Interesting thread. When I compare my R/L flight experience in a C172, most GA aircraft have an issue with pitch attitude. In the C172 that I have flown, the pitch attitude is the most stable if trimmed correctly, and while additional pitch input is required in turns (especially steep ones), it's not required as early in the turn and as much in the real thing as in FSX. Also a similar comment when it comes to power changes- the nose responds almost immediately to seek the speed that the aircraft is trimmed to. Of course, if the a/c isn't trimmed, all bets are off.

 

It would be great to see the same thing in FSX, I think of this every time I make a turn. Even at standard rate, the VSI goes more negative and the IAS increases almost immediately in FSX, which is not my R/L experience. There's a reason why we use standard rate turns in instrument flying.

 

I assume this is all related to the above topic of trade-offs being made with tables and programming which I don't understand, but it sure would be cool to fix it.

 

Thanks, Bruce.

 

Bruce,

 

The only way it could be fixed is for someone to program back in all the basic variables and mathematics in the flight dynamics. Lockheed Martin went and did a fairly significant series of improvement in this area but I am not privvied with the details, nor would likely understand it should the software engineers at LM try to tell me! LOL!!

 

But, even if all these missing aspects of flight dynamics were incorporated, there would still be another vital component missing. Even the most advanced force feedback controllers cannot replicate the actual dynamic resistance of control surfaces that arise from changes in flight configuration before these forces are trimmed out as well as the increase in control surface forces caused by wind resistance over the control surfaces themselves. Then, you have the effect of g-loads on the body which change the entire way your body senses such things as steep turns, and other maneuvers such as loops, rolls, chandelles, lazy eights, etc....

 

Frankly, I have been impressed as to what the professional FDE coders have already been able to achieve given the limitations they have to work with. So, while I perfectly understand the desires expressed for more fidelity, the simply truth is I think much of what folks rightly criticize today are things very unlikely to find correction. In other words, I think folks should enjoy what they have and appreciate the hard work of so many people who spent incredible hours to dig down deep and find out all the tricks available.

 

Cheers,

 

Ken

Hi Ken,

 

Thanks for your reply, and I totally agree with your comments about appreciating the great work that a lot of people do for us in FSX. I know nothing about FSX aircraft design, so try not to comment on something that I can't change, but got a bit off track in this thread. :)

 

By the way, I have noticed that this pitch attitude "issue" is not just in FSX, but also in Elite, and the Frasca sim that we have at our flight club. It kind of fascinates me how that could be, other than a simple verticle lift vector analysis that might be common to all sim models. If I had the time and the talent plus the tools I'm sure would be required, this would be something I would love to try and change. However, as you correctly point out, there are so many independent and inter-dependent forces acting on a vehicle such as an aircraft that it may just be too hard to get our heads around.

 

Thanks, Bruce.