FS 2004 Flight Dynamics.. Beta Testers Please Answer

[LAdamson 240]

>>Because you are a skilled and very accomplished video gamer.>And why would I want to take off from spot plane view? >Is that realistic with respect to the way real aircraft are>operated?>Is this Flight Simulator or Radio Control Flight Simulator?Either one......................The cockpit view isn't any more real than the spot view, as you're "faking" it anyway!! So I'd suppose it doesn't really matter. R/C is also a learned skill, and most can't sim fly from that view. But it's THAT view, that really shows the flight characteristics of any given model.....>the flight models aren't realistic where>pitch inputs are concerned.>Pure opinion, based on hardware, settings, & "touch".....edit..>If parting company with thousands of dollars for some flight time >is on my list of things to do today, then I'll head to the airport >and spend it on some real hardware, I'll spend it on one of those >heavier than air flying machines that I've seen out there.>For me, Flight Simulator is all about the enjoyment of flight and >doing it on a budget. The bottom line here....... No CPU upgrade this year, as I need a C/S prop governor ($1000.00 foreign/1495.00 domestic) and transponder (another 1400 bucks) :-( L.Adamson

[Guest jcomm]

I do not make - yet... - the slightest idea about how it is with the other aircraft, but the following comment found at one of AVSIM's forums isn't really what I should call a compliment to fs2004 flight-model-wise, as I could only expect...>Flight model: I haven't done more than initial flight>testing, but the fun factor of hovering this helicopter is>one of the highest of any FS helicopter.>Pedal movement is not really required. Whow!!! What a realistic feel it must have !!!! Great!!!>In a zero wind,>neutral pedal lift off, the helicopter only begins to yaw>left very slowly.And does it even require the engine to be working? That would add an additional feel of reality to an already perfect flight simulation evironment!!!!>Normal flight maneuvers are pretty much accurate, except for>a few details.Yes... like about 99% of the details that make up the feel of the helo flightmodel in MSFS... Sorry for being so negative, but what worries the most is how a proof of a highly irrealistic flightmodel response to control inputs can be mistakenly considered as some sort of improvement in the quality of this line of simulators... On the other hand this is certainly what MS and the MSFS team expects from their customers - a poor/biased notion of reality. Only such a basis can support the "As Real as it Gets" statement...

[Guest]

Hi DouglasLets not confuse the Flight Equations with the data used by them. :) Unfortunately the flight equations get a bad rap because poor data is used. The FS flight equations (also used in CFS) are the best available for the PC (I can

[LAdamson 240]

>I do not make - yet... - the slightest idea about how it is>with the other aircraft, but the following comment found at>one of AVSIM's forums isn't really what I should call a>compliment to fs2004 flight-model-wise, as I could only>expect...>J.C.----- As I remember, you're an X-Plane fan, but after just flying the externally beautiful new FS2004 R-22 versus the X-Plane R-22, you'll be happy to know, that MS has exceed my expectations, and probably yours too!! :)I don't know what that particular poster had realsim settings on, or even if using auto-rudder for that matter. And I also don't know how much anti-torque (proper language?), if much at all the real R-22 requires in a hover. But I did have a much better workout with this new chopper than past models. My rudder pedals worked very well as I moved side to side, foward & back, and keeping the nose pointed straight down the runway. Transitions to forward flight & back to hover had some nice realistic stability and control. I havn't tried auto-rotations....... but who knows. What I do know, is that I'll probably be flying choppers in FS2004 much more than past versions of MSFS! And BTW--- with fps setting at 35 fps, a small airport and light AI traffic, the sim keep a near constant 35 fps the complete session. Was the good old X-Plane "fluidity feel" if you know what I mean. :)My advice to any serious X-Plane chopper fanatic, is to try this new R-22 out. With some very reasonable out of the box flight dynamics, and a very good looking machine externally, and VC cockpit........... it's well worth looking into!My creditials---- fly real planes, but my chopper piloting experience was limited to 4 years of R/C choppers 30 & 60 size, including aerobatic manuvers...... 10 years ago. But I believe that's good enough to develope a feel of what to expect from a PC simulation. Have been up in several real ones though.edit---- after flying this one, and X-Planes version 6.70----- there is no way, I think I fly the X-Plane version again! Of course, if X-Plane has something better to offer, then let me know....L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

Just wanted to add.....Thanks for bringing the helicopter issue up! Have just spent the last hour in the FS9 Robinson R-22, and it's some of the best flight time, I've had in any FS yet!!! With default southern Idaho scenery of hills, plenty of trees, and light clouds, I'm maintaining a near constant 35 fps with limiter set at 35 fps. Extremely fluid and smooth low level & fast, flight!! The Virtual cockpit with rotating blades overhead is a must!!!Rudder pedalsSaitek X45 joystick --- cyclicSeperate left hand X45 throttle/collective comboAthlon 1900XP/Geforce3Ti500L.Adamson

[Rottenlungs 0]

I think its true to say that some of the default aircraft in fs2002 are a bit dodgy handling wise. Hopefully this has improved a bit in fs2004. However, this has been resolved by the classy end of the freeware & payware aircraft builders. For instance, the c402 or the Sf260 are both lovely & stable, so is the DF Archer. I`ve always found the jets harder to trim (esp DF 737) but have found it to be quite possible with the Iron Knuckles DC-9.Practice, my boys, practice!CheersLungs

[Guest byoung]

But the question is, do these fly realistically???Many have argued that this is not the case!Barry

[LAdamson 240]

>But the question is, do these fly realistically???>>Many have argued that this is not the case!>Now this this getting absurd............What's realistic ? ---------answer---- the actual plane!!!!!!!!!!!!!The "many" are correct------------as this P/C desktop flying isnot the actual plane, or even a full motion simulator!!!And until this "hobby" is exactly like the real plane, then the manywill always argue their case!!!!!!!!!!L.Adamson

[Johan_Dees 84]

Of course one of the main problems is that we dont FEEL what is happening. We only can rely on our visual clues.Therefore, you need to learn; to see first what the reaction is before you make an adjustment (unless you fly always the same airplane and know it habbits)Like the trim, add a bit and watch whats happening.. sometimes it lags a bit before it actually does something, and if you in the meantime added more, you might overdo it and PIO is your part.So, without FEEL, and only visual I think we need to focus also on SOUND more.Let me explain: with a very good model, panel and sound, where all is real alike, you shouldnt be able to hear much engines in the cockpit. (JETS!). The wind sound takes a lot away, and most are samples taken from real jets. Thats fine to me, but we are loosing a clue we need very hard.The sounds should need a high pitch what is just be audible in the cockpit for the SOUND clues we need.When doing an approach for example with A/T on, you can HEAR with good sounds that you are descending and building up speed.. sound pitch decays to a lower pitch.. and vice verse. See my website for my enhanced 747 sounds. They have that audible clue in it. (after install play with your FS engine sound loudness to set it so that it isnt irritating)Before judging ANY flightmodel remember that we miss clues to flying.Of course some are good, and some are bad.. always.Johan[A HREF=http://www.phoenix-simulation.co.uk]Phoenix Simulation Software[/A]-----http://www.people.zeelandnet.nl/johdUnofficial PSS Website

[Guest]

>But the question is, do these fly realistically???This is a valid question.If I have a Cessna 152 that can do Mach 2, but it

[LAdamson 240]

>>But the question is, do these fly realistically???>>This is a valid question.>>If I have a Cessna 152 that can do Mach 2, but it

[LAdamson 240]

>Therefore, you need to learn; to see first what the reaction>is before you make an adjustment (unless you fly always the>same airplane and know it habbits)>>Like the trim, add a bit and watch whats happening.. sometimes>it lags a bit before it actually does something, and if you in>the meantime added more, you might overdo it and PIO is your>part.>>So, without FEEL, and only visual I think we need to focus>also on SOUND more.>An observation:In my mind, I actually "feel" the pressure being relieved from my joystick. But take away sight, and I really have no idea, since there is no actual change in stick pressure.It's the old "other car at the stop light trick" where it moves & you slam on your brakes because you think you're moving..You havn't moved an inch, but your mind swears you did. If sound add's to the "fakeout", then why not..L.Adamson

[Guest SoarPics]

"Ouch! Arghh! I despair!!"No reason to despair, Rob (I still won't have this sim on my computer without the SF 260 :-) ).My point is... alot of folks are blaming MS for bad flight models, yet they work pretty good with my joystick. Perhaps it's time simmers started thinking more about hardware and less about blaming .air files.Cheers,

[Guest byoung]

>>This can be done in FS. From spot plane view, line up your aircraft with the nosegear directly on the runway centerline. Now switch to cockpit view, and pick a reference point on the panel that corresponds to the centerline (you can even open the panel bitmap in paint and place a mark there if you want), you should use this panel reference during the landing approach to align the aircraft with the runway. Now line up your aircraft on final just the way you do in real life, by picking a spot on the runway and aiming the aircraft at it, if the runway has visual approach aids you should ignore them and concentrate on keeping your landing "spot" stationary in the "windshield". Small frequent corrections are the key here, and even with a no wind situation, most of the time you will be making these corrections all the way to touchdown.Also, what View_Forward_Zoom settings are you using? This seems to be a very subjective issue with most people, and preferences vary widely. I find a zoom of 1.2 - 1.3 to be the most realistic as far as the runway aspect (view) is concerned, and this zoom level has the added benefit of making the approach and landing somewhat easier as well. <

[LAdamson 240]

Barry, Have you tried the RealAir Cessna182 file upgrade issued last year? It's the one that came with some polished alumimum aircraft.I don't remember if I mentioned it in these series of postings. It has excellent rudder control........... at least with my pedals.Other than that, It's going to be your hardware, settings, and various air.files. Some work very well with my pedals and settings (default) and it's very much like the real thing. But like I said, some & not all!L.Adamson