X-Plane 11 - perhaps hold off a bit

[Murmur 3,944]

Just to add to Larry's post above I should point out the weathervane effect that is also way overdone in XP11 - inherited from XP10 just as it was there...

 

I'm not sure it is the weathervane effect that is overdone. I suspect that the main culprit could be the reduced tire friction (about 15-20% of its actual value).

 

I am contemplating about a plugin that could address this, if the needed datarefs are available.

[Paraffin 2,197]

I'm not sure it is the weathervane effect that is overdone. I suspect that the main culprit could be the reduced tire friction (about 15-20% of its actual value).

 

I am contemplating about a plugin that could address this, if the needed datarefs are available.

 

Might be tire friction that needs tweaking. In XP11 Beta I've noticed some weird things:

 

The default S-76 seems very lightly loaded on its tires. It tends to spin on the ground with the collective dropped all the way down and no pedal input (to counteract the torque). It shouldn't do that. 

 

When I set heavy weather with a wet runway, a light GA plane with the parking brake on will slide crazily off the runway and into the weeds, as if the surface was totally iced over or covered with oil. 

[Patriot3810 182]

Why do people buy products that are beta and then complain,i simply don't understand that,people should wait until release if they don't want to test it.

[jcomm 5,939]

@Murmur: Yes, when I refer to the weathervane tendency on ground, I am not speaking about the "aerodynamic weathervane". It subsumes whatever is in the root of the problem, probably even a combination of factors.

 

Sideways and other friction scalars can be adjusted in Plane Maker as fas as I recall, but all of the tests I did in the past failled to provide reasonable effects.

 

Some authors create a pletora of invisible wheels / undercarriages...

 

Once Ben tried to explain what might be origin of the problem, but honestly I never understood what he was talking about... :-/

 

@Patriot3810: if referring to my post, mind you that the problems with wind on ground have been present since somewhere along version 9. They were present in all of the final releases, are now present in XP11 beta, and LR never even mentioned anything about it being part of their plans for future details of the simulation.

 

I recall Austin mentioning a modified model for free-running turbines ( of which the pt-6 is a good example ) and also control surface efficiency at higher AoAs.

[kneighbour 32]

Why do people buy products that are beta and then complain,i simply don't understand that,people should wait until release if they don't want to test it.

Not sure if anyone is complaining? I certainly wasn't. Perhaps your idea of what a beta is and mine are different. As a developer myself, I think of a beta as a program that, as far as I know, has NO observable bugs. ie I have tested it inhouse and it works perfectly. It goes to beta to get tested on various hardware, with different level of users, etc. Not sure if I would call XP 11 a beta as it has so many obvious bugs I assume it was put out there due to marketing pressures.

 

Again, not complaining, in fact, all my title says 'perhaps wait a bit', and I stand by that. The problem is, as I see it, is that a brand new user, perhaps from FSX, will fire up XP11, have a hard time with it, then give up. I was certainly in that camp. I am a pretty experienced XP user, and I gave up. We need all the new XP users that we can get.

[ricka47 611]

Not sure if anyone is complaining? I certainly wasn't. Perhaps your idea of what a beta is and mine are different. As a developer myself, I think of a beta as a program that, as far as I know, has NO observable bugs. ie I have tested it inhouse and it works perfectly. It goes to beta to get tested on various hardware, with different level of users, etc. Not sure if I would call XP 11 a beta as it has so many obvious bugs I assume it was put out there due to marketing pressures.

 

Again, not complaining, in fact, all my title says 'perhaps wait a bit', and I stand by that. The problem is, as I see it, is that a brand new user, perhaps from FSX, will fire up XP11, have a hard time with it, then give up. I was certainly in that camp. I am a pretty experienced XP user, and I gave up. We need all the new XP users that we can get.

 

I was in that camp for XP10 and went back to FSX and then P3D.  But, I can't say the same for XP11 and will stay with it in place of P3D this time around.

[kneighbour 32]

I was in that camp for XP10 and went back to FSX and then P3D.  But, I can't say the same for XP11 and will stay with it in place of P3D this time around.

Well, good to hear that. XP is much better than FSX once you get it all setup. Much more reliable and feels more real.

[LAdamson 240]

Well, good to hear that. XP is much better than FSX once you get it all setup. Much more reliable and feels more real.

Can't say anything about XP-11, but I've never changed my mind about the "feel real" department.  Been a few months since I've loaded a flight sim; however I was thinking that FSX & XP-10 were running neck to neck in the feel of flight.  Much has to do with smooth frame rates, and the authors ability to tune flight models.  I still think that smooth fluidness is much of the perception for some. I had both sims running smooth, the majority of the time. On the other hand, I keep hearing about some combat sims, being the best, flight dynamic wise. I just haven't got to them yet. 

