16 minutes ago, kand said:

All of those addons have to set a highly unrealistic level of idle thrust to "nullify" the effects of the default friction coefficients, however they can do nothing for the unrealistic sliding co-efficients or the unrealistic contamination coefficients. This high idle thrust means that you end up with a very flat curve through the N1 23% to 70% range, so they dont actually fix the issue, just mask it, realistic? I think not 

I agree you shouldn't have to do it yourself, but it bothered me so much I am now resigned to fixing it myself each time a point release is made, takes me about an hour all in, cant imagine I would use the sim with the default values again, awful experience. 

I agree that some of this is true, but that's the only way of going around all these problems in P3D. Majestic has it's own physics and flight dynamics engine outside of P3D. Still, this is core functionality in a flight simulator that LM should take seriously and fix. There's been numerous complaints over the years about these issues.

A2A has it's own way of dealing with this as far as I know. Don't see any unusual high rpm to get the plane rolling compared to the real C172.

27 minutes ago, kand said:

it bothered me so much I am now resigned to fixing it myself each time a point release is made

Interesting and has me curious. Have you detailed the information that you edit and perhaps a step-by-step guide on how to accomplish this? I don't have a problem making these manual changes if the result is satisfactory.

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

Well there is one that has coding for wet/ice runways etc within its performance and probably the best simulation you can buy within P3D v4.1

FSL A320. 

As a real pilot you would  enjoy the depth it's beyond anything else. The next release build with performance looks close now and reports say its now the same as the PMDG NG performance wise but a much higher level that someone like you should enjoy. Even with the shortcoming of P3D that FSL have manage to mitigate some of.

The FSL A320 is still not even close to how the real A320 behaves on the ground, its like a sportscar compared to an SUV, way to responsive...

 

15 minutes ago, JanReidar said:

I agree that some of this is true, but that's the only way of going around all these problems in P3D. Majestic has it's own physics and flight dynamics engine outside of P3D. Still, this is core functionality in a flight simulator that LM should take seriously and fix. There's been numerous complaints over the years about these issues.

A2A has it's own way of dealing with this as far as I know. Don't see any unusual high rpm to get the plane rolling compared to the real C172.

Its not N1 or RPM, you wont see any difference here, its the static thrust (at N1) an airfile designer needs to increase at the 0 mach thrust level to overcome the incredibly high amount of ground friction that is set by default in SIM1.DLL

Not much can be done with the flight dynamics to overcome the low sliding friction which is why aircraft slip and skid in turns on concrete

eg

Real 777-300 with GE90-115B  engines, 4013lbs of thrust per engine emitted at idle N1 23%, breakaway thrust required at MTOW 9125lbs x2 (1%uphill slope) 

Default fsim 3rd party 777 with RR engines, 9000lbs of thrust emitted at idle N1 23%, 16000lbs of thrust x2 set in table 1506 to get moving at MTOW to mimic the ability to taxi at idle thrust etc etc 

But by setting that high amount of thrust at the low end (which would normally be seen through the mid N1 levels, you end up with a really flat high thrust curve until you can get back onto the real world vector aiming for the real world max thrust value.

The community needs to lobby LM and accept that if this is fixed, many aircraft addons will be broken (taxi like rockets and not be able to stop in required distances) requiring airfile updates. 

anyway, going off topic, believe me I have spent hours/days analyzing information in the quest to find the accurate rolling friction coefficient for concrete, I provided my work to LM but had no response.

 

15 minutes ago, Chandler said:

The FSL A320 is still not even close to how the real A320 behaves on the ground, its like a sportscar compared to an SUV, way to responsive...

 

 

The FSL a320 is the only add on I have used that has enough rudder authority to counter a v1 cut in a realistic manner..  it seems to me that most planes in FS have a neutered rudder probably because our controls suck or to appease the people flying without proper gear. 

I would love to try a set of control loading rudder pedals with the FSL a320, I would think that would be as real as your going to get with a desktop sim at the moment.

