Read the link. All good stuff!  Nice to have a turbine aircraft handy, when programming reality. 

Funny, looks like every single comment is someone requesting a different feature lol. Can't make everyone happy.

Some of the items mentioned by Austin have already been included in the latest beta(s), like the tyre model and the loss of effectivity of control surfaces in near stall AoA.

 

The Pt-6 modeling still presents the fuel flow bug from previous versions though.

 

Welcomed are the aditional types of icing effects on static and dynamic ports and the effects of accumulated ice on stall AoA.

 

In Ben's Blog I wrote about the weathervane effects and the possibility of adopting a Perpetual Calendar so that we can specify the full date for a flight, and possibly get correct daylight at any place and time :-) and... you know what more too....

 

But for me, what Austin wrote is at least indicative of his concern ( at last! ) to look into X-Plane's fight and systems modelling along the XP11 run, and some of the mentioned features will make it an even better alternative to other civil flightsims, and an even better choice for procedural training.

 

I will be following XP11 very close, every day :-) here at AVSIM and at Ben's blog, and strongly hope for the best ...

These are a welcome changes , though i have not tried to stall in the 172 and get her in a spin as yet. Quite a few of those things mentioned are a bit complicated to understand though. 

 

That stupid tyre screech still seems to be there . anyone ? 

 

Though i like the shock compression modeled now in the cessna quite cool.

 

Hopefully they get the rendering optimized now. 

 

That stupid tyre screech still seems to be there

 

This might be a temp fix, did not test it yet.

 

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/34888-dry-skid-replacement-sound-file/

This might be a temp fix, did not test it yet.

 

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/34888-dry-skid-replacement-sound-file/

 

Thanks toufic but i know about it.

It is great that xplane is constantly being improved but this link highlights one of the weaknesses of xplane too. Because it is owned and directed by one man it means the direction it takes is entirely due to his interests at any given time.

 

That article is a prime example. He gets enthusiastic and talks about how he is fine tuning the turbine model due to spending more time in his aircraft. He enthuses about how he correctly tweaked the fuel flow on the cirrus and Columbia, again due to his ownership and experience in those aircraft. Great if those are what you want or like.

 

Unfortunately he gets distracted and enthusiastic about the minutiae of these things which on the one hand I think is great(I am a massive nerd when it come to technical details and accuracy) but on the other hand is really annoying when he writes a post about how he is improving the accuracy of the sim and how real it feels and yet ignores the fact that a 5kt cross wind will blow you off the runway....

It seems the basic dynamics are having to be solved by the community. Thanks Murmur!

 

I just wish he would sort the basics first before devoting his time to the icing on the cake.

 

Chris

I just wish he would sort the basics first before devoting his time to the icing on the cake.

Well, there is a huge difference between the start of X-Plane 10 and today.

In the past days developershad to tweak their aerodynamic models to somehow counter these effects. Today they simply override it.

Well, there is a huge difference between the start of X-Plane 10 and today.

In the past days developershad to tweak their aerodynamic models to somehow counter these effects. Today they simply override it.

 

Yes there is a huge difference between the start of 10 and the end, yet those simple bugs still exist. I just wish he would fix the basics which have existed all through the development of 10 and yet have been ignored.

He gets excited and runs off looking at specific details that interest him at a certain point in time and yet won't fix something that has been around for ages. It's frustrating! Like I said before, I love the advanced stuff but I want the simple stuff to work first.

 

Chris

 

Chris

I think we should all take up a collection, and buy Austin a vacation cabin up in the Pacific Northwest near an airstrip. Maybe northern Vancouver Island somewhere. Make it so the cabin is only available from November to January. 

 

Then we'd probably get that weathervaning issue solved.

 

Next step, a place available only summer, somewhere with a lot of thunderstorm activity and an airstrip, Maybe the Midwest or South Florida. Then we could hope for more accurate CB's and a full 3D weather model.

 

:smile:

My blog post 

 

Zulfikar says:

December 29, 2016 at 2:51 am

Austin,

There is some funny thing i have noticed , i can pitch the 172 nose up even at 20-30kts on the ground , it’s a like prancing horse. Feels like the COG is in the tail section.

As Jose above has commented , the weathervane effect.

Ben,

Hope the next updates gets some rendering optimization .

Rgds.

Reply

• Austin Meyer says:

  December 29, 2016 at 11:18 am

  starting with beta 3 the pitch effect of the skyhawk should be about right
  real skyhawks can ding the tails on the ground for sure
  this is simmed in x-plane certainly

  Reply

This was Austin's answer to one of my posts:

 

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/12/fight-model-improvements-done-for-x-plane-11-00/#comment-15973

This was Austin's answer to one of my posts:

 

http://developer.x-plane.com/2016/12/fight-model-improvements-done-for-x-plane-11-00/#comment-15973

 

Sounds like a no on both your weathervane issue when actually trying to move down the runway as well as your calender. :wink: 

 

Excited to see what they are fixing though, but I do agree, over the years, the stuff Austin seems to focus on at times makes me go huh?

Sounds like a no on both your weathervane issue when actually trying to move down the runway as well as your calender.

 

 

Some guys like to joke about my interest on proper Moon and daylight representation, and I am happy that Bem says a bug report is filled, but in very low priority...

 

I guess most of the comments come from non pilots, or pilots who never flew night vfr....

 

Just a link, among many...

 

http://www.pilotfriend.com/training/flight_training/fxd_wing/nightfly.htm

 

And I insist - if it was such a meaningless  factor, why would even ELITE IFR include proper Moon and daylight calculations for any date ?

 

( * ) and... btw, there's a reason, based on rl experience, for me to find it so importante, I just can't mention it ... remember I only own a GPL !