[Paraffin 2,197]

On the other hand, I keep hearing about some combat sims, being the best, flight dynamic wise. I just haven't got to them yet. 

 

Combat sims are better in some areas, not as good in others compared to civilian sims like X-Plane.

 

What the best ones do well, is modeling flight at the edge of the envelope. You spend more time there in combat than you would in a civilian plane, so you get things like buffet stall modeling with extreme maneuvers. There is more careful attention to engine performance at different altitudes, because that's a critical factor in combat. Combat sims put more flight model and graphics resources into damage modeling, for obvious reasons.

 

Combat sims also have the luxury of just modeling a few aircraft in depth, rather than trying to be an all-purpose platform for everything from a 747 to a Piper Cub. That's one of the really big differences right there.

 

And even the combat sim fanatics complain about flight models, so don't expect perfection on that side of the fence.  :smile:

[be77solo 125]

Not sure if anyone is complaining? I certainly wasn't. Perhaps your idea of what a beta is and mine are different. As a developer myself, I think of a beta as a program that, as far as I know, has NO observable bugs. ie I have tested it inhouse and it works perfectly. It goes to beta to get tested on various hardware, with different level of users, etc. Not sure if I would call XP 11 a beta as it has so many obvious bugs I assume it was put out there due to marketing pressures.

 

Again, not complaining, in fact, all my title says 'perhaps wait a bit', and I stand by that. The problem is, as I see it, is that a brand new user, perhaps from FSX, will fire up XP11, have a hard time with it, then give up. I was certainly in that camp. I am a pretty experienced XP user, and I gave up. We need all the new XP users that we can get.

 

I completely agree with all of this.  XP11 isn't a "beta" in current form; at this point it is what Steam calls an "early access" title.  Beta, like you say, is complete and just fixing any remaining bugs.  Early Access is still in heavy development, but available to the public for the diehards to helps shape the finished product (and obviously make some early $$$).  While XP11 is great, it's no where near what I'd call a ready for release product.  And, unfortunately, this I think will hurt sales for those that aren't as knowledgeable to come to this board for help.

 

By comparison, as an on again off again XP7/8/9/10 and now 11 owner (as well as a committed MSFS from 4.0+), I'm actually totally impressed with the current status of XP10.  I've used it on and off since release and would check back every few months, but always go back to FSX or now P3D.  Installing the current "final" version of XP10 was absolutely eye opening; it ran smooth and fast, looked gorgeous, and completely worked.... I was shocked.  I was so impressed, I'm actually now reinstalling all my add-ons and haven't touched XP11 or P3D since, and look forward to expanding my library of addons for XP10 (of course, with an eye towards those that promise full 11 updates :wink: )

[strider1 575]

Well, my first thought was that you have failed to read my posts. But then, we are all busy people, so let me repeat myself by saying that I am a software developer and have been for many decades. I know what a beta is better than most, I dare say.

 

Your comment about my rudder pedals is puzzling. Not sure what your experience with weather-vaning has to do with it at all. Also not sure what rudder pedals has to do with it either. It has been a well known problem in XP 10 for ages. In fact I seem to recall seeing a post on one of the forums this very day on the subject. In his case a recalibration of the rudder hardware in-flight fixed his problem.

 

Well I am not a beta expert but typical xplane betas have plenty of bugs. And since you are a experienced xplane user you should know better ! I think you are doing everybody a disservice that wants to participate in the early betas by complaining. If any of the developers read this nonsense they will probably stop offering us access to the early betas. 

 

As far as weather-vaning goes I know it's buggy but just use the opposite rudder to keep on the centerline of the runway. I just set up a 15-20 knot cross-wind and I was able to takeoff on the runway centerline. The weather-vaning is really buggy when you are at a standstill, but if you add a little power and opposite rudder you should be able to manage. I think the weather-vaning has something to do with the friction. If not then you need to take a look at your rudder pedals. And since you are a beta tester you should file a bug !   

I completely agree with all of this.  XP11 isn't a "beta" in current form; at this point it is what Steam calls an "early access" title.  Beta, like you say, is complete and just fixing any remaining bugs.  Early Access is still in heavy development, but available to the public for the diehards to helps shape the finished product (and obviously make some early $$$).  While XP11 is great, it's no where near what I'd call a ready for release product.  And, unfortunately, this I think will hurt sales for those that aren't as knowledgeable to come to this board for help.

 

By comparison, as an on again off again XP7/8/9/10 and now 11 owner (as well as a committed MSFS from 4.0+), I'm actually totally impressed with the current status of XP10.  I've used it on and off since release and would check back every few months, but always go back to FSX or now P3D.  Installing the current "final" version of XP10 was absolutely eye opening; it ran smooth and fast, looked gorgeous, and completely worked.... I was shocked.  I was so impressed, I'm actually now reinstalling all my add-ons and haven't touched XP11 or P3D since, and look forward to expanding my library of addons for XP10 (of course, with an eye towards those that promise full 11 updates :wink: )

 

We are not on steam ! and I would not call this heavy development, more like heavy bug fixing. 

