Sign in to follow this  
jcomm

Everyone at the looks... very few at the "Feels"....

Recommended Posts

My great friend Zulfi, from Bombay, with whom we share this passion for aviation and flight simulation as a way to keep us as close to it as life allows, and who also is a fan of one of my two preferred flightsims ever ( DCS and IL.2 ), pointed me to this extraordinary post at the ED forums, following the release, this weekend, of the Spitfire Mk IX module for DSC World...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=179253

 

Why do I bring this here ? Well, because 99% of the posts and focus of attention on X-Plane is directed towards the looks. Everybody discusses how the skies look, the shadows and the glowing fuselages in XP11, and there's even one guy who is worried about the Moon and it's phases or being able to set a precise date ( including the year )....

 

Are we really seeing just that in a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ?

 

Well, actually, DCS, and IL.2 for that sake, both correctly calculate the Moon and Sun for any date :-) But! what really matters way above that is the way both model FLIGHT!  Heck guys, specially some of you I have known for quite a long time, and who made serious contribution to the community with their findings and tuning - try DCS, or IL.2, or even better both!

 

Start with the free2play version where you have access to the TF 51, and taste what is really an Ultra-Realistic flight simulation.

 

Then, can we start buzzing Austin about the still many inaccuracies. unplausiblities of X-Plane as a flight sim ? I know he's now fixed on tire modelling and fine tuning, but heck! (and something tells me this will bring no update by itself to the most unrealistic behaviour in x-wind on ground I've seen in any flight simulator I have used so far !!!)  Try a taildragger in X-Plane, and then do the same in DCS or IL.2... Bring an aircraft to a nearing stall AoA in DCS or IL.2, and then repeat with the best and closest model available for X-Plane and see how different these sims are. Or pick an helicopter in DCS, and then one in X-Plane, which I really think does an exceptional work regarding rotary wing compared to FSX / P3D....

 

 

Try even the basic modelling of pitch stability, and compare short period oscillation between X-Plane's best models and what we get in those sims...

 

Pick the best rendition ( flight model wise ) of a B747, or a powerful airliner, and compare pitching moments due tot thrust with, for instance Aerowinx PSX... It is sooooooo far from being close guys, so far :-/  and I think it is such a basic "feature" that shouldn't require any fancy flight dynamics editing, but only a few basic aerodynamic parameters and turbofan engine modelling...

 

That's one of my biggest problems with X-Plane each time I approach it... I know what I do not like or like very much compared to other sims including FSX, like weather, but there is so much more that put's it away from what I really would like it to be regarding what I consider fundamental in a flight simulator - the flight dynamics!

 

I would like to one day be able to pick a Bf 109 for X-plane and feel it as close as possible to a 109 in either DCS or IL.2. There's one, available at the .ORG store, and which I believe probably represents some of the best that can be achieved with X-Plane, but, it is still so so far away...

 

Yet, in the end, I do think that ( not considering AEFS2 ) XP11 has the potential to become the best civil fight simulator for 2017, provided Laminar really dedicates more time and passion to the cause of bringing it's potential to use, because there is indeed the potential there!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Lol , you really did make the thread. Now get ready to be swallowed alive hahaha.

 

I knew what torque is but never new how strong it could be and how dangerous till try I tried the props in DCS. First tries in the props in DCS used to make me roll and crash on take off or giving thrust then i understood it's the torque causing it , well these are high performance props. The effect of flaps and gears are very well modeled too.  Though the props in XPlane and DCS differ due to different engines. 

 

I know the torque bug is fixed. But we need high performance aircraft in xplane to see that powerful torque.

 

There are a lot of things that DCS models as a simulation platform even though it's a combat oriented simulator and different aircrafts between the two but my landings are way tougher in DCS than in XPlane. we do need comparative aircrafts. 

 

The Xplane BF 109 G2 / G6 is very close to DCS k4 but still needs a lot of corrections.

 

I think the longitudinal stability is fixed in XP11  if i am correct. 

 

I really want to see Xplane being there with DCS / il2.  I don't like combat anymore so i just login to the AO server where only formations and free flights are allowed and it's fun.

