Sign in to follow this  
Fi5kuS

Landing physics in P3D vs XPL

Recommended Posts

I think there is no doubt that the landing physics of P3D differ substantially from X-Plane. Don't get me wrong, I think P3D offers more in several areas compared to X-Plane, but the landing physics has always bothered me in P3D. Here, every aircraft feels like a feather, almost certainly to float. In X-Plane, especially IXEG and Flightfactor jets, it feels much more heavier and you will actually sense the hydraulics kicking in during touchdowns.

 

Anyone else sharing my opinion? Maybe my settings are completely off, but I am not steering the aircrafts in P3D and XPL any differently but they certainly "feel" different.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Depends on the addon aircraft you use and not on the platform P3D/XPL. You might be right if you refer to default aircrafts, but A2A and RealAir for instance did an excellent job in resembling the landing behaviour of the real bird in P3D.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, as much as I adore A2A 172,  I saw  some complaints with regards to their depiction of 172 ballooning over the airfield. Again, I'm not sure if that's physics or our hardware limitation (Let's face it - Saitek Yoke is only a taste of real controls I guess).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

You might want to try without the ThermalDescriptions.xml in P3D - rename to ThermalDescriptions.xml.sav. These thermals appear anywhere so test without them as you could get one right before the runway would add lift.

 

C:\ProgramData\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3D v3\ThermalDescriptions.xml

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting - would it also disable turbulent air whenever its related to thermals or its not related? On the other hand A2A at least gave option to adjust elevator sensitivity which is a must with cheap yoke. When I set it to 30 I can grease-land the 172 easily and it seems that the amount of movement needed to flare is matching youtube vids of real world machines.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes the thermal is also injecting turbulence into the sim, a thermal may have zero lift but still create turbulence.

Share this post


Link to post

Pilot technique will make a bigger difference than the platform.  I've flown the DC-6 in XPL many hours and while I find the simulation very  good I did not find a significant difference in the 'physics.'

Share this post


Link to post

Well, as much as I adore A2A 172,  I saw  some complaints with regards to their depiction of 172 ballooning over the airfield. Again, I'm not sure if that's physics or our hardware limitation (Let's face it - Saitek Yoke is only a taste of real controls I guess).

 

The real aircraft balloons if you pull back on the yoke, or ar too fast. Use FSUIPC to set your elevator axis and use a slope of +4 and see if that works better for you. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

The real aircraft balloons if you pull back on the yoke, or ar too fast. Use FSUIPC to set your elevator axis and use a slope of +4 and see if that works better for you.

 

Thank you for the tip. For now I'm not on FSUIPC but I might ultimately get it although with some tweaking to elevator sensitivity I found the sweetspot.

 

I'll probably rework it anyway after my first flight IRL ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

Well, as much as I adore A2A 172,  I saw  some complaints with regards to their depiction of 172 ballooning over the airfield. Again, I'm not sure if that's physics or our hardware limitation (Let's face it - Saitek Yoke is only a taste of real controls I guess).

 

I can vouch that the A2A 182's landing characteristics are not good IMO, so simply always assuming A2A is great isn't always prudent.

 

182s are heavy birds, especially in the nose. They are not hard to land nor do they have issues with ballooning unless you are well off your numbers. In real life, it's a bear to bring the nose up on a 182 in the flare with full flaps. In the simulator, everything is way overstated.

 

By contrast, their Cherokee is much better in ground effect and compares more favorably to the real thing.

Share this post


Link to post

182s are heavy birds, especially in the nose. They are not hard to land nor do they have issues with ballooning unless you are well off your numbers. In real life, it's a bear to bring the nose up on a 182 in the flare with full flaps. In the simulator, everything is way overstated.

 

Yup, when I went from the benign PA28 to the 182 I couldnt believe how much the nose fell out the sky when cutting the power for the flare, in the end I used to leave a little bit of power on to help lift it up provided I had my Vref nailed 

Share this post


Link to post

I can vouch that the A2A 182's landing characteristics are not good IMO, so simply always assuming A2A is great isn't always prudent.

 

182s are heavy birds, especially in the nose. They are not hard to land nor do they have issues with ballooning unless you are well off your numbers. In real life, it's a bear to bring the nose up on a 182 in the flare with full flaps. In the simulator, everything is way overstated.

 

By contrast, their Cherokee is much better in ground effect and compares more favorably to the real thing.

 

Yeah, IRL, that 182 elevator is HEAVY compared to a 172 (or anything small)

Share this post


Link to post

The Landing Physics is non existent in FSX - P3D unfortunately. Just browse how many Youtube videos of people doing crash landings that would sure make the plane bounce out of control and damage the entire thing and see how they get away with it. In FSX it's like a Switch, you touch the ground and it's like magnets are engaged that will hold you on that surface no matter what the suspension is doing, it only takes the calculation of Lift in consideration, not the suspension, spring, wheel compression, etc.

 

Now take the DCS P51 and try slamming it at the ground, man you;re in for a BIG surprise! It's going to push you back into the air when you least expect it, below Stall Arc Speed, and you're in for a big unpleasent surprise! Just do your best not to crash it

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

AHah!!!!! Alexis also using the BEST sim ever - DCS World!

Share this post


Link to post

While A2A makes great addons, the host simulator they choose to use is making any kind of realistic flight behavior impossible.

 

Also, I never did like Carenado aircraft until I started flying them in X-plane.

Share this post


Link to post

There are two fundamental problems with landing physics in both platforms. In P3D-FSX, the ground effect too strong. If you flare properly, you will float for ever. In X-plane, its too weak. If you flare properly, it will pound down. Some of the talented aircraft developers have engineered the issue out. How does real ground effect work?

 

1. In aircraft, mostly heavy metal that I fly and have flown, the flare is a 2 to 3 degree pitch change. This will diminish, not stop the sink rate.

 

2. You enter ground effect at an altitude about half of the aircraft's wing span. You notice this as a gradual 200 to 300 feet per minute loss of sink rate. You will also notice that the nose will tend to drop as you enter ground effect.

 

3. On approach in a normal jet on a 3 degree glide path, you are looking at 700 to 800 feet per minute sink rate. The aircraft is properly trimmed for your approach speed, REF+5/additives. As you cross the threshold, you start to bleed your additives and your +5. As you slow, now your yoke is a little nose heavy. As you enter ground effect, you start to lose sink as it gradually impacts the aircraft and inertia. Ground effect makes your nose a little heavier. As you apply the flare at 20 to 30 feet, you make a 2 to 3 degree pitch change and pull power. You will find that it takes some back pressure to keep the pitch constant. You never trim, you just keep that back pressure and adjust to keep your flare pitch. As you are doing this, the pitch change is also decreasing your sink. In this text book fashion, you will end up in a text book lightly firm touch down. As you gain experience, you will learn to adjust pitch change rate and power pull timing to get a nice touch right in the target zone. If you find this happening in the sims, the developer did an excellent job with the model.

 

Rich

Share this post


Link to post

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