I don't know if I titled this right but I'm looking for some opinions here. I see so many people using FS for bush flying and other GA purposes. After flying around in real Cessna's and getting the feel for a real aircraft's performance I find FS's FDE a little arcadish. What I mean by that is the most important feature I noticed when flying smaller aircraft is the Adverse Yaw when turning the aircraft. I had no idea of the importance of the rudder up until this point. The main Fuselage doesn't automatically turn just because you bank the wings. I mean the whole airplane turns but unless you turn the Fuselage as well (laymen

Although it's not in the release version here at Avsim, my Microlight FDE has adverse yaw. A Microlight pilot gave me a few tips on improving the flight model, and I allowed him to post a customized copy of the FDE. Since my Microlight was a simple effort--my first aircraft--I never bothered updating the FDE here.Anyway, I think adverse yaw is mostly something up to the FDE designer. It can be done for light GA aircraft in MSFS--at least to the extent I experienced in a 172 during the one year I took lessons. It's probably tweaked too high in my Microlight, but the pilot I shared my FDE with swears it's the best he's flown. Or maybe he was just trying to stroke my ego...Sorry to poat and run tonight--I likely won't see your response. I'm flying to Mexico Friday AM to pick up my wife and daughter, who've been visiting family there. We'll all spend a few days together on the beach, then back to the States (and work) for my wife and I.... Sigh.....-John

John as far as I was aware Flight Simulator was incapable of simulating true Adverse and Proverse Yaw effects in it's flight models...

> I can't use FS to>prepare me for certain aspects of flight like Adverse Yaw or>Spins which for the first time makes FS seem more like a video>game in certain aspects versus a simulator. Sure........... you can use MSFS to learn & memorize the techniques for getting out of a spin. Aircraft such as the RealAir Marchetti 260 also do a credible job for rudder use in aerobatics, not to mention slips, which both the RealAir 172 & 260 do well.This "adverse yaw" subject was highly debated when it came up as an Op-Ed at Flightsim. com. The author was most familiar with high aspect ratio glider wings where yaw is most noticiable. But yet, many GA aircraft use differential ailerons, or perhaps "frize" ailerons that produce little yaw. Some light aircraft need virtually NO rudder for corridnated turns. I know, because I'm building one that has both frize & differential ailerons.Personally, I use rudder all the time with flight simulators, just because I'm use to it, as well as having rudder pedals, which are a requirement to imitate real flight IMO.L.AdamsonNote: As to X-Plane, I'll be sure to notice next time I fly it. Havn't flown it since last evening, but I don't remember great expectations in the "adverse yaw" department. The RealAir's are still my all time favorites for use of "rudder" in any simulation I've used.edit again ------ The RealAir models "slip" (which is very much a rudder controlled manuver) much more effectively than any of the "stock" models for X-Plane. X-Plane defaults don't slip any better than MSFS stock. I've havn't yet experienced any 3rd party models for X-Plane.

basically a double post -- edited out!

Also...Double check that auto rudder is turned off in the aircraft realism settings. Auto rudder will remove any hint of adverse yaw.DannyCYVR

Actually, to answer the topic question, FS (with a good FDE) simulates GA MUCH better than it does commercial heavy aircraft.This is not to say that GA simulation is great, but I think its relatively reasonable.Heavier jets or turboprops on the other hand are totaly misrepresented. Their weight and inertia are just not there. well, try to make a little experiment. Take a 737 for example and imagine it's a fighter jet or an aerobatics airplane - try to fly it like one...you'll be surprised by the results.With all the lovely addons, FS makes a nice program for familiarization of flight decks, instruments and basic concepts.When it comes to flying or the "feeling" thereof, true aicraft behaviour etc. it's well well off the mark.If I think of it, I don't believe it was ever presented as such.//Mike