 

I love to fly the Mig21 but flying the props is a different experience all together in DCS. Hope i can see the same in XPlane with similar aircrafts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear you Jose, but the problem is that they are combat flight simulators and a lot of users here (including myself) want to fly around in general aviation aircraft or tubeliners around areas and airports we know. I personally started simming with Microsoft's combat flight sim, but it can have the greatest flight dynamics and visuals in the simming world but my interest will remain short-lived if all they simulate are military aircraft in small areas that I don't really want to fly in in aircraft I'm not really interested in. From my experience, the average simmer here wants to:

 

  • Have accurate systems simulation. e.g. A working FMS or G1000
  • Realistic looking airports which look like the airports they use in real-life or know
  • Weather? (Did this one get mentioned recently quite a lot ;-)), oh and weather

Some things though really do annoy me about the FD in X-Plane, and most of them I won't go into as they have been discussed to death. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Tony as myself is a VFR / GA flyer and love doing bush flying and looking at the scenery and doing grass / dirt strips landings, but getting a good FD adds more to the immersion ?  I will always be a visuals simmer as that's the first thing i look for and then the aircraft. But DCS changed all that for me. Yes they are military aircrafts all simmers don't fly them , as I said it's the flight the immersion that i want in Xplane.  

 

It's XP11 so refreshing the FD part should be ok I guess and fun to read what experts have to say.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, while some points are in LR's hands to improve, many things need to be done by the addon designer in order to make a great sim. That's true for DCS as well. The sim has the basis on and around which the addon designer needs to build his plane.

 

It's just as easy to make an addon for DCS that flies like s**t as it is for X-Plane. If there were as many developers working on freeware or light to medium payware models for DCS, people would also complain about bad flight modeling.

Difference is, that the quality standard and users expectations in DCS are a lot higher. If we had the same in X-Plane, we would probably only have 10 planes to fly. And if you think about it, almost every flight sim just has that handful of really stellar models.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, while some points are in LR's hands to improve, many things need to be done by the addon designer in order to make a great sim. That's true for DCS as well. The sim has the basis on and around which the addon designer needs to build his plane.

 

It's just as easy to make an addon for DCS that flies like s**t as it is for X-Plane. Difference is, that the quality standard and users expectations in DCS are a lot higher. If we had the same in X-Plane, we would probably only have 10 planes to fly. And if you think about it, almost every flight sim just has that handful of really stellar models.

 

True, but i think ED concentrates a lot more on the FD .  That is what the threads about. 

 

Even getting a handful of really good planes is welcome.  

 

I see it  this way the addon maker FD can only do what the platform FD engine is capable of doing if the addon maker is using it, yes there are external scripts or programs that change a lot , but would it not be useful if the core engine has been optimized ?   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be, but I still think that we had the same quality in X-Plane, if the same devs would use the same effort to bring a model to X-Plane. They might need to do some more workarounds on X-Plane, but in the end we should see a comparable level of fidelity.

 

I'm not saying that X-Plane developers are less knowledgeable or don't work hard enough. It's just different goals, different audiences etc.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It reminds me of those folk who ask why X-Plane scenery doesn't look like GTA 5 or similar. DCS and GTA are specialised to smaller areas and can concentrate on those aspects more. 

 

However, there are just some things in X-Plane that really should work better and there really is no excuse they don't, but if the developers don't see them as important or think they are actually working then there is little one can do about it except to not buy the product in the first place or to find a solution around it (Look what Majestic or A2A do on FSX). But hey, in the meanwhile, we will get more realistic tire physics  :Tounge:

 

 

 


but getting a good FD adds more to the immersion ?

 

Well this is just it, the FD in X-Plane are mostly ok for me I don't need much more for the immersion (Taildraggers aside, I can't fly those). I don't practice stalls or spins, I just want to practice landings and approaches in Alaska in mountainous terrain, and this is something the sim does really well (Also having more than 20fps really helps with the immersion here).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Mathias, Zulfi and Tony.

 

Yes, indeed the work put into an ED or Leatherneck model in DCS World, or into the aircraft that make part of the IL.2 Battle of Stalingrad and Battle of Moscow tittles are dedicated work, that takes months and sometimes more than 1 year until they get into final release.

