I decided to start this separate thread because, as someone noted very well, the discussion about the BET vs Table-based and other aspects was, somehow, going on not under the correct topic...

 

I will start by saying I am not using X-Plane10 now (nor the other platform that competes with it...). I decided to give it and me a break... I will wait until I see something really worth the try in terms of fixing those aspects you already know I usually fight for... There is a strong chance of things changing course in the right direction, so I ** still ** hope...., at least in as far as X-Plane10 is concerned, because we all know there are no miracles that can do better for MSFS than what already has been done by the best 3pds producing for that platform, with the exceptional cases of wetaher modelling and use of external flight dynamics models, which both can still bring ( good ) news in the future...

 

But... Murmur, on that other thread:

 

Among the release notes of the latest DCS P-51 release, I read: "Control stick and rudder pedals movement are now limited due to hinge moments."

 

makes a very good point, and one of the "features" that is available in Plane-Maker but I never really used.

 

The way some aircraft react (independently of RoGs) to control inputs is way to abrupt, as if no hinge forces existed.

 

I tried to explore that section of PM, but didn't really find out the answer to - does playing around with these settings help?

 

Indeed in that other sim Murmur quotes, one of the latest patches included further refinements to the hinge moments on control surfaces, and although I didn't use the previous versions, most users noticed the difference, and I myself, after first having had some trouble finding myself around a completely new type of control input sensibility, was soon able to perform very well :-)))

 

Hinge forces are certainly important in the modelling of an aircraft in X-Plane10. I don't recall if the Sundowner or the dc-3 (together with the IL-14 from another author, the Seneca from Carenado, the single most perfect models I ever used in X-Plane10, and Morten's Archer too, of course...) make use of those parameters (?)

 

Just one more thing....

 

Instead of turning this thread into another X-Plane10 vs FSX one, which is indeed useless, it would be great to concentrate solely on X-Plane10 features / problems. I believe most of us want X-Plane10 to become better. Both are nice simulation platforms, and people who can use more than one sim at a time certainly profit from them all, but this is about X-Plane10 itself...

 

Of course if some aspect from another simulation platform can contribute to explain what we think needs update in X-Plane10, I don't see any problem in referring to it, provided it is not stated as: "X-plane10 is piece of crack when it come to... and my ... does it better" or the way around...

I'm a new user of XP after trying the demo for several months. Here's my question.

 

How does XP get FAA certification with the reported deficiencies? Is the Professional version different than the Desktop?

The requirements for FAA aproval are rather sparse in terms of flight dynamics, and X-Plane, just as many other simulators, perfectly suite their requirements in that specific area.

 

http://www.medallion...PA_Overview.pdf

 

https://www.flyelite...01/ac61-126.pdf

 

 

I am also sure that aircraft designed with good knowledge of the available (and provbably some internal) tools can perfectly achieve high standrads in terms of quality / plausibility. LR offers dev for specific platforms at much higher prices than the "street" version of X-Plane10...

The way some aircraft react (independently of RoGs) to control inputs is way to abrupt, as if no hinge forces existed.

 

I tried to explore that section of PM, but didn't really find out the answer to - does playing around with these settings help?

 

In the Standard->Control Geometry menu there are 2 tabs of interest:

 

1) "Phase Out" tab.

 

In this tab, you can phase-out the max deflection of the different flight controls between a range of airspeed (KIAS). There is a fixed max control deflection below and above this range of airspeed, while the max deflection is linearly phased out between the two speeds.

 

These settings may fit the behaviours of hydraulic/fly-by.wire controls as found e.g. on airliners, but obviously with it you cannot model with a 100% realism the normal (non servo-assisted) flight controls (aerodynamic forces are not linear with KIAS). You can approximate the real behaviour though.

 

2) "Trim & Speed" tab.

 

In this tab, at the bottom of the screen ("Control Deflection Speeds and Limits"), you can set a max control deflection speed. In this case as well, this is perfect to emulate the behaviour of hydraulic flight controls, less so for the normal, non servo-assisted flight controls. You can use this settings to approximate the inertia and damping of them, though.

 

There's also a third tab labelled "Control Forces". AFAIK this is used to simulate control forces and damping when using force-feedback flight controls (I think it is meant for professional, force feedback simulator flight controls, not the usual consumer force-feedback joysticks). AFAIK this tab has no effect at all (unless of course you have professional force feedback flight controls )

 

Just one more thing....

 

Instead of turning this thread into another X-Plane10 vs FSX one, which is indeed useless, it would be great to concentrate solely on X-Plane10 features / problems. I believe most of us want X-Plane10 to become better. Both are nice simulation platforms, and people who can use more than one sim at a time certainly profit from them all, but this is about X-Plane10 itself...

 

Absolutely agree! Believe me, I am as concerned as you by X-Plane FM imperfections and eager to discuss them in a non-hostile environment.

Great Murmur! Those are the tabs I looked and tried for a while, just as the artificial stability to tweak a few models and get rid of the excessive torque (also what Morten uses in his Archer, for instance...). It worked fine as far as the Artif. Stab. goes, but playing with 1) and 2) in your post above didn't seem to give me what I was really expecting... because, just as you described, it's meant for more sophisticated control systems and not so good for instance to try and tweak the default AS-K21 :-/

 

Again, I should try to do a lot more of testing & design myself :-)

 

Thx!

because we all know there are no miracles that can do better for MSFS than what already has been done by the best 3pds producing for that platform, with the exceptional cases of wetaher modelling and use of external flight dynamics models, which both can still bring ( good ) news in the future...

