Hi all,I would like to know why it is still not possible to fly corrct sideslips with this version of FlightSimulator? It is one of the fundamental procedures to do when landing in crosswind conditions with small propellerdriven planes. To clarify: It is not possible to bank an aircraft (about 5 degree will do for demonstration purpose) and stop the turning tendency with the rudder! Sure, it will work in the beginning, but once you are at full ruddertravel, the plane will turn towards the bank. In any real aircraft you will be able to stop this turning with the rudder, for as long as you like. With full rudderdeflection and wings level the plane skids sideways. This is correct, but it should in fact also turn slowly around the vertical axis.So in a nutshell: The rudder fails to produce a yawing moment BEYOND (and this is important, please understand and read carefully before flaming away) the initial onset of yaw when applying rudder and establishing sideslip.Try it: Fly towards the east, for example. Bank the aircraft five degrees either way. Keep the nose pointed towards the east with the rudder. Fly for 10 minutes..and keep the bank at 5 degrees! Is the nose still pointed east? No, it isn

I agree Jan. My understanding has been that Microsoft cares less about their flight modelling and leaves this area to 3-rd party developers. Since I don't fly MS default aircraft anyway I really don't care as long as PMDG's, Flight1's, Dreamfleet's, etc. airplanes will be able to sideslip correctly. ;)Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/for...argo_hauler.gifhttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

>Hi all,>>I would like to know why it is still not possible to fly>corrct sideslips with this version of FlightSimulator? Apparently, it is possible in the flight model. The RealAir aircraft are testimony to that. I think you should ask other people who have flown more RealAir aircraft about this, because they will have more simhours on them than I do. Why this behavior is not modelled into more aircraft, I do not know. Maybe it is hard to do. Or maybe it involves some fudging of the flight variables.Rhett

>If you would like to see how it should work,>download the demo of X-Plane and give it a try (Not a X-Plane>a really excited user, here, both programs have their strenghts and>weaknesses).>The "RealAir" addons for MSFS, even slip much better than an X-Plane will. I should know, as it's been one of my arguments against X-Plane flight modeling for quite some time. RealAir has become well known for their exceptional rudder control which applies to aerobatics also. Allows for knife edge, hammerheads, snaprolls, tailslides, etc. Other addon's for MSFS are capable of slipping too, in varying degreees, but it's been a nitch for RealAir products for several years.Just fork out a few bucks for an addon, and get an airplane that will slip better than any other flight sim! :-hah L.Adamson

>>Remember, a flight-simulator should simulate flight! Fancy>palmtrees and elephants are nice, but way down on the list ->in my opinion.>Do keep in mind, that flight also involves looking towards the ground. That's much of the excitement! If it wasn't, we could always test our IFR capabilities in a darknend room with a desktop computer. We could get some G-forces at the amusement park, and try our aerobatic capabilities with an R/C airplane.For me, what's on the ground and how the simulated airplane fly's is about a 50/50 proposition. I don't really enjoy one without the other.In my GA flight travels through southern Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico, I've seen wild horses kicking up the dust on mesa's rising above the Colorado River plateu. Perhaps Microsoft could duplicate this effect to make it feel a bit more like "real life"... A few eagles and hawks would enhance realism also! :)L.Adamson

Just as with xplane, etc... most default aircraft in MSFS are "as bad as they can get".I have at least found something "new" in two of the default aircraft in FSX - they stall, and even spiral very acceptably.I believe something was corrected in the way default airplane AIR files were designed before. The FM does allow for it, as RealAir models can easily demonstrate, you just have to know what to do with it, something that whoever takes care of the flight dynamics department in MSFS is missing a loooong time ago...If we look inside the FSX AIR files we'll find a few irrealistic parameters, and flight tests can easily reveal the poor modeling, but if one knows how to design an aircraft then the FM core in FSX will certainly yield acceptable performance. Yet, there are aspects of this game that never got right where they should be. I have pointed out a few on a couple of other threads in this board, but appart from Larry's comments, no one from the dev team made any remarks....How can it be that no one found the way to implement a realistic turn coordinator??? This is basic stuff guys! It really irritates me to see the ball slowly centering when my Baron is flying with and engine (even the left one) quit and the prop not even feathered!!! Even worse on the new executive jet - fail an engine and don't worry about using rudder trim - your PFD will show you a perfectly coordinated flight with one of the engines off!And... do you know that on a real GA aircraft if you use your turn coordinator to fly a standard rate turn (2') it will take 2' to complete a full circle? Of course you know - not true in MSFS's world (even if you use top notch RealAir stuff!!!).Well... I'm glad I have ELITE to decompress after a few FSX sessions...

