircraft as close as possible to its real world counterpart, but I keep forgetting that Carenado has a tendency to partially finish a product. Visually they appear as a shining star, but they have lost that touch of going the extra mile to make it a "knock out" product. I am not venting, just stating a fact. One could say that I threw away thirty odd bucks, but that is not the case I do enjoy the aircraft as it has brought back many fond memories of my charter operations flying in the Caribbean.Now when you make a statement that claims that you used C340 pilots to test/sign off a Beechcraft Baron aircraft that puts everything into perspective. The aircraft has not been truly tested by pilots who actually flew the 58.....SAD

I both agree and disagree. Carenado products have taken a nose dive in product quality. Yes, the exterior models look nice and pretty. But they ALWAYS have a myriad of probles with switches, clicks spots, functionality, and problems with flight models at release. Some get fixed, most don't.The Seneca V for example was porpoising up and down in flare and was not able to land upon realease. This is a commercial level add-on?? There are now 4 service packs for the Seneca.Carenado still can't syncronize something as simple as the HSI to GPS and have a GPS/NAV switch that works! Pathetic....... I've been communicating it with Carenado for years about this issue.On another occasion I noticed there was a funcitonal switch I believe in the C340 that was for wing de-ice power (can't remember the details) anyway there was a Ammeter for Wing De-ice on the panel it was on constantly in the green when the power switched was toggled on -->off. I email Carendo and got the response "This feature is not modeled in FSX". Total B.S!!! If Carenado can't make the most simple things like the airfile not stall properly, porpoise upon landing, switches that don't work, and can't even get the GPS to synchronize with the HSI and have the GPS/NAV toggle switch work in the most simple planes how is Carendo going to get a very complicated twin turbine like the King Air C90?The bottom line Carendo is releasing poor quality products that are at alpha stage with a strict approx. 3 month development cycle and selling them as fully functional add-on products. This is totally unacceptable. Yes, I am venting because I've sent alot of money on Carenado products on most don't even function properly.I'm to busy with work to spend 6-10 hours each plane tweaking and recoding files, etc. making them functional like alot of the Carenado followers do. When I pay $30+ for an add-on I expect a solid functioning product that has been properly beta tested. I don't think that is too much to ask for. I shutter to think of the quality of the King Air C90 Carenado is puroposing. Most likely another white elephant in the hanger.I will absolutely will not buy another Carenado product until AVSIM awards a gold 5 star excellence. Which will not happen any time in the forseeable future, unfortunately.If you are willing to spend and extra $15 I'd HIGHLY reccommmend the RealAir Tuke Turbine. This is a very solid and functional release that took years, incontrast to a quick and dirty 3 month developmental Carenado cycle, to develop and properly beta test. Also, the PMDG 737NG will be realeased VERY soon. Without a doubt anyone will be extremely happy with either of these products.

[MartinRex007 390]

I both agree and disagree. Carenado products have taken a nose dive in product quality. Yes, the exterior models look nice and pretty. But they ALWAYS have a myriad of probles with switches, clicks spots, functionality, and problems with flight models at release. Some get fixed, most don't.The Seneca V for example was porpoising up and down in flare and was not able to land upon realease. This is a commercial level add-on?? There are now 4 service packs for the Seneca.Carenado still can't syncronize something as simple as the HSI to GPS and have a GPS/NAV switch that works! Pathetic....... I've been communicating it with Carenado for years about this issue.On another occasion I noticed there was a funcitonal switch I believe in the C340 that was for wing de-ice power (can't remember the details) anyway there was a Ammeter for Wing De-ice on the panel it was on constantly in the green when the power switched was toggled on -->off. I email Carendo and got the response "This feature is not modeled in FSX". Total B.S!!! If Carenado can't make the most simple things like the airfile not stall properly, porpoise upon landing, switches that don't work, and can't even get the GPS to synchronize with the HSI and have the GPS/NAV toggle switch work in the most simple planes how is Carendo going to get a very complicated twin turbine like the King Air C90?The bottom line Carendo is releasing poor quality products that are at alpha stage with a strict approx. 3 month development cycle and selling them as fully functional add-on products. This is totally unacceptable. Yes, I am venting because I've sent alot of money on Carenado products on most don't even function properly.I'm to busy with work to spend 6-10 hours each plane tweaking and recoding files, etc. making them functional like alot of the Carenado followers do. When I pay $30+ for an add-on I expect a solid functioning product that has been properly beta tested. I don't think that is too much to ask for. I shutter to think of the quality of the King Air C90 Carenado is puroposing. Most likely another white elephant in the hanger.I will absolutely will not buy another Carenado product until AVSIM awards a gold 5 star excellence. Which will not happen any time in the forseeable future, unfortunately.If you are willing to spend and extra $15 I'd HIGHLY reccommmend the RealAir Tuke Turbine. This is a very solid and functional release that took years, incontrast to a quick and dirty 3 month developmental Carenado cycle, to develop and properly beta test. Also, the PMDG 737NG will be realeased VERY soon. Without a doubt anyone will be extremely happy with either of these products.