 

And yes the bare bones flight dynamics model ( physics model more correctly put ) available both for DCS and IL.2 are probably just a base, even if a sound one, over which lot's of work has to be done.

 

But when someone claims his FDM is "Ultra Realistic", then I would expect at least a "Ultra Realistic" example to ship with the base simulation, like the Tf-51 in DCS. Austin owned a C400, now a powerful turboprop, so, I would expect him to give dedication to their respective models in default X-Plane, or even to the default C172.

 

Heck, not even the most basic details as the implementation of the turn coordinator work in X-Plane - try a standard rate turn in any of it's models.

 

And I believe that given the necessary dedication a nice aircraft can be designed for X-plane, approaching or even equaling the level of quality of a DCS or IL.2 BoS / BoM model, but I am yet to see one :-(

 

I don't like having to play combat flightsims in order to get the most advanced flight dynamics I taste among all sims I have ever used. Even Aerofly FS2, which has rather promising flight dynamics, lacks the level of detail available on those sims... Aerowinx PSX is a unique rendering of a B744, but too limited in terms of World views, and even aircraft lighting systems which are represented by a very limited and simplified set of lighting systems, which kills the immersion for me... but in terms of feel of flight, like many rw pilots using it for training confirm, it is light-years ahead of any available model for fsx / p3d / xp...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


And I believe that given the necessary dedication a nice aircraft can be designed for X-plane, approaching or even equaling the level of quality of a DCS or IL.2 BoS / BoM model, but I am yet to see one :-(

 

IXEG seemed to put a lot of work and passion into their 737 and it shows. It of course still has problems that they are fixing, but considering it took them years to make shows that every now and then a developer comes along who doesn't just mass produce low quality products for the sake of producing a fast buck. Also consider that something like a 737 has a lot more to get right than a Spitfire. If everyone worked at the same pace as IXEG or the folks who worked on the Saab, we'd only have a few aircraft.

 

But yep, the lighter aircraft really do need more love and attention. Even the Airfoil Labs C172 falls short for me (and another user who hated the hula girl they added  :wink: )

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


But yep, the lighter aircraft really do need more love and attention. Even the Airfoil Labs C172 falls short for me (and another user who hated the hula girl they added )

 

Yep, of what I saw and tried ( I have it ) it is certainly not superior to the A2A offer in FSX, or even the default AEFS2 model even if with some need for tuning, and only flight dynamics wise in the case of the AEFS2... A2A in terms of systems modelling is still... A2A...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you get my 100% approval! Actually, that's what's been bothering me for some time now. I fly the real C172. I own both the XP AFL C172 and FSX A2A C172 and both feel different to the real experience. Their FDE are made-up at some stages, making them unpredictable and rather more difficult than their real counterpart. I've always been looking for the feel and the feel first in any sim. It's a shame that the majority actually wants candy.. Makes you wonder why that "simulator" word was ever used.. I completely have no fate in any ESP engine driven sim, simply because i doubt that any developer will gather/ will be able to gather all the necessary data for a certain aircraft and the deliver for a reasonable price. That's why my eyes are on the AEFS2, DCS and the XP series.. and man do i feel lonely sometimes..

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is just it, the FD in X-Plane are mostly ok for me I don't need much more for the immersion (Taildraggers aside, I can't fly those). I don't practice stalls or spins, I just want to practice landings and approaches in Alaska in mountainous terrain, and this is something the sim does really well (Also having more than 20fps really helps with the immersion here).

 

no stalls / spins , i will never let you fly my aircraft you are a boring pilot :Tounge:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no stalls / spins , i will never let you fly my aircraft you are a boring pilot

 

Ha ha. It's actually pretty boring in the sim because a) You can't feel it and b ) You're not going to die a tragic death if it goes wrong  :wink:. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I don't have any real-life experience to compare it to (unlike plenty of experience looking out of windows in planes), IL2 BoS (and M) have definitely given me the strongest impression of what I imagine it must feel like to be in the pilot's seat of that particular plane.

 

Hard to quantify but the sounds of stress on various parts of the plane when turning, buffet noise, fluidity of flight model in high speed / stress situations, altogether just a very plausible feeling.