>Heavier jets or turboprops on the other hand are totaly>misrepresented. Their weight and inertia are just not there. >well, try to make a little experiment. Take a 737 for example>and imagine it's a fighter jet or an aerobatics airplane - try>to fly it like one...you'll be surprised by the results.>//MikeI feel the same way about the larger aircraft.Most of them feel way too nimble.However one aircraft that really "feels" heavy is the Falcon 50 (Yannick Lavigne, Fred Banting, Rob Young)It has an incredible feeling of mass and inertia even when taxiing.If it wasn't for the fact that I know it's a smallish jet I would have thought I was flying an underpowered Boeing 737.Paul

>I feel the same way about the larger aircraft.>Most of them feel way too nimble.Isn't it true about any default FS aircraft ? None of them, regardless of size feels right to me. The all bob up and down like demented yoyos (per Rob Young's description).And I wish we stopped talking about default FS aircraft - one has to be nuts to use for anything other than AI.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

Actually I for one wasn't talking about default aircraft... The dynamics of Flight Simulator as a whole is what limits developers from truly doing justice to various FDE's. I don't think anyone at this time can truly simulate Adverse and Proverse Yaw. Even RealAir's 172 can't do it... Everyone keeps talking about how well the 172 spins but I'm concerned with normal flight operations. In normal flight in a real 172 you have to use rudders when entering a turn. Rudders are really not needed with any way in FS2k4 except for turning on the ground. This should be far from the truth even with simulated aircraft.

I think there are some misconceptions about what FS can do in this thread. In fact there IS an adverse yaw parameter which does the job well.Having flown gliders I'm familiar with what adverse yaw looks like, both from the cockpit and looking at the turn and slip indicator.However, the focused nature of the "look ahead" view in FS makes fair amounts of adverse yaw look very exaggerated, and there are side-effects which don't help.But it is unfair to say FS cannot emulate adverse yaw.We do state in the RealAir C172 that it is beneficial to use a little rudder into turns, and if you look at the turn and slip indicator you'll see the inbalance if you use just aileron.Maybe I should upload a patch with more adverse yaw - it really isn't difficult to do, but most pilots agree that stubby winged GA aircraft do not have great amounts of it, and about a quarter of the amount you will see in Gliders. But the Flying School who commissioned the C172 were happy with the way it is.Rob Young

"The main Fuselage doesn't automatically turn just because you bank the wings"Actually it does. Though not as nicely as it does when you use yaw and bank. If you only bank an aircraft to turn it you slip the aircraft, which in effect creates a new relative wind from the direction you are slipping. This new relative wind acts on the fuselage and vertical stabilizer and causes the aircraft to turn towards the relative wind. Next time you fly for real

> In normal flight in a real 172>you have to use rudders when entering a turn. Rudders are>really not needed with any way in FS2k4 except for turning on>the ground. This should be far from the truth even with>simulated aircraft.Ever wonder how a Cessna 172 with auto-pilot makes a turn, considering it's only connected to the ailerons??????????No rudder whatsoever for A/P in these small GA airplanes.Rudder is just a matter of keeping the turn more coordinated, which especially benefits back seat passengers. In my experience, the Cessna high wings always required more rudder than the low wing Pipers.Other than that, I use rudder many times in the simulation for small course corrections while in flight, or during the landing---- when required.L.Adamson

And aerobatic monoplanes go to great trouble of taking dihedral (angle of wings-- root to tip) out of the wings so they DON'T tend to turn as much when using aileron to bank. But then they also loose positive stability.L.Adamson

>>Isn't it true about any default FS aircraft ? None of them,>regardless of size feels right to me. The all bob up and down>like demented yoyos I've heard you're description of the defaults before, but I just don't seem to have that yoyo problem------------Not that the defaults are my favorites though! :) I can even usually get some reasonable level trim by using slight power adjustments along with trim. This feels in the gaps created by the "pots" used in our joystick/yokes.And FWIW--- the default Cessna 172 is actually more stable in pitch, than the new 172 included with X-Plane version 7.10 --- for anyone that wonders.L.Adamson