Yes, I would tend to agree, the functional aspect of Carenado's products doesn't seem to be there, nice eye candy but you can get more bang for you buck as mentioned with RealAir or Orbx's Lancair, or A2A. These aircraft have great flight characteristic and look great!CheersMartin

[crosswind 825]

Well to be honest if Carenado is using testers/pilots who have no experience in a specific type aircraft, they are headed for a "irrecoverable tailspin". Now I made the statement earlier of not venting which is still the case. As a beta tester/pilot of several products released in the past, I have worked with some developers who will attempt to sweep issues/challenges under the rug making FS9/FSX the incapable culprit which is not always the case. Carenado has not an excuse in this case as it appears to be a FDE/.air file issue I think (someone correct me if I am wrong). Everyone I think should be given a fair chance to get something right (and sometimes it takes people in the community to see something that the testers may have missed/omitted). When developing a product it is critical to have expertise from every possible avenue if possible, we have many talented folks who I know are more than capable to offer suggestions/fix the problem. No-one will think less of you if you ask for help. The key is being able to present a product that performs as close as possible to it real-world counter-part, thus pleasing the customer base that you serve. Now if Carenado is attempting to create a buffeting stall effect they have failed miserably in this case. The real world Baron has stable characteristics at the flare and touchdown, the undercarriage geometry and good pitch response results in easy to achieve landings. The Baron lifts off the ground with gentle back pressure on the column giving an early indication of its appeasing handling with both engines at full RPM. It's usually best to accelerate to blue line speed before climbing away. The Baron's reputation for having responsive and harmonized controls is part of what makes this aircraft a pure delight to fly.There is definitely need for Carenado to focus, as their competition is beginning to show that they (Carenado) is lagging behind. They may have to create a new mission statement which encompasses "Visual Quantity, but not Performance Quality". Now i am not bashing or venting, just expressing mere concerns.Respectfully,Simeon Richardson

[pager94 4]

Yes, I would tend to agree, the functional aspect of Carenado's products doesn't seem to be there, nice eye candy but you can get more bang for you buck as mentioned with RealAir or Orbx's Lancair, or A2A. These aircraft have great flight characteristic and look great!CheersMartin

Hi Martin,How do you like the Orbx Lancair? I'm applealed to it. However, I get a pretty scared when companies start going into areas they have no expertise in.For example, Honda is making the "Honda Jet". I don't think I'll get into one of these. LOLBest,Billybob

[pager94 4]

Well to be honest if Carenado is using testers/pilots who have no experience in a specific type aircraft, they are headed for a "irrecoverable tailspin". Now I made the statement earlier of not venting which is still the case. As a beta tester/pilot of several products released in the past, I have worked with some developers who will attempt to sweep issues/challenges under the rug making FS9/FSX the incapable culprit which is not always the case. Carenado has not an excuse in this case as it appears to be a FDE/.air file issue I think (someone correct me if I am wrong). Everyone I think should be given a fair chance to get something right (and sometimes it takes people in the community to see something that the testers may have missed/omitted). When developing a product it is critical to have expertise from every possible avenue if possible, we have many talented folks who I know are more than capable to offer suggestions/fix the problem. No-one will think less of you if you ask for help. The key is being able to present a product that performs as close as possible to it real-world counter-part, thus pleasing the customer base that you serve. Now if Carenado is attempting to create a buffeting stall effect they have failed miserably in this case. The real world Baron has stable characteristics at the flare and touchdown, the undercarriage geometry and good pitch response results in easy to achieve landings. The Baron lifts off the ground with gentle back pressure on the column giving an early indication of its appeasing handling with both engines at full RPM. It's usually best to accelerate to blue line speed before climbing away. The Baron's reputation for having responsive and harmonized controls is part of what makes this aircraft a pure delight to fly.There is definitely need for Carenado to focus, as their competition is beginning to show that they (Carenado) is lagging behind. They may have to create a new mission statement which encompasses "Visual Quantity, but not Performance Quality". Now i am not bashing or venting, just expressing mere concerns.Respectfully,Simeon Richardson