 

But I'm with many who also just want to calmly enjoy some pretty scenery go by, which must be the goal for a lot of actual GA flying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Hard to quantify but the sounds of stress on various parts of the plane when turning, buffet noise, fluidity of flight model in high speed / stress situations, altogether just a very plausible feeling.

 

I must admit, that does sound awesome

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I just had my friend over yesterday who is airline captain . We tried IXEG 737 in XP11, and he was very impressed. Of course XP is not perfect but don't think it's so bad either. Frankly  I don't recall any ultra realism in IL-2. It  was good at the time, but had its own shortcomings.

 

Back in days when I was working on my multi engine add on to commercial certificate, I tried two FAA approved sims  None of those sim got even close to XP in terms of flight dynamics or graphic. And my flight instructor still had to evaluate me on that crappy sim LOL

 

Really I don't know what is the fuss about. Good things comes in small packages. Enjoy what you have. Want ultra realism go buy/rent an aircraft and fly. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha. It's actually pretty boring in the sim because a) You can't feel it and b ) You're not going to die a tragic death if it goes wrong  :wink:. 

But at least you don't need the bag. :smile: Ok, unless you are using VR equipment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's no fuss , its just a few things probably need sorting out.  Even i don't have any real world flight experience, I am not even saying that XP is not good , i prefer it to the other civil sims tbh.  It's now XP11 so wondering what is going to get fixed. I only go buy what i read.

 

I am a GA flyer and VFR mostly, and i have read a lot of good things about IXEG and i will be honest here saying that even the default heavies in XP feel very good because of the response which you may call it as inertia i guess.

 

 Actually the thread title should have been different. Like "what needs fixing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99,9% of the people using flight simulators have never ever flown a ga or have experience flying a real aircraft.  therefore they have nothing to relate to. what they can relate to is how the world looks. 

 

I cant tell what a real cessna will do in a stall because me and almost everybody else has never been in one. But i can tell you how weather, clouds, horizion and scenery looks because i see that every day and i can relate to that. And seeing improvements there gives me joy because i can see the progress.

 

I love flying my rep planes and at the end of they i love to pretend that i would know how to fly a real plane because of this but lets be honest. that thing could be completley wrong and i have no idea of knowing it. It seems plausible to me and that is enough. So it is natural for people to focus on what they are good at. We have metrologist here that babble on about vertrical winds, cummolus, etc. and think its the most important issue.  Then we have people that think the moon phase is the most important issue. Then we have a few rw pilots here that think the flight model is the most important issue.

 

at the end of the day it is an aproximation and once that aproximation is plausible enough that most of the people are happy, you move on to the next thing. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do I bring this here ? Well, because 99% of the posts and focus of attention on X-Plane is directed towards the looks. Everybody discusses how the skies look, the shadows and the glowing fuselages in XP11, and there's even one guy who is worried about the Moon and it's phases or being able to set a precise date ( including the year )....

 

Are we really seeing just that in a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ?

 

That is because we are not really flying. We are replicating in our mind what we see when we fly - as passengers - and the biggest, most obvious cue we have to replicate that experience is visual cues and sound cues. It is exactly what you see - and the ability of developers to make that cue as realistic as possible that draws the masses. Most have never flown an aircraft themselves, so wouldn't really know what 'the feel' is like - notwithstanding that there is only so much you can do to deliver that feeling on a desktop flightsim. Although DCS does a pretty good job.

 

The illusion of flying takes place in your mind. So unless the flight model is horrendously bad and way off the numbers, the ability to suspend belief is not that difficult and P3D /Xplane don't do a bad job (when left in the hands of skilled aircraft developers) to make that illusion as real as they can.

 

Additionally, the 'feeling' of immersion is also greatly enhanced by a bigger display. There is a massive difference bewteen a 32 inch monitor and a 55' 4K display to deliver the immersion and feel most crave for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99,9% of the people using flight simulators have never ever flown a ga or have experience flying a real aircraft.  therefore they have nothing to relate to. what they can relate to is how the world looks. 

