Wingflex - Time for a review?

[SierraHotel 974]

Can't wait to see it in a REX Super Cell!

[Ephedrin 418]

5 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Hell, the cockpit doesn't even shake.

Euhm... haven‘t flown the 747 for 2 months or so... but I m quite sure my cockpit DOES shake...

[Captain Kevin 586]

6 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Hell, the cockpit doesn't even shake.

It doesn't? Wonder what you call this then.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/174119106

[ahsmatt7 1,199]

3 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

It doesn't? Wonder what you call this then.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/174119106

You have a serious problem reading between the lines don't you?

[ahsmatt7 1,199]

4 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

Euhm... haven‘t flown the 747 for 2 months or so... but I m quite sure my cockpit DOES shake...

Mine doesn't...

Obviously it's a problem on my end.

Ever since I followed the guidance on turning the AS for p3d v4 settings down in the turbulence scalar, I don't really get any turbulence or shaking cameras.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

1. Back on topic, please.

2. Data, please.

3. No, videos are not data.

4. The videos aren’t providing much actionable anything.

5. Did I mention data...?

6. I see this as a repeat of every other thread on this exact topic where I ask for data, get none, get a bunch of videos that are about as worthless and much less entertaining than cat videos, and end up locking it because it devolves as the requests for data get ignored.

 

 

In the spirit of the holidays, I’ll make this pretty simple: bring data and discuss; or ignore data request and get shut down until someone brings actual data.

This is remarkably simple, and I’m baffled as to how people continue to bring this up as NEEDING review because it’s “so clear,” without providing any clear evidence using data.

The plane climbs like garbage when weather programs throw garbage/unrealistic temperatures at it, too. Fix plane or fix weather program? Totally fix the plane. Absolutely...

<TomCruise.gif> SHOW ME THE DATA!

[icaruss 18]

In flight test videos ARE accepted as data, however in this case is just an incomplete picture as stated numerous times above (weight, configuration, flight control inputs, etc).  

Hard to fix something when more than half of the story is missing.  

[Captain Kevin 586]

5 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

1. Back on topic, please.

2. Data, please.

3. No, videos are not data.

4. The videos aren’t providing much actionable anything.

5. Did I mention data...?

6. I see this as a repeat of every other thread on this exact topic where I ask for data, get none, get a bunch of videos that are about as worthless and much less entertaining than cat videos, and end up locking it because it devolves as the requests for data get ignored.

 

 

In the spirit of the holidays, I’ll make this pretty simple: bring data and discuss; or ignore data request and get shut down until someone brings actual data.

This is remarkably simple, and I’m baffled as to how people continue to bring this up as NEEDING review because it’s “so clear,” without providing any clear evidence using data.

The plane climbs like garbage when weather programs throw garbage/unrealistic temperatures at it, too. Fix plane or fix weather program? Totally fix the plane. Absolutely...

<TomCruise.gif> SHOW ME THE DATA!

I was on your side with this, actually. I only posted my video to prove that it didn't look as drastic as it did in Alex's video. I asked about the turbulence settings, but no response to that question, so not much I can really do from there. I personally didn't see anything wrong with the wingflex on my end.

12 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

You have a serious problem reading between the lines don't you?

Yes.

[aceridgey 330]

I think videos are fine, and unless you're an in house Boeing Engineer how do you expect people to provide data?? This is a visual thing, videos allow reference?

 

Kyle, I think you're being a little over enthusiastic. This forum is a discussion point for people share views and opinions. I didn;t think it was more black and white where pmdg=right criticism=wrong 

[Ephedrin 418]

On 29.12.2017 at 10:03 PM, Iceman2 said:

FWIW IMHO, I have piloted the real 747-400 albeit a few years ago now and believe PMDG have done a remarkable job in simulating the wing flex on this product. My experience is with P3Dv4 and AS as the WX engine. Your mileage on different platforms or WX engines may vary.

The B747 is very unique in its wing flex especially after Boeing attached the winglets adding additional weight.

Viewed from the passenger seat the wing on a 74 appears to be alive and moves around all the time while taxiing or flying. 

In order to simulate this unique living wing and dealing with the many in sim limitations, PMDG have had to make the flex more sensitive to create this effect . (I’m no software engineer, just a happy customer) 

As PMDG have stated many times in their forums and probably in their manuals adjustment to settings within the WX engine (of choice) is necessary.

I think I have AS set just right for my personal taste, unfortunately I can’t remember the figures right this second, but if anyone wants to ask for them I’m happy to look them up when next on the sim computer.

 From memory the turbulence & WS rates have been adjusted and the extra thunderstorm turbulence effect disabled.  

I know this post will frustrate those who don’t know how or what to adjust in their weather engine of choice but at least try and experiment and have fun.

IM

 

 

This post should actually be enough.. 

My cousin flies the 737 and she was visiting the family last week. She sees numerous 747s at the gate, taxiing or on the runway every day at Schiphol. I've showed her the latest P3D and also asked her about the wing flex. She said it looks pretty familiar to her. 

Kyle has repeated many times that the wing flex was created after data provided by Boeing. Boeing has certified those addons. 

It is impossible to recreate a 100% correct wing flex. And why should it be tried? This is a flight simulator, released in 2017. We're eventually lucky enough to have got a 64 bit environment. Maybe PMDG and others will be able to recreate an absolutely 100% swiss-watch-wing flex in future versions. Maybe 2020, maybe 2030. 

 

And if the wings bounce 5m up and down then adjust the weather settings. As simple as that.

[icaruss 18]

8 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

 

This post should actually be enough.. 

My cousin flies the 737 and she was visiting the family last week. She sees numerous 747s at the gate, taxiing or on the runway every day at Schiphol. I've showed her the latest P3D and also asked her about the wing flex. She said it looks pretty familiar to her. 

Kyle has repeated many times that the wing flex was created after data provided by Boeing. Boeing has certified those addons. 

It is impossible to recreate a 100% correct wing flex. And why should it be tried? This is a flight simulator, released in 2017. We're eventually lucky enough to have got a 64 bit environment. Maybe PMDG and others will be able to recreate an absolutely 100% swiss-watch-wing flex in future versions. Maybe 2020, maybe 2030. 

 

And if the wings bounce 5m up and down then adjust the weather settings. As simple as that.

Couldn’t agree more.  This is just a flight sim, don’t care how good it is, it just won’t  be exactly like the real thing (especially for outside visuals).  

Priorities in what I look for a sim are Performance, Handling Qualities, and Systems.  If these are as close as it gets, fantastic!  I personally don’t care much about how much a wing flexes, it doesn’t affect my experience in the cockpit.  

[scandinavian13 5,192]

12 hours ago, aceridgey said:

Kyle, I think you're being a little over enthusiastic. This forum is a discussion point for people share views and opinions. I didn;t think it was more black and white where pmdg=right criticism=wrong 

No. You're being a little over pointed. Your original posts makes it seem like this is an established fact. It is not. Moreover, your implication that this is an established fact is not backed by data. You provided none; you linked to none. The whole "this is a discussion" excuse is lost when you toss out an assertion of fact that is not backed with data.

We're all for criticism. Just back that criticism with FACTS. This is not too much to ask. Sorry.

Since I asked for facts and data earlier and all I've gotten is feelings, this one's getting locked. If you want to discuss this in the openness of the idea that you may be wrong (particularly when you bring ZERO data), fine. If you're going to ask if we're going to modify something as if it's proven wrong, no. That's not how discussions work.