Thanks for all the answers, guys. I guess I should try some of the Real -air addons you mentioned, hopefully Microsoft decides to correct this behaviour for the stock aircraft as well.I agree that eyecandy and correct modelling of the world is important and adds to the realism. Thats why I like to use MSFS, the fidelity of the terrain is outstanding and FSX is a nice improvement in that regard. I even use MSFS to familiarize myself with airports I have never been to or expect to have to use as diversion airports (in addition to the official and legal familiarization, of course).Jan

>>And... do you know that on a real GA aircraft if you use your>turn coordinator to fly a standard rate turn (2') it will take>2' to complete a full circle? Of course you know - not true in>MSFS's world (even if you use top notch RealAir stuff!!!).>No,no,no...... :7My RealAir SF260 nailed that two minute turn perfectly, as I mentioned previously!And that's from a clock with a second hand on my office wall, which keeps about as good of time, as my watch does, when coordinated to GPS atomic clock time.L.Adamson

A friend has modified several add-ons, and even the default J-3, to be able to slip (yes, a "real" slip, just as in the RealAir). He corrects many other faults, as well, including getting different aircraft to turn at the same rate at the same speed and angle of bank (as they should, of course) -- I've not tried the standard rate turn by timing it, yet.So it's the fault of the way the default (and most add-on) aircraft are designed, not the inherent flight model software in FS9 or FSX, that causes handling problems.

Ok ok ok!!!I know it is possible, because I've flown aircraft designed, for instance, by Ron Freimuth, that do everything as they should, down to not being so stable in pitch as they normaly are (only problem is that when pitch stability is reduced to realistic values the AP does a real bad job maintaining it..., and I wasn't able to reproduce typical ducth-roll effects on swept-back wing aircraft such as the good-old b727...).So, in a word, I am sure that provided someone who knows what he/she is doing designs an aircraft, it will certainly behave as supposed. In the end, and although I have used many simulators, as I still do for instance with xplane, MSFS is kind of the regression line of PC-based flight simulators. It packs the most important characteristics together with increasingly game-oriented features, but we have to learn how to live with that, because it is indeed one of the best products around, including many expensive high-end products (not ELITE, which I also use and is indeed a very valuable tool for IFR proficiency, and a great training platform for any RW pilot!).From time to time a rather promissing platform appears, just as happened with the great Fly series, but none has ever gone so far as xplane (in the game market, of course) in competing with MSFS. Fly!, and Fly!2 has features no other PC-based GA flightsim was ever able to model, but it is a stopped job (appart from the Legacy port to UNIX...) and xplane evolves erraticaly, and one never knows what Austin is up to for the next upgrade...

In defence of the MS Developers, remember, they are designing aircraft for the general populace, not trained pilots. I believe that many of the parameters they have chosen are to make the planes "easily" flyable.Now, I would argue that the planes chosen by MS should actually be easier to fly with "realistic" flight parameters. But I'm not the one who has done the studies on the subject.What would be cool, would be if they offered an upgrade for those that want it with more realistic flight parameters.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

>What would be cool, would be if they offered an upgrade for>those that want it with more realistic flight parameters.>That's what I like about third party addons. With so many varied preferences for specific aircraft, you can usually find a 3rd party vendor who has what you want, and with additional finely tuned flight dynamics and systems.L.Adamson

Yeah, but these planes are their babies, and I'm sure they would love to release a really awesome set of airfiles on the Realair level of realism quality.C'mon, C'mon I dare ya .... yeh, bring it on, show us what you got!:-)Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

To be honest I think what they've got is a huge hole in the aerodynamics department at the ACES Studios. Ptrobably there's no one in the "ACES Aerodynamics Dept.". He/She left long ago, by the time the new turbine models were introduced. Then, sometime between fs2002 and fs2004 someone decided to make a straight cut on the AIRfile parameters, and we were left with what MSFS flight dynamics are now...I just wonder why they don't ask for support from credited developers. People like Ron Freimuth, Rob Young, Herv

I would disagree-the flight models have improved in fsx. They are not perfect-but neither are the avionics,atc, scenery, and even "eye candy". Just because you can't do your 2 minute turn, and I can't do my chandelle with perfection, doesn't mean there are not improvements.You could make the same observation about other upgrade developers too-the add on airports ,items like FE and mesh upgrades, the avionics from Reality xp, are always improvements to the core product. The core product is improved with each version, but the ultimate perfection in various areas is always left to outside developers.I would think the beta testers are probably busy doing other things than looking for birds-however I am sure they will appreciate your comment as much as the Aces team does......and you know what-when fsx comes out-I'll bet there will be complaints that the birds are not specific for a particular region of the world. How can they do that? Shameful-waterfoul and birds should be faithfully modelled in every respect....I want egrets on my lake! :-lolhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg