How do I stop slewing violently to the left or right?

[LAdamson 240]

LA,To me it sounds like you are confusing SIM flightmodel with AIRCRAFT flightmodel.Those are two VERY different things.SIM flightmodel.As an engineer with flying experience and having developed acf for X-Plane for about 10 years, I canassure you that X-Plane is LIGHTYEARS ahead of the FS model from an aerodynamic perspective. I'll give you a few examples;

Btw- In addition to my previous rant, in which I can think of several more pages worth....I have no complaints on your Archer. I think it's one of the better X-Plane models. I haven't extensively tested it either. But it seems like an Archer. But don't be too quick to judge what's capable of MSFS. Through the years, third party developers have made great strides in work arounds to the basic model...... which are very believable in both response and feel, as well as results. I expect the use of right rudder to counteract the left drift (prop spiral effect) of single engine models. And with good MSFS or X-Plane models, I get it. I also want it to feel as if a continuous push is needed, and not a tendency to wander. If the prop turns in the opposite direction, then left pedal it is. I expect the requirement of right pedal through a portion of the climb. I want to see the effects of P-factor as the nose rises, as well as the possibility of torque effects depending on the relationship of the engine/prop size to airframe. Well done FS9/FSX models are also very capable of this.I want rudder control in aerobatic capable aircraft that are able to produce knife edges, hammerheads, tailslides, and even snap rolls as a bonus. Once again, certain MSFS aircraft are capable. Exacting slips such as forward and side are performed precisely. Even spins, accelerated stall/spin, and secondary stall/spins are quite believable with particular 3rd party designs for MSFS. And with great importance, hitting the required numbers when it comes to landing gear & flap extensions during the approach phase can be performed with realism within the FS9/FSX model. Not only does the model hit the numbers, but the look & feel is also correct. MSFS is also capable of ground effect, washout, wing cuffs, and more. It's capable of simulating the use of aileron in specific stall situations depending on wing design. But then the way I hear it, ground effect is just a matter of settings within both sims. No simulation of actual air molecules in the X-Plane sim either. Same for simplified water landings, takeoffs, and turbulence off the wings.So let's not dismiss the MSFS model as being severely limited, and especially arcade. At the end of the day, neither X-Plane or MSFS is riding on molecules of air. They only simulate it. If either sim is capable of doing it well, then that's just what it needs to do. It's all virtual, but needs to be believable.In regards to both sims, I'm still waiting for improved effects concerning the use of constant speed props. I just don't see them.L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,772]

Greg-I have a real problem with your statement "unlike the avsim forums, free speech is encouraged."Free speech is certainly encouraged here at avsim-insults and poor behavior is what is not acceptable here-period.I do find your statement rather an oxymoron because above you are above chastising Larry for exercising his free speech in this forum. You also state that x-pilot.com has discussions of fsx vs. xplane-yet you seem to be sensitive that this subject is discussed in this thread?!By the way I have developed stuff for xplane in the past, and have bought nearly every version because I support flight simming. I also have problems with xplane's fm along with other things-and I speak about it not to put the sim down but to hopefully improve it-especially now that it may be the only going concern left....and in the future I hope people will continue to visit our forum-it is good for Xplane. Xplane is viewed too much as a nitch market and it needs to be more widely accepted. A forum like this helps.

Hi GeoffWith all due respect...taken from the AVSIM forums terms of use:Please also understand that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN A PRIVATELY OWNED AND OPERATED FORUM. If you believe that you should have unfettered freedom of speech without equal responsibility for its use, then the AVSIM forums are not for you. I don't have a problem with free speech at all. But some things that have been said here are downright laughable.My main point is, Larry feels as though he has every right to condemn x plane because he claims to have all this experience in flight engineering, being on the MSFS beta team, and God knows what else. If he wants to condemn x plane, then by all means, he can do it. But not at the extent as to dissuade someone from making a purchase or downloading a demo of it and trying it out for themselves.He has pushed it quite far in some cases.If I had his "claimed" experience in engineering and aircraft, I sure as hell wouldn't be simming. I'd be up there flying trans continental flights in a 744.Sorry, but I call a spade a spade and he seems grossly over-qualified for someone who only owns a Vans and does virtual flights every now and then.Greg