Hi Simeon,I agree. I brought these topics up before here, and I was bashed heavily by the Carendo extremist followers. They told me I was always wrong that that it was an FSX issue that the fuel injected aircraft was icing and that "Carenado" carb heat fixed the engine icing in a fuel injected aircraft. I never had this problem with any other plane besides Carendo. Flight 1 PC-12, and other engines have never iced up, like that. I was also told I should have to go in and do hard coding in the files to make corrections for issues. I'm not a programer I'm a customer expected a functional product.I don't have a problem is there is a honest mistake or issue here and their. But but to be constantly running out new releases every 3 months that are plaqued with basic FUNCTIONALITY problems is unaccpetable. I'm not asking for a PMDG level civil aircraft. I'm just expecting a reasonably funcational product that has not been the case for along time with Carenado. Additionally, there is a new post for someone whom is getting a total computer crash "Blue screen" upon hitting a botton on the Carendo GPS. This is HIGH DISTURBING. Carendo will probably blame the problem on the default FSX GPS.The bottom line is Carendo product qualtity has taken an ABYSMAL turn and the company is here to get unfinshed planes out the door every 3 months to take make a quick buck at the customers expense. Carendo has made absolute minimal effort to fix the plethora of issues with many rescent releases and will continue to do so. What a shame!!Anyway, I'm done venting.

[MartinRex007 390]

Hi Martin,How do you like the Orbx Lancair? I'm applealed to it. However, I get a pretty scared when companies start going into areas they have no expertise in.For example, Honda is making the "Honda Jet". I don't think I'll get into one of these. LOLBest,Billybob

The Lancair is a fantastic plane and Orbx did a fantastic job, and it's even more amazing given these folks are primarily into the design of scenery. They are a great company so you can't go wrong in buying any of their products. Actually right now you can even buy the Lancair for something like $20.00 and in the next couple of days a free upgrade to 1.2 will be offered. Handles great, and looks great too, you won't be disappointed!! CheersMartin

[pager94 4]

The Lancair is a fantastic plane and Orbx did a fantastic job, and it's even more amazing given these folks are primarily into the design of scenery. They are a great company so you can't go wrong in buying any of their products. Actually right now you can even buy the Lancair for something like $20.00 and in the next couple of days a free upgrade to 1.2 will be offered. Handles great, and looks great too, you won't be disappointed!! CheersMartin

Thanks Martin,I'm going to get it right now!Cheers,BB

[pager94 4]

Well to be honest if Carenado is using testers/pilots who have no experience in a specific type aircraft, they are headed for a "irrecoverable tailspin". Now I made the statement earlier of not venting which is still the case. As a beta tester/pilot of several products released in the past, I have worked with some developers who will attempt to sweep issues/challenges under the rug making FS9/FSX the incapable culprit which is not always the case. Carenado has not an excuse in this case as it appears to be a FDE/.air file issue I think (someone correct me if I am wrong). Everyone I think should be given a fair chance to get something right (and sometimes it takes people in the community to see something that the testers may have missed/omitted). When developing a product it is critical to have expertise from every possible avenue if possible, we have many talented folks who I know are more than capable to offer suggestions/fix the problem. No-one will think less of you if you ask for help. The key is being able to present a product that performs as close as possible to it real-world counter-part, thus pleasing the customer base that you serve. Now if Carenado is attempting to create a buffeting stall effect they have failed miserably in this case. The real world Baron has stable characteristics at the flare and touchdown, the undercarriage geometry and good pitch response results in easy to achieve landings. The Baron lifts off the ground with gentle back pressure on the column giving an early indication of its appeasing handling with both engines at full RPM. It's usually best to accelerate to blue line speed before climbing away. The Baron's reputation for having responsive and harmonized controls is part of what makes this aircraft a pure delight to fly.There is definitely need for Carenado to focus, as their competition is beginning to show that they (Carenado) is lagging behind. They may have to create a new mission statement which encompasses "Visual Quantity, but not Performance Quality". Now i am not bashing or venting, just expressing mere concerns.Respectfully,Simeon Richardson

Hi Simeon,In addition to all the stall, panel, switch, HSI/GPS couple problems etc. The Barron Mixture / EGT functionallity to be perfectly honest SUCKS!! I added the service pack and it made it even worse. Originally, the fucntional EGT needle range was about 10% of that of the gauge with full enrichment and lean. So by moving my mixture 1/16" of an inch out of range by 1/32" of an inch the engine cuts off. With the addition of the service pack the right engine EGT is slightly impoved to about 50% of the EGT guage range but the left engine still is still stuck at a 10% range from moving mixture. No nothing is wrong with my throttle/Prop/Mixture controls they work perfectly well with all other planes.And Carendo is going to make a complicated King Air C90???? What a joke!!Best,BB

