Flight Dynamics

[ZG862]

Pretty true.  I flew C152s for my flight training and there was one that would always want to wing-over on a power-on stall.  The others were pretty docile.  I remember reading a thread on the C210 that said that every one of them was different.  People also don't take into account that, in the real world, gauges can be off, read high or low.  Things are more pristine in our FSX world than they are in the real world.

 

Gregg

 

Hi Gregg.

 

Also trained in 152s and agree that no 2 are the same and none perform exactly as the POH. Mind you, I don't think I've ever flown in ISA conditions.

 

I think there are 2 separate issues here. One is that as Ed says, the performance data for most aircraft are not in the public domain and even if they are, sim aircraft designers don't necessarily remain faithful to them in their implementations.

 

Second (and I think this was the OP's point), the underlying algorithm is a simplified representation of what is happening in the real world. It's quite understandable given the processing limitations of the PCs for which it was conceived and is not a dig at anyone. The question is, what bits of the algorithm could be improved?

 

Z

[motoadve]

What year was MS Flight simulator released? 2006.

 

8 years ago, I think LM should update or improve the flight dynamics.

In 2009 I started flying to get my PPL, that is when I stopping using FSX, I was soo dissapointed at how different was from a real plane. I took X Plane , better for the landings but kind of strange torque.

Now with more than 1,000hrs and flying 3 to 4 times per week.

Prepar 3D Im enjoying thanks to the A2As and smooth and nice scenery weather.Fun and immersive with this planes.

 

A2A 172 and Cherokee are real good, but still could be better.

 

Carenado eye candy but I hate their flight model, very easy and simple.

[Gregg_Seipp]

Carenado eye candy but I hate their flight model, very easy and simple.

 

Seriously?  I love their C337...flies very much like a RW C182 except, of course, heavier.  Their Malibu Mirage is really nice too.  Also, like I mentioned, if you put the Realair C172 FDE on the A2A C172 and do slow flight or stalls?...really nice!  In fact, comparing the A2A FDE and the RealAir one is quite interesting.

 

 

The question is, what bits of the algorithm could be improved?

 

The answer for me is turbulence.  While the air is calm, it seems real enough.  Yes, airplanes do fly on rails in the RW (mostly above the lowest cloud layer.)

The turbulence needs work, though...especially the chop.  I like flying with some light turbulence on...especially touch & gos   In the summertime, thermals do catch you all over the place...air moving up and down.  When you enter a mass of air moving in another direction, it's often smoother, less noticable than depicted in the sim...either up and down or from the side...subtle.  Also, and importantly, we need air moving around mountains and through passes.  The chop is ridiculous. ASN might be able to push the envelop there and, perhaps, P3D can help.

[jcomm]

Unfortunately I never had the chance to experiment with any of Bernt Stole models, and I quited FSX and P3D a while ago, although I am now experimenting with FSX, P3Dv1.4 and XP10 for the visuals component only.

 

I heard the best about the quality of Bernt's work, as well as Rob ( Real Air ) and the A2As, and as a RealAir and A2A user, I can only say that it was always a delight to use their models, but, when I pick the p51d or the fw190, or the uh-1h in DCS World, it is just a different sensation, something that cannot compete with any of the civil flightsims around IMO. Since P3D is work in progress, I surely hope we can see some promising news in this area for future versions.

 

Many Moons ago, when Ron Freimuth was still with us, I spent excellent moments exchanging info on MSFS's FDM, changing / editing airfiles, correcting bugs here and there. I was able to test a few default aircraft airfiles tweaked by Ron, and they surely felt different.

 

But when he wanted to model some specific behavior, like for instance in the T-37, he had to make use of non-normal tweaks, tricks, ...  In X-Plane10, for instance, tricks can be used to overcome the overdone prop / engine torque effects, etc... We can have good aircraft in FSX, and hence in P3D, but like many others, I do think that a next step would be to create a better / new flight dynamics engine for future versions of Prepar3d.

[ZG862]

Hi Jcomm. What would you like to see improved in a new FDE?

 

Z

[vololiberista]

 

The answer for me is turbulence.  While the air is calm, it seems real enough.  Yes, airplanes do fly on rails in the RW (mostly above the lowest cloud layer.)

The turbulence needs work, though...especially the chop.  I like flying with some light turbulence on...especially touch & gos   In the summertime, thermals do catch you all over the place...air moving up and down.  When you enter a mass of air moving in another direction, it's often smoother, less noticable than depicted in the sim...either up and down or from the side...subtle.  Also, and importantly, we need air moving around mountains and through passes.  The chop is ridiculous. ASN might be able to push the envelop there and, perhaps, P3D can help.

Have you tried changing the cfg file?

Look for TurbulenceScale= and increase the number. I have 1.5

and also look for DisableTurbulence= it should be 0

[Gregg_Seipp]

 

 

Have you tried changing the cfg file?

Look for TurbulenceScale= and increase the number. I have 1.5

and also look for DisableTurbulence= it should be 0

 

No...it works.  I just think it needs to be more fluid (less abrupt) and more dynamic and responsive (in clouds and to terrain). 