[Geofa 108]

Hi GeoffWith all due respect...taken from the AVSIM forums terms of use:Please also understand that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN A PRIVATELY OWNED AND OPERATED FORUM. If you believe that you should have unfettered freedom of speech without equal responsibility for its use, then the AVSIM forums are not for you. I don't have a problem with free speech at all. But some things that have been said here are downright laughable.My main point is, Larry feels as though he has every right to condemn x plane because he claims to have all this experience in flight engineering, being on the MSFS beta team, and God knows what else. If he wants to condemn x plane, then by all means, he can do it. But not at the extent as to dissuade someone from making a purchase or downloading a demo of it and trying it out for themselves.He has pushed it quite far in some cases.If I had his "claimed" experience in engineering and aircraft, I sure as hell wouldn't be simming. I'd be up there flying trans continental flights in a 744.Sorry, but I call a spade a spade and he seems grossly over-qualified for someone who only owns a Vans and does virtual flights every now and then.Greg

Well let me clarify the avsim terms-read the second sentence " unfettered freedom of speech without equal responsibility for its use".I think that is pretty clear. Things like insults, bad behavior-dual accounts posting posts as different users-you get my drift. Not allowed..Yell fire in a movie theater where there is none and I think you will also find "free speech" has limits.As for things that have been said here as downright laughable-no question about that. As long as bad behaviour is not part of it-no problem.As for Larry-he and I have been around simming since the beginning. In my case I beta tested Pro Pilot, Fly, MSFS amoung others.I don't see him "condemning xplane"-those are your words. He has taken issue with the flight models and so have I. I believe this is in the interest of improving the sim-after all if one has their head in the sand and only sees bliss improvements don't occur.You might be flying flights in a 744 but I personally would not. I'd rather be flying a Baron, and I do. Flying on autopilot is just not my thing, and flying the same route every day I would find boring. Doesn't mean someone else might not find it interesting. One of my flying partners also built his own aircraft-a Christian Eagle. When he goes into a mechanics shop they get nervous-he finds things they don't catch. I would not dismiss Larry's credentials so easily...

[LAdamson 240]

If he wants to condemn x plane, then by all means, he can do it. But not at the extent as to dissuade someone from making a purchase or downloading a demo of it and trying it out for themselves.*************************If I had his "claimed" experience in engineering and aircraft, I sure as hell wouldn't be simming. I'd be up there flying trans continental flights in a 744.Sorry, but I call a spade a spade and he seems grossly over-qualified for someone who only owns a Vans and does virtual flights every now and then.

As to qualifications, you don't see me making many mistakes, do you? Over at the org. much of the advice given is full of mistakes (just an outright lack of knowledge on the subject), or excuses to make up for shortfalls. It's too bad, that I've spent much time on giving the correct answer, just to have it left out by the moderators...... while absolutely no one makes any corrections. I'm not outright condemend. When I hit the send button, it say's that my reply must be first checked by a moderator. Lately, nothing goes through. The last one really got me. The new X-Plane user inquired for solutions to make the Cessna 172 panel not appear so much in his face. He had GA flight experience, but from a long time ago. He wanted to pull back the view point to get some additional runway views off the side & top for landing. One answer, said you can pull back, but will probably end up with the seat back. Another said to set view points in the program, but you'll loose some frame rates. But the unchallenged answer was to use the directional gyro set to the right heading for the runway, and then the VSI to grease it in. This was followed by saying his instructor always made it a point to set the DG. I don't know about you, but there is no way that I'm sticking my head back into the cockpit during the landing phase. I get quick glimpses of the airspeed, but that's it! This forum isn't used as much as the org., but I think you'd get better answers. I actually have quite a list that fall into the same category. Why aren't you giving some proper advice at the org?And no, I don't make overall condemnations of X-Plane. They're always in response to the "I've seen the light", and X-Plane is the true flight sim when it comes to aerodynamics. This is pushed by the nubies as well as Austin himself. How many times do you see "Wow, I'm an X-Plane convert after many years of MSFS. I just can't believe how much better the flight models are". From that point on, all you'll get is..... yes, it's X-Plane for flight models, and MSFS for scenery". That is usually followed by..............."are you flying a plane or just want to look at eye candy (scenery)?"You see, I'm just the guy that doesn't buy into the hype, and it seems to bother you. I know very well, just how realistic MSFS can be, as well as it's pitfalls. But one thing for sure, is that MSFS is very capable of simulating flight. It does it very well. Not in all phases, but neither does X-Plane. And, yes, I'm experienced enough to know. You're not calling a spade, because you really have no idea. But I'm up to scrutiny. As I said, how often do I make mistakes, by pulling uneducated answers out of my hat? Heck, I can't even remember one...L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,772]

