New Sim - Best Flight Dynamics?

[ZG862 1]

I would say give me an aircraft which is flyable when I purchase a sim,  

 

 

BET = Blade Element Theory 

 

I share your sentiment but there's a lot of room for interpretation on what "flyable" means. I can take the default FSX Cessna around the circuit and get it back on the ground without destroying its virtual landing gear but I have to do a lot of controlling that wouldn't go on in the real thing. Arguably, it's "flyable", just not exhibiting realistic flight dynamics. Some of that is FDE, some the aircraft parameters.

 

Thanks for the deacronymistification btw! B)

 

Z

[ZG862 1]

I'm with "Z".

 

I'm with Z because indeed the absence of proper force feedback simulation in our simmer controllers is probably one of the worst limitations the use of a flight sim presents when it comes to realistic reproduction of flight.

 

 

Thank you!

 

I'm embarrassed to have to admit that I've never used an FFB stick with FSX, though I still hear people say good things about the MS one. I suppose it still requires that the aircraft developer dials in an appropriate amount of force but nevertheless this seems a fundamental requirement for fidelity. Was this technology just ahead of its time?

 

Interesting comments about IL2 and DCS, too.

 

Z

[Wobbie 938]

I'd argue that without force feedback controls it is almost impossible to implement convincing flight dynamics.

 

I say "almost" because I understand some aircraft (A330?) don't provide physical feedback through stick & pedals. 

 

I'm an INexperienced PPL-holder and I haven't "flown" Flightgear but I don't find any of the usual suspects to behave like the few real world GA aircraft I have flown. Doesn't mean they don't have entertainment value but (as they might say on Airplane) it's a different kind of flying altogether.

 

Z

Dunno about that...... We have built an Avro Shackleton simulator (original seats, controls etc), using FS9. It flys 'by the numbers' & the immersion factor is such that when real pilots fly it & come in for landing, they actually anticipate the landing & brace themselves for the bump on touchdown.

So, in my humble opinion, we do not need a shaking stick to implement convincing flight dynamics. We are using the original yoke, by the way.

So, to put the cat amongst the pidgeons.... a shaking plastic gaming joystick used to fly a plane that should have a yoke? (Cessna's, Boeings etc)?

Or is it OK to use it with Airbus's, jets, Cirrus?

Oh, by the way, A shaking joystick with a twist grip? Realism or entertainment/gaming?

[jcomm 5,890]

Z,

 

honestly I don't really believe any FF joystick available in the market could do the job...

 

Hardware used on some FNPTs, very sophisicated, can approach the target though... 

 

I still find that the best way to do it is to program some sort of translation of force required into amount of deflection required and even inefficiency of the controller above some G threshold. 

 

In some simulators like MSFS this is designed into the code, and can even be disabled in FSX.CFG, while on others like X-Plane you can play with force feedback parameters if you're using a FF controller, and / or with Control Phase-Out, creating a sensation of force required for non FF devices.

 

I still prefer the approach followed by MSFS, IL2 CoD and IL2 BOS to that of either X-Plane or even DCS, although I repeat - X-Plane has tools to allow devs to program some sort of realistic feel of control forces required, and even to tailor them to specific models.

[ZG862 1]

Dunno about that...... We have built an Avro Shackleton simulator (original seats, controls etc), using FS9. It flys 'by the numbers' & the immersion factor is such that when real pilots fly it & come in for landing, they actually anticipate the landing & brace themselves for the bump on touchdown.

So, in my humble opinion, we do not need a shaking stick to implement convincing flight dynamics. We are using the original yoke, by the way.

So, to put the cat amongst the pidgeons.... a shaking plastic gaming joystick used to fly a plane that should have a yoke? (Cessna's, Boeings etc)?

Or is it OK to use it with Airbus's, jets, Cirrus?

Oh, by the way, A shaking joystick with a twist grip? Realism or entertainment/gaming?

Sorry Wobbie, you misunderstand me. I said force feedback, not Microsoft Sidewinder Force Feedback 2 (or any other model). I wholeheartedly agree that twisting a stick is nothing like pressing rudder pedals.

 

I'd agree too that simpits inherently encourage far greater immersion but my point was that control feedback is a very important factor in achieving fidelity. During training in a lowly Cessna 152 Aerobat, my instructor was trying to demonstrate stalling during tight turns, eventually both he and I had the aircraft banked at somewhere around 60 degrees and were both pulling as hard as we could without getting the thing to stall. Plenty of buffet alright, and you could certainly feel the work the elevator was doing. Same thing in a sim? Not even close.

