Hi folks,I am interested to know if adverse yaw and sideslip are modelled in X-plane (ie. yaw / beta effects). I ask because I have yet to see it modelled in any freeware or payware models. Now that maybe for a number of reasons--I may not be using the right models! But it isn't obvious in otherwise excellent models (eg STMS Husky, Yak55 , Falco 1.2)--I may not have set the simulator correctly. However I can't see where I could have switched the effects off.--Perhaps the effect is overwhelmed by other effects. I've noticed that the slipstream effect from the engine on the runway is overwhelmed by even the lightest cross-wind.--Perhaps it isn't modelled or is difficult to implementor some other reason.Any info gratefully receivedTIM(NB--this is not some extension of the X-plane/FSX slagging match, I am a fan of both X-Plane and FS9.)

Hi Tim,I don't think crossed controls work properly in XP (or in any other SIM for that matter), so probably adverse yaw and sideslip don't work either. I guess those characteristics are too far from the "normal" range of operation to worry about from a SIM developers POV.CheersBruce H (Oz)

Hi Bruce,I suspect you are right which would be a pity.Cross control flying, as I am sure you are aware, is a normal flight mode for many GA aircraft on approach. Accurate yaw modelling essential for incipient spin situations. Adverse yaw a reality in many similar aircraft and gliders. The modelling of them (and therefore the correct usage of rudder), would be invaluble in improving the basic training potential of the simulator.The only models to date that make a passable attempt are the RealAir Decathalon / SF260. I suspect that is due to Rob Youngs software work arounds rather than any specific attribute of FS9 code.Here's hoping I am wrong, TIM

Crosscontrols, sideslipping and uncoordinated flight work just fine on X-Plane - even on the default planes. Of course you will need separate controllers to manipulate rudder and aileron separately.It is entirely possible to bank X-Plane aircraft a few degrees, then stop the yaw with rudder - voila, you are in uncoordinated (crosscontrols) flight. This is not possible with any default aircraft in any version of MSFS.

Crosscontrols, sideslipping and uncoordinated flight work just fine on X-Plane - even on the default planes. Of course you will need separate controllers to manipulate rudder and aileron separately.It is entirely possible to bank X-Plane aircraft a few degrees, then stop the yaw with rudder - voila, you are in uncoordinated (crosscontrols) flight. This is not possible with any default aircraft in any version of MSFS.

Actually, it's just as possible, or perhaps not possible, as it is with X-Plane. I've demonstrated cross-controlled crosswind landings with the default MSFS Cessna 172 for years. That includes landing on one wheel. Rob Young models have been mentioned. In general they improved on the effect of "slipping"............meaning more rudder for more cross control. This is where the defaults in both X-Plane and MSFS generally lack. Not always enough rudder for effective slips..to maintain a track. However, of course in real life, we do run out of rudder at a point. But usually not as easy, as with the simulated ones. When it comes to simulated airplanes, for both sims........ much depends on the designer/programmer. I often get a bit dissatisfied, when the airplane can easily maintain runway heading after takeoff with to little, or no rudder input. I'm making my comments, due to what I've emphasized with bold in your reply. The biggest crock in flightsim land.........is that X-Plane is somehow superior across the board in flight dynamics...........especially out of the box. It simply is not, and never has been. I use both sims, but have always said, that the X-Plane edge in flight dynamics has always been nothing more than a myth........due to marketing. That said, there has been some pretty good models from both sims in the last few years.And of course, I do use pedals in addition to the stick, and fly real world aircraft, where rudder does indeed count........alot!L.Adamson

Sustained crosscontrolled flight is impossible with default MSFS planes, we had this discussion before. Sure, you can stop the yaw for a short time, but only while pushing more and more rudder. It is impossible to bank the default MSFS plane, even by just 5 degrees and stop the yawing tendency for an extended period of time like 5 minutes. Try it, everyone, and then see for yourself instead of believing me if you like.I will not enter into a general "which simulator is more realistic" general discussion. We can agree to disagree, I guess.But this one point - the way the rudder is supposed to work - is one that Microsoft has really gotten wrong. It is not a flaw in the general flight model of MSFS, as payware authors have overcome this, but for default planes it does not work realistically.Jan

Sustained crosscontrolled flight is impossible with default MSFS planes, we had this discussion before.

+1Marco

Sustained crosscontrolled flight is impossible with default MSFS planes, we had this discussion before.

I don't remember this discussion before...So, I just went through the proceedures with X-Plane 9, X-Plane 8, and my trusty RealAirs for FSX. X-Plane 9 (default 172) could hold a bit more roll angle than the FSX 172, and stay on track ..... before running out of rudder. But it's still less than the real thing. X-Plane 8 was awful. It would bobble back and forth, and even gain altitude. The RealAir (FS9/FSX) will do exactly as advertised. The RealAir claim to fame, is it's ability to slip with realism and percieved "feel". I just compared some of the better X-Plane payware offerings. The RealAir still has a more solid & precise feel during the slipping manuver. It does extremely well!L.Adamson

Hi folks,Thanks for the replies. (Remeber this IS NOT an X-PLane / FSX slagging match.)If it is assumed that we are lucky enough or mad enough to have invested in separate joystick/rudder controls the question still arises. Are sideslips and adverse yaw modelled in X-plane?I agree with a previous poster. It is perfectly possible to counteract to a degree yaw with aileron input giving a semblance of cross-controls. However the consequence of this action in my experience doesn't seem to be modelled; that is turnig a relatively slippery aerodynamic shape into a barn door with a concomitant increase in drag and in the approach mode dramatically increased rate of descent.TIM

However the consequence of this action in my experience doesn't seem to be modelled; that is turnig a relatively slippery aerodynamic shape into a barn door with a concomitant increase in drag and in the approach mode dramatically increased rate of descent.