 

I cant tell what a real cessna will do in a stall because me and almost everybody else has never been in one. But i can tell you how weather, clouds, horizion and scenery looks because i see that every day and i can relate to that. And seeing improvements there gives me joy because i can see the progress.

 

I love flying my rep planes and at the end of they i love to pretend that i would know how to fly a real plane because of this but lets be honest. that thing could be completley wrong and i have no idea of knowing it. It seems plausible to me and that is enough. So it is natural for people to focus on what they are good at. We have metrologist here that babble on about vertrical winds, cummolus, etc. and think its the most important issue.  Then we have people that think the moon phase is the most important issue. Then we have a few rw pilots here that think the flight model is the most important issue.

 

at the end of the day it is an aproximation and once that aproximation is plausible enough that most of the people are happy, you move on to the next thing. 

 

 

To take it even further: I don't even really care if the flight model is accurate. I simply enjoy flying in a sim. Period. The Cessna in XP flies and that's all I want. It goes up and it goes down whenever I want it and it goes left and right and that's all I need. If someone says a certain plane is pretty realistic when it comes to the flight model: nice to know! Really cool! Feels good! I do like my A2A planes in P3D more because of that! But if someone says a specific is totally crap but I like flying it... I don't care at all that it is crap. I like flying it. Period.

 

I also have no real world flying experience and I don't want to get some real life experience either. The flightsim world IS my 'reality' and I am fine with it... apart from the looks! :wink: I want everything to look as realistic as possible and there still is a long way to go in that department. So that's why I mostly post about that. And I think that is why most simmers mostly post about that.

 

So I am, and I think most simmers are, looking at flightsims from a totally different perspective than some of you: some of you want the perfect simulation of an airplane while I, like a lot of other people, if not most, want the perfect simulation of the idea of flying a plane. And looking at sims this way scenery and graphics etc. are far more important than the flight model. I have no clue what a good flight model is anyway so why care about that. I never thought or expected that my flightsim experience would enable me to fly a real plane: I simply like looking out of the window while turning some switches, pushing some knobs and pulling my joystick: my main reason for flightsimming is to relax why I am flying above a simulated world. And I think this goes for most simmers.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that there is something like "real" FDM in desktop sims.

Everybody has different hardware (joysticks, pedals, yokes), set up and calibrated differently.

Especially in X-Plane, it makes a huge difference, how your controls are calibrated, how the null zones are set, and all of that. That being said, civilian desktop sims offer not less than the whole world to fly in, they offer (more or less) dynamic and realistic weather, and a few default aircraft, to have something to start with. They are the platform to build on, with plugins, addons, etc.

The look AND feel, and the interaction between the simulated aircraft and the simulated environment has to be a close approximation to the reality, and that's where the experience and expectations vary widely, to give you the feel of immersion.

I've been in full flight simulators a few times (737 classic, A320, 767), and from my limited experience with these things and my understanding of flight, and my expectations of a realistic rendition of that (including the sense of speed, the visuals, THE SOUNDS), the IXEG 737 (XPX) is my all time favourite tubeliner simulation, followed by the FSLabs A320 (FSX, hopefully soon in P3D).

But it really is a highly subjective thing!

I tried DCS, but I am not too crazy about war machinery, so I concentrate on civil aviation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you want real, your gonna have to go out to your local fbo and rent a cessna for 150+ per hour! come on guys lets be real here, I have flown the real thing , and i guess I didnt realize that im a minority on here because of that . The reason why i cling to this hobby is because realistically the cost of doing the real thing is very expensive and for me its just not financialIy feasable. Now I would say that in terms of reality these sims are not terribly off either. sure, they dont replicate all flight characteristics, but for 59.99 what do you expect ?? Everyhting is what you want to make of it. P3d was great for me till I realized that xp 10/11 offers me something even more enjoyable. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Everyhting is what you want to make of it. P3d was great for me till I realized that xp 10/11 offers me something even more enjoyable

 

Exactly the same reason I started using DCS and IL.2 Battle of Stalingrad, and I didn't like combat, but I do look for good flight and overall physics modelling...

 

And while I keep my pilot license current, it becomes more and more difficult, specially now with the new EASA rules, so, I am with you in finding in flight simulators an escape from the limits in real world leisure flight.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this