 

Z

@jcomm: Agree and it's a shame since it doesn't seem as though it would be particularly hard to do better. Iirc, someone has recently started shipping a yoke with more realistic travel and powerful FFB capabilities. Big bucks though. 

FNPT = Full Something Procedure Trainer?

In your 3rd paragraph I'm not clear as to whether you are advocating this with or without FFB primary flight controls.

[Humpty 751]

An ex Indian Air force pilot once told me that even a FFB joystick does not give you the feel. This was just after my ground training in '97 but that way back and even though technology has gone mountains.

 

Get the NASA wind tunnel. 

 

 I am not saying that it's not at all flyable , but it needs some polishing.  

[jcomm 5,890]

In your 3rd paragraph I'm not clear as to whether you are advocating this with or without FFB primary flight controls.

 

 

Without, when using non FF joysticks. AFAIK, apart from some really expensive "Flight and Navigation Procedures Trainer", there aren't rudder pedals with FF available yet ( ? )

[Wobbie 938]

ZG862,

 

Plenty of buffet alright, and you could certainly feel the work the elevator was doing. Same thing in a sim? Not even close.

 

.. So right, but we are flying a simulation/game, so unless we get someont to tilt our chairs for us... lol

 

I once read a story that some guy was not happy with the small movements of his joystick, so he bolted a broom onto it & stuck it onto the floor.

Problem solved! .. far better throw of the stick..

[ZG862 1]

I once read a story that some guy was not happy with the small movements of his joystick, so he bolted a broom onto it & stuck it onto the floor.

Problem solved! .. far better throw of the stick..

 

That sounds like a re-working of the John Farley story. In his role as chief test pilot, he was asked to consider the value of increasing the roll response on the Sea Harrier during vertical landing. He went out that day and flew a landing holding the stick half way down and reported back that he'd tried doubling the sensitivity and found it worked very well. The engineers (who had been contemplating weeks of modifications) were, um, grateful for this bit of lateral (or should that be longitudinal?) thinking.

 

I know what you mean about tilting chairs but I think it depends on the class of aircraft being flown as much as anything and I feel is less important than control feel. I've noticed that I for one tend to roll my head "level" in a turn, pretty much like my body thinks I'm flying well coordinated turns at 1g. I'm not saying I wouldn't like a motion platform, I just don't know where I'd put it!!

 

Z

PS/ When does a game become a recreational simulator? Is this not just a reflection of how realistic it is?

Without, when using non FF joysticks. AFAIK, apart from some really expensive "Flight and Navigation Procedures Trainer", there aren't rudder pedals with FF available yet ( ? )

 

Thanks!! And I think you're right about FF pedals. I'm hoping to build some though...

[Wightleal 3]

First of all, thanks to everyone who took the trouble to respond to this topic. Since then I have purchased a core i7 all-in-one pc, and, on a whim, FSX, partly because I think available copies are disappearing fast. My experiences so far are as follows:

I now have FS9 and FSX running at a rock-solid 30fps locked to 1/2 display refresh rate. Most of the sliders in both are fully right, and FS9 looks stunning, everywhere.

FSX is impressive out of the box to start with, but the ground scenery and autogen in areas I'm familiar with are appalling! (I live on the Isale of Wight in England).

There is an eggs and apples issue here - over the years I have installed many improved sceneries and textures to FS9, and my FSX is sub-vanilla (I'm awaiting the Acceleration upgrade). It is clear that to get FSX to look as good as FS9 in Europe I'm going to have to spend some money. I would appreciate some advice on whether to go for ORB-X (it gets the most votes I could find on the web), or whether later packages are better.

Finally, getting back to my original post, is FSX more like real flight than FS9? I have absolutely no idea!

[Wobbie 938]

No..same, but with more eye-candy & more views. Flight engine more or less the same. Remember, it's about 6 years old now.

Accelleration is esential. Weigh the price of that to the price of Prepar3d Academic Now on version 2.4! that has it all built in.

[Wightleal 3]

Oh dear! Acceleration pack arrived so I installed it straight away. Guess what? My fps halved! I double checked I didn't have DX10 enabled, then I ran fs9 which still sat at a solid 30fps. So I uninstalled Acceleration, and the FSX fps stayed at half what it had been prior to installation. I then restored the system to pre-Acceleration status, and lo and behold - solid 30fps. I really want to use Acceleration. Any ideas anyone?

[Wightleal 3]

I thought I'd try re-installing Acceleration. All good now, even with DTX10 enabled. Very strange. However, I did notice some flashing artifacts that weren't there pre=Acceleration.