Having credentials is one thing.Bragging about them (excessively) to the extent he has, to the point of sounding like a broken record, kinda gets boring real fast and it's very easy for someone to go from being mildly impressed to being downright turned off by the plethora of arrogance.We get it. He owns a small aircraft. He's hammered that fact into just about all the forums there are on flight simming. He owns an avionics package that could probably buy a small holiday house.It's fine if he mentions it in passing. But mentioning it with the bragging undertone, which is clearly obvious, does not really help someone elses situation when it comes to making a purchase.Telling someone to try it and see how they like it, along with seeking out independent reviews, is more unbiased, not to mention "helpful" for the prospective buyer.He didn't condemn x plane? Depends on ones interpretation. He did say blade element theory is all hype and is not as accurate as a lookup table.I don't really like debating about these kinds of things. I do tell people to try all options and go with what they feel comfortable with. Perhaps Larry should try to do the same.As you have said in another thread. People can have both.It's not a couple of political parties. It's a flight simulator. Greg

[LAdamson 240]

He didn't condemn x plane? Depends on ones interpretation. He did say blade element theory is all hype and is not as accurate as a lookup table.

No I didn't. I said that you just can't throw dimensions in, and get an accurate aircraft out. I said that it takes a lot of experience to "tweak" what you get out of plane makers blade element theory. And Morten, just confirmed that. You had better re-read my statements. I've even gone as far as saying that plane maker might get into the ball park without tweaks. But that's it.P.S. --- You're making the big deal about my credentials. I have over 5000 post's, and usually say nothing of them. L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,772]

Whatever you say, Larry.I'm off to enjoy X Plane and FSX.Have a nice dayGreg

[LAdamson 240]

I'm off to enjoy X Plane and FSX.Have a nice day

That's what everyone should do! I'll get the Falco, CRJ................and you can check out the Orbx Pacific Northwest... :( And seriously, that's my plan!Have a nice day tooL.Adamson

[60North 120]

LA,You elegantly missed the points I was trying to make.Whatever you as a GA pilot with grease on your hands believe,from an aerodynamic engineering perspective, Xp's COREflightmodel is much more advanced and capable than FS - Period!Now, how each aircraft designer bends the rules or messes up, thats another story.However, a bad aircraft design (in any sim) doesnt tell you ANYTHING about the simflightmodel itself! This is what you for some reason don't get!So, is your intension to fill all forums with this nonsense for ANOTHER 8-10 years..?M

[GoranM 3,772]

Morten, don't even bother.Some peoples heads are so hard, they're bullet proof.It's like convincing Osama Bin Laden to have Christmas dinner at George W's house.Greg

[LAdamson 240]

LA,You elegantly missed the points I was trying to make.Whatever you as a GA pilot with grease on your hands believe,from an aerodynamic engineering perspective, Xp's COREflightmodel is much more advanced and capable than FS - Period!Now, how each aircraft designer bends the rules or messes up, thats another story.However, a bad aircraft design (in any sim) doesnt tell you ANYTHING about the simflightmodel itself! This is what you for some reason don't get!So, is your intension to fill all forums with this nonsense for ANOTHER 8-10 years..?M