 

Maybe you should read the X-plane Developer Blog !

 

• X-Plane 11 is still quite full of bugs. That’s why it is labeled as a public beta and why the release notes list a number of known open bugs.

So at this point we are in a situation that is not that different from a regular public beta. If you want to try the new stuff, you can do so, but if you want to get flying, you may need to wait for a later beta. Bug reports can be filed in the bug report form,

[Guest JustanotherPilot]

I Like it ! Even the Beta is a big improvement on XP10.50, the new user friendly interface alone convinced me -  as a dedicated FSX/SE/P3D user, to try it. I'm flying the IXeg 737 (which needed a few tweaks with planemaker to run) all over Norway/UK using the stock airports, they are unbelievable. With the new airport vehicles, pushback and AI, it is so much more immersive. Lately, I have been experiencing too frequent OOM and VAS issues with P3D v3.4 even with reduced settings. I can run XP11 Beta with everything maxed out and not one single memory issue and am rewarded with stunning visuals and performance. Yes, the default 737 and MD80 have some problems but they will eventually be sorted out and they pack a lot of punch for realism.

 

 

I am one happy chappy.

 

steve s

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

This is a somewhat misleading title and seems to stem from a misunderstanding of how LR generally work.

 

This is not meant for the OP, but remember, it is a beta, and a very early one at that. Users should expect lots of problems and the idea is that users report their issues to LR so they get fixed (Posting for solutions here isn't going to help LR find the problem). If you're not willing to to do this or are looking for a stable simulator then stick to XP10 until 11 matures :-)

 

Trying to use this as your main sim is asking for trouble, it took XP10 some time even after v10.0 to become good enough, and this is no different than XP11. If you are sensitive to bugs and don't want to offer feedback and bug reports then simply avoid the beta and wait till it's stable. 

 

As they say, beauty is the eye of the beholder.

XP11 is in a pay-to-beta state right now. I don't really think that a 15 minute demo where you only can fly KSEA constitutes an open beta. The demo is a Demo, and you actually have to buy XP11 to be able to beta. I think it is warranted to have a couple of threads on the topic; one which celebrates it, and one that sees some problems with it. It's good for consumers

[harrry 322]

I  think this is a reasonable stage to open a public beta.  It gives developers a chance to see what changes are needed on their products and start planning.  True it is a moving target still but much of it is settled and by having it people can see what is likely to be needed for their system and whether more investment is needed.

[jcomm 5,939]

On the other hand, I keep hearing about some combat sims, being the best, flight dynamic wise. I just haven't got to them yet.

 

Larry,

 

indeed both DCS World and IL2 Battle of Stalingrad provide a feel of flight that is unique IMO, but also Aerofly FS 2 can give us that feel, although it's modeling is still limited, with many system and even flight dynamics areas not fully modeled.

 

Unfortunately this type of simulators make me feel bad - that's the only way I can put it - when I find myself playing them with the objective of doing simulated air combat - I always end up feeling ridiculous, sooner or latter... But indeed they both are designed with detail and accuracy of the aircraft systems and flight characteristics in mind.

 

A DCS Module takes probably as much time as a PMDG one to get released in it's final version. Usually not less than 1 year in pre-release! Along that period the modules receive updates and fine tuning that bring many of the modelling aspects to even higher levels. IMHO nothing compares to DCS in this area, closely followed by IL2 BoS / BoM that although not as detailed for instance in cockpit interaction ( it has non-clickable cockpits ) is still at least as good in flight dynamics and certainly better regarding damage modelling.

 

Even Weather modelling, although not as complete in some aspects as in fsx and x-plane is still dealt with with great detail in those sims. IL2 offers the best wind and turbulence model among all sims I've used, DCS even offers weather systems in a dynamic weather simulation, they both are extremelly realistic from the ground to the air regarding weather and model for instance geopotential height quite noticeable in cold weather Winter scenarios, and!!!! perfectly model the Moon with it's phases and both Moon and Sun and daylight with perfection, given any date - year/month/day/timeofday...

 

As mentioned before, for me the problem with this sims is, exactly, the word - Combat :-/

 

I also believe that with dedication and when exploring all of it's true potential, an X-Plane airplane model can probably be brought near to the level of sophistication of a DCS or il2 module. Today I installed the Airfoillabs C172 v 1.61 in XP11, which works with some quirks, but works! and is really a charm to fly and interact with systems wise...

 

For GA and IFR, nothing comes even close to ELITE Flightsim, specially now in version 9 ( beta ) :-)

 

But let's no forget that presently for VR Aerofly FS2 beats the competition, and there are new players arriving !

 

https://bisimulations.com/