25 minutes ago, kand said:

The community needs to lobby LM and accept that if this is fixed, many aircraft addons will be broken (taxi like rockets and not be able to stop in required distances) requiring airfile updates. 

 

Good luck with that. Far go many have a vested interest in maintaining status quo to get traction on lobbying for this change. 

Although it would great if LM would address all those legitimate complaints, doing so goes against their general product philosophy. It is clear to me that they rely on 3rd party developers to fix issues like those mentioned. Many of the items in the list do not affect either high end 3rd party aircraft or good 3rd party airports. 

The navdata issue is fixed by a combination of subscriptions to Navigraph and fsaerodata. Although not mentioned, VOXATC fixes the  simpleton ATC and AI aircraft behaviors.

Anyone who thinks that for $20 or $60 US they are going to get a perfect flight simulator, well to them I say best of luck. All of them have major worts and deficiencies of some kind and at least with P3d and XP those flaws can be remedied if one has a bathtub full of cash. Either buy add-ons or learn to live with the issues in the base sim.

1 hour ago, mikea76 said:

 

The FSL a320 is the only add on I have used that has enough rudder authority to counter a v1 cut in a realistic manner..  it seems to me that most planes in FS have a neutered rudder probably because our controls suck or to appease the people flying without proper gear. 

I would love to try a set of control loading rudder pedals with the FSL a320, I would think that would be as real as your going to get with a desktop sim at the moment.

Many Real world pilots praise the FSL. It taxis so well and the difference with the CFM and IAE is very nice.   

18 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Many Real world pilots praise the FSL. It taxis so well and the difference with the CFM and IAE is very nice.   

Majestic Q400 taxi behavior is great in my opinion. 

 

Have a look at Aerowinx. Takes care off all your P3D frustrations. Only for the 747 unfortunately

http://aerowinx.com/index.html

 

7 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Majestic Q400 taxi behavior is great in my opinion. 

 

The Q400 is a masterpiece Bob I agree. It's the very best in class.

4 hours ago, JanReidar said:

They need to break the backward compatibility at some point to give us the oportunity to have properly simulated airplanes and helicopters in P3D

I would suggest you bring this discussion to 3rd party Aircraft developers and see what sort of response you get.  What you are asking for would essentially break EVERY SINGLE existing 3rd party aircraft ... zero compatibility.  So if new physics happen, then new aircraft will need to happen, which means upgrade costs for existing aircraft owners.  You even hint at more money for end users and you'll get a rather hostile reception.

To keep compatibility, LM would have to code two entirely different physics models that the end user would have to select from or provide the option for aircraft developers to have a trigger value that if not present would indicate old physics and if present would indicate new physics ... but even with that, all AI aircraft would operate completely differently and would also need to be updated.

But like I said, I think your biggest opponents are not LM, but 3rd party aircraft developers.

With that said, I do agree with most of your comments.

Cheers, Rob.

4 hours ago, JanReidar said:

piston engine simulation also has a few issues (try a constant pitch propeller plane. If you add power without changing rpm, you will hear the engine working harder. In a real airplane, you will not hear this. Only if you change rpm. The opposite happens in P3D)

The piston model is, unfortunately, every bit as rough as the turbine one.  In addition to the relationship between prop pitch and power not being right, mixture modeling is completely broken.  With every plane you have to lean aggressively starting at far too low an altitude in order to maintain power and the relationship between leaning and fuel flow is wrong.  The mixture issues become particularly problematic when it comes to turbo-charged aircraft which simply can't be flown in the sim as they would be in real life.

Scott

55 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

Many Real world pilots praise the FSL. It taxis so well and the difference with the CFM and IAE is very nice.   

We are praising it, cause it's the only serious Airbus simulation out there and it's really good for a desktop sim, but ground behavior is weak. But it's still okay, as it is not a million dollar simulator.

I hope LM has some sim improvements on functionality for 4.2 release.  It is time to let go of the legacy stuff, the sim already is now 64bit.  Legacy stuff is holding everyone back.

 

Please post this on LM forums too.