X Plane11 Cirrus SR22T

Do any of you know if the Carenado Cirrus SR22T realistic? does it fly like a real SR22T does it stall like a real SR22T? is the performance realistic? I ask because It is the airplane I fly in Xplane11.

The Torquesim SR22 is a lot closer to being accurate.


Don’t know of Carendo. I’m using Torquesim SR22 to practice approaches, it flies like my plane. Perhaps just a tiny bit slower with 18% power and 50% flaps on GS. Other than that pretty good. I’m trying to figure out why my fuel levels are remembered between flight…


Thank you, I did notice that the MAP it only goes up to 30in not 35in and the fuel burn is way low. but stall speed is right on. I think it is still a good model but not as good as Torquesim SR22.

1 Like

I would like to buy that one in the future. Thank you!

The Torquesim is fantastic - still some room for improvement, and they indeed are releasing updates regularly. On the other hand when the only option in years-past was the Carenado I found it was so bad that I was better off just flying the stock C172 w/ G1000 and pretending I was flying a slow Cirrus :smiley:


Those of you attending any week end CPPP this year will get to use the new Nobel sims. They’re running X Plane and their engineers have tweaked and tuned the X-Plane SR2x models to match the POH performance numbers. After flying these new models Torquesim will seem clunky.


Oddly, I can’t even rotate a plane in a home desktop based computer SIM without crashing it (Xplane, MS FS). I find the feed back (or more precisely the lack thereof), the setting you are in, indeed the entire experience really to be completely unrealistic and not particularly useful.

I know some folks love them but for the way my brain works (or perhaps doesn’t), home desktop SIMs just aren’t useful for me.


I suggest double checking with them that the COM/NAV/CRS knob is not still also controlling the functions of the FMS knob - a frustrating bug that I reported to them months ago.

1 Like

I agree with you that for things like takeoff and landings, most home sims are not very useful. I will say however that with the right hardware even those activities can be vastly improved. I use the Noble Cirrus yoke and it is very close to the real thing. A good set of rudder pedals help too.

Where I think the home sim is most useful to me is practicing approaches, holds, in varying meteorological conditions. Hand flying, fully coupled, with PFD failure on back up instruments etc. it helps tremendously to build flow and routines, buttonology and hand flying approaches.

Also, very helpful to “fly” into an unfamiliar airport in the Sim wether VFR or IFR and trying different approaches is super useful before going out to do it. Especially if the approach is challenging, terrain is an issue, etc.


I can see the utility, for sure, in that situation. Do the SIMs allow you to “start up” mid flight. Wasting hours trying to get the hang of the kinda-phony take off/landing inputs drives me to rage-quit these desktop SIMs.

I use the Foreflight option and “fly” the route before hand to gain perspective of an unfamiliar area.

1 Like

I have the Noble yoke too. Do you find it hard to trim for straight and level, when hand flying? I find the the trim switch far too sensitive (even more so than the real plane!) To be fair though I think this is Xplane’s fault rather than Torquesim or Noble.

Btw do you use the default control sensitivities for pitch and roll?

1 Like

Yes - it’s easy with XPlane.

To be honest, I find the best way to use sims is doing end to end flights with Pilotedge, which is an incredible ATC simulator that plugs into Xplane and gives you a truly real world ATC experience of an IFR (or VFR) flight.


Yes, X-plane let’s me start anywhere on the map in mid-flight. I don’t bother with takeoff. Rarely do I bother with landing. Maybe on the final approach I practice I may land for fun. I don’t find landing useful.

Take off in the other hand, provided you have a good yoke and rudder pedals is useful. Practicing entering the “soup” at low AGL and hand flying on instruments is very useful.


I have had pretty good luck with the default sensitivities. I am sure if I spent the time I could improve on the performance of the yoke.

I don’t bother with trying to trim to perfection. I have a hard enough time doing that in the plane. I will trim to get it mostly where it needs to be but when I hand fly the sim my hand doesn’t leave the stick.

This however is a must I think. Cheap solution that provides forearm support like the door arm rest in the plane:

It adjusts pretty much infinitely to get it just right.

FUZADEL Arm Rests Ergonomic Arm… https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0714CCM12?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share


Can you elaborate? I found the Torquesim model to be very good, especially for Avidyne.

1 Like

As a 30 plus year CFII, MEI & Platinum CSIP I can tell you all - and get consensus from my peers - that the NUMBER ONE issue we see at CPPP, Embark and transition training is POOR TRIMMING.

All of my sims have this sticker right in from of the pilot. "WHEN YOU FLY THE SIM, TRIM, TRIM, TRIM!!

From other threads you all know that the largest common denominator in landing accidents is speed. Too much of it. I’d bet a lot of my meager net worth trim was a contributing factor. Trim you simulator, trim your airplane. Be a trim guru. Your life literally depends on it

The old adage with simulators that you all seem to be missing is, if you can do it in the sim you can do it in the airplane. I’ve heard all the ‘negative’ training comments. They don’t hold water because using these devices is an intellectual exercise not a physical one.

If you really know what you’re doing in an airplane at the correlation level landing a sim is fun and challenging and has all the same issues you have when landing your own airplane. So what if it doesn’t feel the same. Think it through and make it work. Engaging your brain and thinking "ok, this is the airplane I have to fly today. It’s not like my airplane but it is an airplane and all the control inputs are no different than my Cirrus. (X-Plane does this well) The power settings maybe different, the trim sensitive and visuals small but the challenge is the same. DO WHAT YOU GOTTA DO TO LAND THE AIRPLANE from a stable approach. There is no negative in that though I’m sure some of you will correct me.

No one can make a $10K, $20K or $50K flight training device fly like your $1MM airplane.

The devices we use in GA are Basic Aviation Training Device and Advance Aviation Training Device for a reason. They are not simulators nor are they required to be by FAR at this level. (RSG and Nobel do a great job of making their sims far better than the FAA requires.) They’re designed to make you use your brain to learn procedures. Their inadequacies and bugs are your inadvertent, unintended shit that goes wrong or doesn’t work as expected. Deal with it. Think it through. No VNV, no blue banana do the mental math.

Torguesim is an airplane model. I’ve used it with perspective and Avidyne avionics. It’s flying characteristics are not bad but not up to matching the POH. Nobel’s new flight models should include the SR20, 22 & 22T with performance numbers matching POH. that means that your climb rates, cruise TAS as well as pitch power and trim for approach to landing will match very closely with your airplane.


Thank you :+1:


Can’t wait to start flying!