It's very important for a desktop sim to fill many of the voids that exist between what we see on the screen versus what we feel in the air. Using just the feel of a joysticks centering spring, and the motion of what's seen on the screen.............the sim has to somehow fill those gaps, so that our "pilot brains" accept it as being close to real. These are senses that include yaw, dampening, inertia, and power to weight. I've explained these "mind" tricks before. It's like sitting at a stop light, in which the vehicle next to you moves slightly forward; but to you, your vehicle seems to be moving backwards and you slam on the brakes. A case of sensed motion with out actual movement.Unfortunately, X-Plane has failed in providing enough of these senses for the last 15 years or so. It's always like flying a fluid magic carpet, but that's about it. I've often explained it as a joystick connected to puppet strings. In fact, I just really can't explain it at all. But one thing is for sure...............it just doesn't have the "feel", and I never enjoy flying it for very long. ..........I just can't seem to put it into words.... I'm not alone, either...Perhaps in another 8-10 years........I'll jump up and say. "WOW, that feels just like flying an airplane"!!!!! L.Adamson

[boshar 6]

And no, I don't make overall condemnations of X-Plane. They're always in response to the "I've seen the light", and X-Plane is the true flight sim when it comes to aerodynamics....

But why does it irk you so much. It looks like you are on a personal crusade. On al the FS boards you are active you react every time as if you are stung by some insect. Maybe some of the newbies don't know your point of view but even they must be in a minority (if they know how to search a forum on X-Plane and flightmodel they will find plenty of your posts).A few years ago I did a personal development course. The course encouraged trainees to explore the things that irked them the most. Exploring these irks and your reaction to them will learn you a lot about yourself. I don't know but maybe it will help you too :(Whatever the cause of your post may be it goes way beyond a friendly critique in order to improve X-Plane (as if that would work with Austin :() or a friendly correction about how Sim A models things opposed to Sim B. We all know how you feel about this Larry. Can you let us get on and make this an X-Plane forum with every now and then the inevitable proud to use X-Plane post by fan boys or will you continue with your negativism until this part of the forum is removed. After all. Discussing the sims beyond FS-X should be an enrichment to the hobby and it could be the way to the future of the hobby (if Microsoft sticks with its decission).

[60North 120]

It's very important for a desktop sim to fill many of the voids that exist between what we see on the screen versus what we feel in the air. Using just the feel of a joysticks centering spring, and the motion of what's seen on the screen.............the sim has to somehow fill those gaps, so that our "pilot brains" accept it as being close to real. These are senses that include yaw, dampening, inertia, and power to weight.

Absolutely correct!AND these are all issues the designer has alot of control over.I'll make you a challenge. Pick any non-complex GA acf model you know well that doesn't FEEL right to you and I'll see if I can make it feel the way YOU want it..M

[LAdamson 240]

Absolutely correct!AND these are all issues the designer has alot of control over.I'll make you a challenge. Pick any non-complex GA acf model you know well that doesn't FEEL right to you and I'll see if I can make it feel the way YOU want it..M

I'll work on that.L.Adamson

[Aerodynamic 0]

Absolutely correct!AND these are all issues the designer has alot of control over.I'll make you a challenge. Pick any non-complex GA acf model you know well that doesn't FEEL right to you and I'll see if I can make it feel the way YOU want it..M

If you wish to pursue this crusade, Morten, go for it. However, I believe Tom Kyler graciously helped Larry with tweaking the Vans aircraft to get it how Larry liked it. If that didn't change his perception, temper your expectations.I use both XP9 and FSX. I enjoy things about both and I dislike things about both. But I think the general consensus is that people who frequent this forum are constantly seeing Larry discuss negative aspects about X-Plane. That said, I guess it is fair game to go to the FSX forum and talk about negative aspects - the archaic engine that should have been rebuilt from the ground up years ago. About the closure of Aces and the overall long term uncertainty of the MSFS series, etc.Or maybe we're too "polite" and don't care as much about doing that.The fact is that X-Plane initally costs less and is developed by a tiny core of people who have a passion to make flight simming enjoyable. It is constantly evolving into something that will hopefully become very polished in the coming years. FSX cost me nearly $80 years ago, and the development studio that put the game on the shelf is gone. I hope Larry can start looking forward to what may be coming down the pipe as opposed to what we have now that is not perfectly done to his liking. There really is no need to keep discussing the same cons to the X-Plane package. We get it, and I agree to some extent.X-Plane is a little engine that can. It's not there yet, but it's climbing the hill. Maybe a little less negativity would help the journey.My .02,Scott