 

I don't know why people keep making statements like this when developers like A2A and Real Air prove they can with everyone of their releases! Just in the last couple of days Johan Dee's and Peter Dowson has released an update to the sim1.dll file that improves FSX Ground friction characteristics. In fact Peter is planning on incorporating it into his FSUIPC utility. We all have to remember both sims are built with an open architecture. Each time a deveoper creates a DLL or an external application linked to FSX or Plugins in the case of X-Plane, they are expanding the capabilities of that sim to more then what the sim was originally designed to do. As long as there are 3PD's supporting them, niether sim is going away anytime soon!!

How does XP get FAA certification with the reported deficiencies? Is the Professional version different than the Desktop?

 

Even commercial simulators costing millions of dollars have their deficiencies to the point that hundreds of crashes over the past couple of decades have been blamed on simulators reinforcing bad habits in pilots because of unrealistic flight modeling. FAA certification is more concerned with mimicking realistic flight operations and doesn't really have any rules governing flight dynamics.

I don't know why people keep making statements like this when developers like A2A and Real Air prove they can with everyone of their releases!

 

Yes, I know, I got it too ;-) You're right... sorry :-/ I meant, no further development from the original crew (MSFS)... Many are even using ESP with their own proprietary external Flight Dynamics models too. I believe even LM, out of the P3d Project, and I know for sure ELITE does it with at least two of their products...).

 

A2A's P-51 Civil is astounding. I wish someone could produce such a good replica of the P-51 for X-Plane10.... ( GoranM???? )

 

Didn't know about PDowson's initiative regarding the ground friction bug in FSX, ported from fs9 ... Oops! HEhe... every civil simulator suffers from Ground Friction... either too much, or too less... Puzzling :-)

Didn't know about PDowson's initiative regarding the ground friction bug in FSX, ported from fs9 :-)))) HEhe... every civil simulator suffers from Ground Friction... either too much, or too less... Puzzling :-)

 

This is the thread, look in the last couple of pages

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/392772-inherent-flaw-of-fsx-to-give-too-much-ground-friction/page__st__75#entry2537398

Great Murmur! Those are the tabs I looked and tried for a while, just as the artificial stability to tweak a few models and get rid of the excessive torque (also what Morten uses in his Archer, for instance...). It worked fine as far as the Artif. Stab. goes, but playing with 1) and 2) in your post above didn't seem to give me what I was really expecting... because, just as you described, it's meant for more sophisticated control systems and not so good for instance to try and tweak the default AS-K21 :-/

 

Mmm... If you want to limit e.g. ASk-2

Great Murmur! Those are the tabs I looked and tried for a while, just as the artificial stability to tweak a few models and get rid of the excessive torque (also what Morten uses in his Archer, for instance...). It worked fine as far as the Artif. Stab. goes, but playing with 1) and 2) in your post above didn't seem to give me what I was really expecting... because, just as you described, it's meant for more sophisticated control systems and not so good for instance to try and tweak the default AS-K21 :-/

 

Mmm... If you want to limit e.g. ASK-21 control authority at high speed, you could try phasing out the controls deflections above a certain speed.

 

To add inertia/damping in the movement of flight controls, increase the "deflection time" values. This will not be function of airpseed though.

 

I _think_ some others flight simulators natively model the inertia/varying max deflection of flight controls: IIRC, in the old IL-2/Pacific Fighters series, and in Condor Soaring, [edit: don't know in DCS] you'll notice the movements of flight controls (stick, surfaces) have a damped motion, and possibly varying max deflection. If you yank your joystick side to side, the virtual one will not perfectly follow its movements, and those will be filtered out.

 

They're not "open" simulators though, so they can (and have to) focus a lot on the flight model and characteristics of their native aircrafts. For X-Plane this would be a little harder to implement, although IMO it could be done!

edit: don't know in DCS

 

Yes, as a matter of fact I tested it yesterday :-)

It would be great to have this in x-plane10 too. I will try to "play" with those PM settings. It's obvious that on non-commercial versions of X-Plane10, without proper hardware with feedback, we are capable of control inputs that only contribute to make X-Plane10's flight dynamics sometimes look "silly"...

want to see awful flight modeling, go fly a just about any $20 million CAT D simulator. The worst ground friction imaginable, its like the runway is solid ice. Then test out 30kt cross wind landings and see how exaggerated the crab angles are, and when you drop a wing down and rudder the nose back to the centerline expect an almost silly result.

 

Yet some of you think siting behind a cheesy PC with a plastic joystick and sub $100 software package will be a near perfect rendition of natural flight.... :rolleyes:

want to see awful flight modeling, go fly a just about any $20 million CAT D simulator

 

Well, not the CAE I have had the chance to play with at TAP's (Air Portugal) trainning Center here at LPPT :-)

 

The A320 I took for a 1hr ride, including the gorgeous scenerey of LPPT and LPMA, and the landings at LPMA with gusting winds made me think this all is soooo different...

 

There was some familiarity with the by then MSFS Airbus models I was using, and PS1 744...