More testing of the V22

1- This has been reported a couple of times, but I've been unable to replicate it.
It may be due to your Flaps. The very last step for the completion of Blade Fold/Wing Stow is flaps full (though not listed on the screen). For this, the "Flaps" step requires you to set Flaps to Auto (default position). May it be the case that your flaps are not set to Auto when it reaches the final step?

2- This is a limitation of our custom physics. MSFS physics are based on a complex CFD model of the aircraft when in flight, considering multiple variables such as wind, aerodynamics, etc. Custom physics are based on simplified calculations, and are not accounting for all the different variables that default APLN physics account for. This will be improved over time, as we improve how wind and inertia affect the movement of the aircraft. The new heli physics won't be of much help here - helicopter flight ONLY applies when nacelles are exactly 90 deg, similarly, APLN flight only applies when nacelles are exactly 0 deg. MSFS does not support (and likely will never support) thrust vectoring, making it impossible for us to accurately model the aerodynamic behaviors of the Osprey in MSFS. It will, unfortunately, always be a mix of both aerodynamic models. But things are constantly being tweaked and improved.

Keep in mind that this is among the very few implementations of full thrust vectoring in MSFS - with perhaps the only other product being the upcoming Harrier by DC Designs. The Harrier being a jet, however, has a simpler flight model - no VRS, hover works differently, and conversion is different as well.

3- Trimming does work in Conv flight, but it is much less effective (design choice). The real-life effectiveness of trim is also highly dependent on speed and nacelle angle, making the physics extremely difficult to model, and hence why trimming hasn't been fully modeled during CONV. Instead, This is on our list of "nice to improve", but again, one of those things that make this aircraft a challenge to make for a platform with multiple limitations for this kind of aircraft. Things will continue improving, over time.

The "kick" you will feel going from CONV to APLN is highly dependent on windspeed. It's the result of the MSFS flight model being re-calculated. At 0 wind, that kick is barely noticeable, while at 99kts wind the kick can ve very dramatic. This is impossible to avoid (unless we fully model APLN flight as a custom flight model). This can also be seen whenever you manually change windspeed or orientation. The physics need a few seconds to recalculate, and during that time the aircraft is very unstable.

Btw - the ideal speed to go from CONV - APLN is right at 170-180kts. Max speed is no more than 200kn, min speed no less than 130.

4- I'm guessing you mean at takeoff - that the aircraft suddenly "pops" off the ground?
If yes - this is also being improved, though it's less noticeable if thrust is slowly increased until the aircraft takes off the ground. If full thrust is applied violently, the "pop" off the ground will be more noticeable.

5- Noted, time will be increased slightly.