The P-40! Released At Microsoft Flight.

[Glynn]

Just got it, really enjoying the model and the physics :-)

 

Hello

Can you really judge the physics flying from outside with the mouse ?

[AllFiredUp]

Hello

Can you really judge the physics flying from outside with the mouse ?

 

I use my Saitek X52 Pro throttle and stick.

 

Ground handling seems right on, it's a bit harder on the ground than the Zero and Mustang with their wide-spread gear. And there is an inside cockpit view, just that you aren't seeing the cockpit, but you are flying from the pilot viewpoint. What little I flew of it, seemed about right, like the Accusim A2A P-40 (a very good aircraft and model right there), but I like flying in MS Flight better (much smoother).

 

Will do some more flying over the weekend and check how accurate it is compared to the A2A P-40.

 

The one thing I have noticed with the tail draggers, and it's probably a model animation issue is that their tail wheel doesn't turn. The models themselves look very good, very detailed. The tail wheel not turning should be corrected. See there's my negative statement.

[Oracle427]

Mad dog. Why would a cockpit be necessary to determine if the physics are correct?

 

You can still determine a lot about the performance from the hud.

 

Rate of climb

vx vy vs

performance in different configs and altitudes

top speed

Stall speed

 

you don't need a panel to confirm these details against published data.

[frankla]

It's really difficult to collect so many negative comments. Probably only our Italian politicians are capable of similar brilliant results

 

A.

 

 

:LMAO: Thanks for the laugh A. I really needed some cheering today

[NWarty]

The P40 has actually caused chaos over at the beta forums. People have started calling other people names and other things that are unacceptable. Even simple questions as "When is the next deluxe aircraft?" have caused people to have a massive argument. I do not want to point out names, but there is one person name Emmeth over at the forums is trying to persuade people from getting away from Flight. How is he doing it? Saying that Flight is massive crap and saying that there will never be any new deluxe aircraft for Flight. Of course, we all know this is not true.

 

Like a few people over here have said before, these aircraft have been planned before the release of Flight. Patience and Optimism are key here.

 

Also, talking about weather themes have caused it to be deleted and a new one started. I was like "#####???" How does a simple talk about weather themes cause it to be deleted? Turns out it was Emmeth again. It seems like to me he just looks at screenshots and videos and says it is crap. How do I know this? Because during the beginning days of Flight, people only posted using the "Fair Weather" theme. No way to confirm why his actions are like that though.

 

If I'm right, Delafina probably banned this person from posting on the forums. Good thing to do so, because he is totally Anti-Flight.

 

Just to summarize, Flight is a sim that requires patience and optimism. Being that negative towards Flight has no effect, especially if the majority of the people using Flight actually like it.

 

Well you know what? I too lost my posting priviledges over there this afternoon and I didn't even come CLOSE to what "Emmeth" was posting, nor did I curse. My criticism of them was harsh regarding the lack of communication. If they want a cheerleading squad, that's their perogative.

 

[FrankFasi]

That's one heck of a cheerleading squad. :Just Kidding:

[Guest russellbdavis]

The simulation market is puny compared to the rest of the gaming world. I believe MS did the right move by entering MS Flight into a new market. 3rd party vendors were probably making more money off of the FSX code than MS sold FS for. So, I'm guessing that's why MS sold the code to Lockheed and ventured into this new territory. Good for them. But I find it sad that people like to tell MS what to do with themselves or how to build a simulator. This is akin to an "armchair quarterback."

 

I for one, have never believed the rhetoric about FS being a "dead" franchise as claimed by Joshua Howard. That is nonsense. Why would MS hire a 2d game developer to lead a team of unproven workers in the opposite direction of a "dead" franchise? At last report I heard, there had been over 50 million copies of FS sold worldwide in its history. That is no puny franchise, quite the contrary. That IS the reason MS decided to go after this market. Its one of, if not THE most successful franchise in the history of MS. If FS wasn't dead before, it won't be much longer before it truly is with the direction FLIGHT is headed. That's my opinion.

 

And I think ESP is an SDK that any developer can use to create a simulation. It's not proprietary to Lockheed, or anyone else. As an MSDN subscriber, I have ESP here that I have been toying with. I am welcome to build whatever simulation I like with it. All you need is the ESP SDK and Visual Studio.

[LAdamson]

Mad dog. Why would a cockpit be necessary to determine if the physics are correct?

 

You can still determine a lot about the performance from the hud.

 

Rate of climb

vx vy vs

performance in different configs and altitudes

top speed

Stall speed

 

you don't need a panel to confirm these details against published data.

 

I'll often use an exterior side view to check flight dynamics. I'll pull power back in stages, and see how realistic the angle of attack appears. I'll also see if the model buries it's rear in the runway for short/softfield takeoffs....as they often do.

[Guest Antlab]

:LMAO: Thanks for the laugh A. I really needed some cheering today

 

Glad to be useful sometimes

 

A.

[Nathan3219]

Hmm... a no VC payware plane? Wow... I guess I'll stick with FSX.

[sibtiger]

Hmm... a no VC payware plane? Wow... I guess I'll stick with FSX.

 

What is so surprising? I'm still waiting for CaptainSim to release a VC for their 777. It's been a year since the exterior model was released and still no VC or panel.

[doggie015]

What is so surprising? I'm still waiting for CaptainSim to release a VC for their 777. It's been a year since the exterior model was released and still no VC or panel.

The point that they are TRYING to make which you may have missed is that even FREEWARE birds for FSX have at least SOME form of cockpit view! Why is microsoft changing that by making cockpitless planes that would not even be thought about by every sane aircraft developer being sold for money here when they would be free in FSX?

[sibtiger]

The point that they are TRYING to make which you may have missed is that even FREEWARE birds for FSX have at least SOME form of cockpit view! Why is microsoft changing that by making cockpitless planes that would not even be thought about by every sane aircraft developer being sold for money here when they would be free in FSX?

 

I don't understand what you are saying. Who is the "they" you are referring to? What cockpitless "commercial" planes are free for FSX? If it is a freeware, of course it is free. MS did not change anything. How do you know that MS will not be releasing a cockpit later on as a deluxe package?

[RoboRay]

How do you know that MS will not be releasing a cockpit later on as a deluxe package?

 

If they had any plans to offer a cockpit in the future for those planes, they would likely say so to encourage the hold-outs to go ahead and buy the planes.

[sibtiger]

But in my opinion its still far away from standards set by Aerofly FS.

 

What standards did AeroflyFS set anyway? Apart from nice bloom in daytime and damage modeling, everything else is either on par or far inferior to Flight. There is no working radio or nav equipment, no AI or ATC, not to mention it is daytime only flying. I have yet to see it working at dawn or dusk, or any weather other than "good weather". Ground is purely photoreal with only trees and a few 3D buildings in isolated regions. Other areas including cities are completely flat. As it stands now, it is even less of a complete simulator than Flight is.

 

they would likely say so to encourage the hold-outs to go ahead and buy the planes.

 

Actually if they did say so, people would have held out even more and wait for the cockpit to be released before buying the complete package. And that means even less revenue for MS.