[Holdit 551]

This is a “heavy rock” aircraft,

As in "flies like one"? I have a number of Carenado aircraft, but this one has been a real eye-opener, because the others I bought long after release when the worst of the kinks had been ironed out. I was always keen to get my hands on a payware Baron and I bought it on day one, even though I didn't intend to fly it straight away. Just as well given what I've been reading in here. I tested for the stalling issue this evening to see what people were complaining about and I sure found out. It's not a stall, it's a tractor beam pulling the aircraft straight down. (The lack of an ADF is another annoyance (particularly after pre-release screenshots showed an ADF in place) but one that's a lot easier to work around.Because I hadn't intended to fly the Baron seriously yet, I can kick back and wait for sufficient service packs to sort out the mess before trying it out again, and in the meantime there's the modified .air file for the default Baron, anyway. However, although this isn't something I'm up in arms about (yet) I will definitely not be buying any more Carenado aircraft until I am 100% satisfied that the issues have all been resolved. As for buying on release, forget it; beta testers shouldn't have to pay for the privilege. A2A doesn't expect it; nor does Realair; there is no excuse for Carenado. As someone who is a bit of a sucker for aircraft add-ons, I'm happy to find an reason not to buy, and Carenado have provided one.Thanks guys! Commander 114? Hmmm, I don't think so... Maybe a year from now...maybe... King Air? I'd give my eye teeth for a good FSX King Air, but I'll be giving the Carenado one a miss. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I just don't like doing business with companies who do business like that. And there are enough around who don't to ensure that I don't have to.Holdit

[rhodges 6]

How true Simeon!"Well to be honest if Carenado is using testers/pilots who have no experience in a specific type aircraft, they are headed for a "irrecoverable tailspin."Very realistic, including real world.Many years ago I remember as a CFI instructing for a Piper distributor checking out an individual that came in to rent an aircraft. The plane in question was a PA-24-250. The party in question was an airline pilot, and frankly I was intimitaded to be in such company as only a pilot of light aircraft. However, on the takeoff roll as the individual in question opened the throttle the Comanche began to immediately veer left. This individual with credidentials that I envied either didn't know, or probably forgot "P Factor" and if I had not added right rudder would have hopefully taken an excursion over the grass for a while before liftoff.Sure sorry to hear this about Carenado's recent scenario. I only have their old model V35 and F33 Bonanzas and they are two of my favorites real world and in FlightSim.Respectfully:RTH

Well to be honest if Carenado is using testers/pilots who have no experience in a specific type aircraft, they are headed for a "irrecoverable tailspin". Now I made the statement earlier of not venting which is still the case. As a beta tester/pilot of several products released in the past, I have worked with some developers who will attempt to sweep issues/challenges under the rug making FS9/FSX the incapable culprit which is not always the case. Carenado has not an excuse in this case as it appears to be a FDE/.air file issue I think (someone correct me if I am wrong). Everyone I think should be given a fair chance to get something right (and sometimes it takes people in the community to see something that the testers may have missed/omitted). When developing a product it is critical to have expertise from every possible avenue if possible, we have many talented folks who I know are more than capable to offer suggestions/fix the problem. No-one will think less of you if you ask for help. The key is being able to present a product that performs as close as possible to it real-world counter-part, thus pleasing the customer base that you serve. Now if Carenado is attempting to create a buffeting stall effect they have failed miserably in this case. The real world Baron has stable characteristics at the flare and touchdown, the undercarriage geometry and good pitch response results in easy to achieve landings. The Baron lifts off the ground with gentle back pressure on the column giving an early indication of its appeasing handling with both engines at full RPM. It's usually best to accelerate to blue line speed before climbing away. The Baron's reputation for having responsive and harmonized controls is part of what makes this aircraft a pure delight to fly.There is definitely need for Carenado to focus, as their competition is beginning to show that they (Carenado) is lagging behind. They may have to create a new mission statement which encompasses "Visual Quantity, but not Performance Quality". Now i am not bashing or venting, just expressing mere concerns.Respectfully,Simeon Richardson

[MartinRex007 390]

Thanks Martin,I'm going to get it right now!Cheers,BB

Great, I hope you enjoy it as much as I do! I do have the Reality XP gauges installed which adds a nice set of avionics. Be sure to download the 1.1 patch and stay turned next week for their 1.2 upgrade. There are also a lot of nice paints jobs for this beast. Enjoy!CheersMartin