[jcomm]

Hi Jcomm. What would you like to see improved in a new FDE?

 

Z

 

- Rotary wing Flight Dynamics

- Prop effects modeling

- Correction of the core bugs in reciprocating engines ( such as the well known leaning bug ), as well as of some basic modeling of CS props, etc...

- Additional engine types modeling with associated properties that could be used to bring their model as close as possible to real performance, if info available...

- A working turn  & slip ( basic ) instrument, with plausible ball physics...

- and many many other things :-), like unlimited ( theoretically ) number of control / lift generation  surfaces, asymmetric wing and engine designs, combination of engine different engine types, most of these already possible in X-Plane for instance...

 

Weather is already very well done in MSFS / P3D, specially when excellent products like ASN are used, but some additional modeling of the atmosphere would be welcomed.

 

In the scenery area, I would really like to have sloped runways / taxiways. In MS FLIGHT we could land on sloped terrain and it worked very convincingly, if I recall...

I would also like to have all of the navdata indep of the scenery files.

[WarpD]

Navdata can't be completely independent, for many, many reasons... the primary one of which is that all of that data is paid for and licensed and thus requires protection.

 

I know... most of you think everything's free... but, it's not.

 

As for the jcomm video... as each of view it and accept it... let me ask you a simple question. Can you get that to happen in your sim? I have tried, repeatedly, to get that behavior to happen with the Extra 300S in a hammerhead stall. What happens for me is the aircraft's forward velocity goes to 0... and then the ailerons lose any authority and the aircraft ceases rotations and falls over into a nose-down attitude.

 

I suspect jcomm dialed the realism settings waaay back to arcade mode and then shot that video. Bet he can't get it to behave that way with realism settings at 100%.

[jcomm]

Nope Ed,

 

full realism.

 

Been able to replicate the same behavior, for instance, with some of the most acclaimed ( and certainly excellent ) add-ons for FSX ...

 

BTW, this particular bug, as well as the leaning bug on prop aircraft ( asphirated ), the ball bug, the poor CS prop modeling, were ported to MS FLIGHT, although MS FLIGHT certainly had an additional internal variables that were responsible for some interesting  effects not modeled before.

 

I don't see what making navdata independent from scenery can put away commercial interests? Products sold as navdata updated could still work perfectly. It is actually how it's done in Flight Gear and X-Plane?

 

My present sim are actually 4 different sims, that I was forced to use after the "dismay" with FSX and XP10 - DCS World, IL2 BOS, Rise of Flight and Aerowinx PSX. I didn't try such maneuvers in PSX, but I did try many in DCS 's p51d, and on some of the il2  ww2 prop fighters, and they behaved very plausibly.

[Gregg_Seipp]

In the scenery area, I would really like to have sloped runways / taxiways. In MS FLIGHT we could land on sloped terrain and it worked very convincingly, if I recall...

 

 

Not to sidetrack the thread but, have to agree with this entirely.  I have two of the Orbx England grass strips with sloping runways and they are fun to fly.  Nice to look down the runway and see it.  My instructor used to take me to a glider park that was on the top of a hill and make me do soft field takeoffs.  You couldn't even see the other end of the runway when you started roll.  I despised that place.  :Whew:

 

Gregg

 

EDIT: Here's the view of the runway at Compton...

 

[WarpD]

Nope Ed,

 

full realism.

 

Been able to replicate the same behavior, for instance, with A2A's p51d....

 

I don't see what making navdata independent from scenery can put away commercial interests? Products sold as navdata updated could still work perfectly. It is actually how it's done in Flight Gear and X-Plane?

Then why won't my Extra fly that way? I still question your sim settings. All things being equal (same software)... I should be able to spin forever at the top of a hammerhead just like you. Since I can't... then all things are not equal (something different in software).

 

Because the data that is in the sim is licensed. It's not free, it never will be free.

 

I can't speak for the other two sims, but I know the 'nuts and bolts' of this one and I am telling you... it can not be done without violating a license or two.

[Gregg_Seipp]

Because the data that is in the sim is licensed. It's not free, it never will be free.

 

Couldn't you buy it and update it?  I mean, I know it's all a mess in FSX/P3D...but isn't it feasible that a sim could be made to do that? 

[WarpD]

To separate the nav data itself from the core scenery would require a complete replacement of the entire scenery system in the sim. All of it, from the ground up (pun intended). Everything you currently own for scenery would be worthless. Everything that currently defines the efficiency of scenery storage (and FS has an amazingly efficient storage system considering the size of the database) would be tossed into the garbage.

 

Then the sim would get released with no data because I can assure you that no data provider will allow Lockheed-Martin to release their commercial product unprotected. Just isn't going to happen.

[jcomm]

Ed,

 

at the top of the ... almost... hammerhead, fully cross your controls, and pull back on the manche. That's how i did it, in the default Extra, and other well known ( top ) commercial add-ons ...

 

Regarding the navdata I accept the hint that due to legal / license limitations it would be difficult to make it differently...