The X-Plane does descend quite rapidly, without an increase in airspeed. Therefor, I'd say it DOES act somewhat like that barn door, you mention. Thank goodness, real airplanes are not just like barn doors.....in a slipping mode. :( L.Adamson

MSFS has a very limited flightmodel. This means each designer has to create their own physics.Very few are able to pull this off successfully.Here are the words of PMDGWhen working within the confines of the rather limited MSFS phyisics model, it is necessary to take some liberties in order to ensure that performance in the end, comes out well balanced.In other words, they spent 1000's of hours "hacking" FS to get ok results.Completely wrong and simplified ground effect model is another good example.This however doesn't mean X-Plane is perfect either...M

MSFS has a very limited flightmodel. This means each designer has to create their own physics.Very few are able to pull this off successfully.Here are the words of PMDGWhen working within the confines of the rather limited MSFS phyisics model, it is necessary to take some liberties in order to ensure that performance in the end, comes out well balanced.In other words, they spent 1000's of hours "hacking" FS to get ok results.Completely wrong and simplified ground effect model is another good example.This however doesn't mean X-Plane is perfect either...

To expand on that a bit...from the PMDG website:The flight model was designed and tuned to behave correctly within the somewhat limited physics model of MSFS. To balance the flight model so that it behaves correctly across the entire flight envelope, we spend months and months tuning, tweaking and adjusting everything from engine location to airfoil surface area, until we find a performance level that matches the book. This takes thousands of hours (and hundreds of cartons of cigarettes for Dr. Vaos). If you move the engines away from the location at which we have placed them, you affect MANY aspects of the performance of the airplane including: •Fuel flow scalars •Engine out moments •Localizer tracking with engine out •Cruise fuel flow performance •Ground handling with not all engines running When working within the confines of the rather limited MSFS phyisics model, it is necessary to take some liberties in order to ensure that performance in the end, comes out well balanced. We recognize that some folks think that anyone can program addons as complex as these but we assure you that it is much more difficult to do exceptionally well than you might believe. I'd say the same applies to X-Plane, also. Over the years, I've read testimonial after testimonial........how you just just have to input the correct dimensions & specs into X-Plane, and out hops the perfect flight model. Of course I know this is "bull" brought on by hype, because I fly these creations, and think........."your kidding right?" There is no doubt in my mind, that the majority of those people who claim this, have never flown real aircraft, or very little at best. I know that Morten is aware of the same, since I've read many pages of his X-Plane problem solving. In the end, it does take a lot of hands on experience to create models for either simulation. I'd have to still call the X-Plane model.........rather limited too. At least out of the box.L.Adamson

Neither XP or MSFS simulate side/forward slips accurately. Keeping in mind I was using XP8. It's just not modeled correctly. I frequently forward slip the Cub (real life) to get over some trees at the approach end of our 900' strip. I can tell you that by no means has any default/add on aircraft simulated this behavior accurately save for the Realair Champs. Even then it feels "funky".

Neither XP or MSFS simulate side/forward slips accurately. Keeping in mind I was using XP8. It's just not modeled correctly. I frequently forward slip the Cub (real life) to get over some trees at the approach end of our 900' strip. I can tell you that by no means has any default/add on aircraft simulated this behavior accurately save for the Realair Champs. Even then it feels "funky".

Of course it's possible in FSX. Suggest you e.g. download the latest Carenado C185 files from www.bushounder.com.The FDs have been finetuned with the help of 4 detailed questionnaires sent to real 185 pilots. With the large amount of data it wasn't too difficult to make the 185 slip like the real thing.In FSX you can finetune everything, like how much aileron you need with a full rudder slip, how high the ROD is, how much bank angle you need for a steady state slip, how far the fuselage swings back if you just let go of the rudder etc... I'm surprised that you mention the Realair Champs as I assume you noticed that expecially these are WAY too stable along the yaw axis.Back in the FSX beginnings slip and spin behaviour was difficult to achieve but that's long ago.There are many freeware planes that slip nicely in FSX like the Bücker 131 from Mr. Fischer (with the updated FDs from flightsim.com)

Of course it's possible in FSX. Suggest you e.g. download the latest Carenado C185 files from www.bushounder.com.The FDs have been finetuned with the help of 4 detailed questionnaires sent to real 185 pilots. With the large amount of data it wasn't too difficult to make the 185 slip like the real thing.In FSX you can finetune everything, like how much aileron you need with a full rudder slip, how high the ROD is, how much bank angle you need for a steady state slip, how far the fuselage swings back if you just let go of the rudder etc... I'm surprised that you mention the Realair Champs as I assume you noticed that expecially these are WAY too stable along the yaw axis.Back in the FSX beginnings slip and spin behaviour was difficult to achieve but that's long ago.There are many freeware planes that slip nicely in FSX like the Bücker 131 from Mr. Fischer (with the updated FDs from flightsim.com)

Of course it's possible. It's possible in any simulator with the correct programming.BTW, www.bushounder.com is a dead link.It's www.bushpounder.comThe site says it was tested by 1 real world pilot. Not pilots.They were beta tested by several people, one being a real world bush pilot with many hours in type.I might have to try those fixes. See how accurate they are.