Austin was RIGHT, and so is MS FLIGHT....

[dburne 2]

C'mon, give us just an hint! Puleeeeeze :-)

 

Lol, should not be too hard to figure out...

[Glynn 405]

I also agree that in x-plane, both the left bank and the right bank, due to prop effects, are excessive, but, there is a possible explanation laying on the fact that the slipstream model in x-plane is either not present at all or not completely modeled.

 

Should prop slipstream and the way it asymmetrically hits the vertical stab/rudder be fully modeled and the yawing moment it creates would sum to and contribute to make not so excessive/prevalent the torque effect on x-planes... Just my way of trying to explain, of course....

 

Hello

But the whole argument in favour of X-Planes supposedly superior flight modelling is that it is based on modelling the results of airflow meeting airframe.

[FSX4Life 2]

Did you just say retard? lol

 

On that note, whenever I manually land an Airbus in FSx it keeps saying "Don't think, Don't think" which confuses me to no end, but not nearly as confusing as when I successfully land and the plane calls me a "retard" ^_^

 

Seriously, flight's handling of props was better than previous MSFS sims, but keep in mind that MSFS had to handle a broader scope of aircraft at launch than Flight. It's easy to have thoroughly faithful GA single prop physics and handling when you only have those types of aircraft to model, but when on a strict schedule you need everything from gliders to jumbo jets to be flyable you have to compromise on simpler physics and handling.

 

X-plane isn't the best example in the sense that they don't use the almighty .air file, the atmosphere is simulated realistically so that as long as a model obeys the physically laws of reality, it will fly and preform just as the genuine article would. The .air file system MSFS uses governs how the aircraft is supposed to perform and the program itself has to be able to read the air file and correctly implement it's values

 

Putting it simply...

X-Plane: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang won't fly

MSFS: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang will fly and can go mach 3 at 80,000 feet if you really wanted.

[FLEX1978 373]

Funny, since don't sink or 'don't think' as you put it is down to a loss of of altitude on the the take off phase, not landing..

 

Anyway, the reason I posted.. Do you guys honestly think the data exists to create realistic flight dynamics for props up to airliners on desktop sims? Do you actually think the data exists despite all the hype certain developers would like you to believe?

 

Do you know that multi million dollar sims are unable to recreate accurate flight dynamics outside certain envelopes?

 

What makes you guys think that x plane, flight, fs9 or FSX is any good for actually keeping proficient with hand flying skills or actually does a half decent job at simulating flight? Do some of you use it to keep sharp? If so I find that scary

[dmaher 0]

FSX in fact does have a torque_on_roll effect. And if I understand this is the effect you're seeing. I think FSX's flight model is still underrated myself. I see Flight as addressing some of the problems FSX does have. One simple way to significantly improve upon the FSX model is to increase the resolution of the flight tables. In the worst cases an FSX table is defined with as few as 4 or 5 points on a curve. If we had more points we could do much more. There are a few of what I'd call bugs in the FSX model. They can often be worked around using simConnect scripts... these are things like CS prop drag and the effects of altitude on power. But I completely agree, I’d rather have Flight’s flight model over FSX.

 

Rob, I think from my POV you’re blurring the line between a flight training simulator and an aero dynamic design simulator (and we sort of want both on our desktop). But they are different. You don’t use a design simulator in real-time…or for training (one thing it is used for is generating tables). In real life training some of these effects are hard to spot even when they are there...and that goes for the sim too. Danny

[MdMax 233]

Well, guess what?, ELITE models this effect, X-Plane 9 and now 10 models it too, and I have argued with Austin about it, but, BUT!!!! MS FLIGHT in it's NEW/redesigned flight dynamics model, also models this effect.

 

Very interesting ! I'll have to test Flight again for this yaw effect. Do they now also model propwash, like in

,

?

[LAdamson 240]

Very interesting ! I'll have to test Flight again for this yaw effect. Do they now also model propwash, like in

,

?

 

Many aircraft for FS9 & FSX also model propwash, etc (p-factor, torque, prop spiral slipstream) . In fact, if we go way back to Microsoft's Combat 1 & 2, which were released just after FS98.........they were heavy on the prop wash modeling. Even for the horizontal tail surfaces on the takeoff roll. At a point (apparently to improve fps) they removed part of that programming. It's been up to third party programmers to add it back in. Some do very well.

 

Prop wash and turning tendencies, are the first thing I check with any aircraft model, that should exhibit the trait. I've found good and bad within MSFS & X-Plane. I never really got into Flight..... to know.

[dmaher 0]

Yeah, FSX does still model propwash too...it is a rudder and elevator parameter. What I believe changed (from FS9 to FSX) was the low end performance of the prop itself. I found editing the prop low-end slightly brings back the old propwash without adverse effects. Otherwise the elevator propwash coefficient must be set so high it causes problems at flight speeds.

[jcomm 5,882]

If you find the time to test the right bank/yaw effect when throttle is..... pulled back to idle .... :-), please make sure you disable mouse control mode because otherwise FLIGHT's auto-trimming will jump in ....

 

Do they now also model propwash,

 

Yep!

[Gibbage 199]

BTW, the Maul's engine is canted. I think it points something like 4 degrees left or something like that. Its modeled visually, just very hard to see. It helps reduce the effects your talking about, but does not eliminate it. If you want to see an extreme example of this engine canting, look at a real life Cessna 208. Those engines are so crooked! I thought there was something wrong with the blueprints when I studied them!!!

[jcomm 5,882]

BTW, the Maul's engine is canted.

 

Oops! But, is it also modeled that way in the FM/AIR files or just visually? Because this would certainly explain even easier the righ bank/yaw tendency when the throttle is reduced (eheheh).

 

On previous versions of MSFS canting of engines is not possible, but the engine axis although still parallel to the aircraft longitudinal axis, can be placed to the right/left to simulate the effects of cant... Maybe in MS FLIGHT the cant became finally possible (?)

 

From what I was able to see in the "AIR files" inside of the 'pak's, there was no can't, at least in the Cub... but I may easily have missed it...

[Gibbage 199]

Oops! But, is it also modeled that way in the FM/AIR files or just visually? Because this would certainly explain even easier the righ bank/yaw tendency when the throttle is reduced (eheheh).

 

On previous versions of MSFS canting of engines is not possible, but the engine axis although still parallel to the aircraft longitudinal axis, can be placed to the right/left to simulate the effects of cant... Maybe in MS FLIGHT the cant became finally possible (?)

 

From what I was able to see in the "AIR files" inside of the 'pak's, there was no can't, at least in the Cub... but I may easily have missed it...

 

I dont know if its possible in the game engine to simulate it or not. I never got into that part of the engine itself, but it would not surprise me. Its amazing the technology at the core of Flight that will never be used. They truly did build Flight for the long run, and it only saw a fraction of its potential realized.

[jcomm 5,882]

Its amazing the technology at the core of Flight that will never be used. They truly did build Flight for the long run, and it only saw a fraction of its potential realized.

 

MS FLIGHT, what else?...

 

Maybe one day we will get it back ;-)

[RoboRay 126]

Very interesting ! I'll have to test Flight again for this yaw effect. Do they now also model propwash, like in

,

?

 

You can pick the Cub's tail up when stationary on the ground with the brakes set using the elevator, so I guess it does.