Anyone reckon we'll be seeing something like this in FS?

 

18 minutes ago, viz said:

Anyone reckon we'll be seeing something like this in FS?

I doubt it we'll see it at the beginning. I think it's more important for MS to get a well-performing sim at launch.
When it becomes a stable and mature platform after a few point releases, then maybe.

Watching that video, I thought the wake turbulence and vortices were under-powered for an IL-76, but then seeing the wake of the SU-27 under load was great, I think they ED have got it spot on!

I'd very much like MS to bring this to MSFS.

And here's a vid of a random selection of airliners, because who here doesn't like seeing things like this?

 

Doesn't FSX/P3D model wake turbulence? It may do so in a fairly rudimentary manner, but I recall being jostled around a little when flying behind AI aircraft. Seems like a rather straightforward aspect to include to the new sim, but I suppose it remains to be seen. I am quite curious to see what effect weather will play on aircraft in general.

This has most probably been done by Active Sky. I don't remember FSX or P3D having that out of the box.

14 minutes ago, meerkat said:

This has most probably been done by Active Sky. I don't remember FSX or P3D having that out of the box.

Ah, yeah. That's probably the case.

Don't know about P3D, but X-Plane has wake turbulence.  The developer of X-Plane is also real world pilot, and takes the flight model very seriously.  I hope MSFS's flight model can come close to this:

 

Actually Phillip i hope MFS takes note of Xplane 11.40 video and implement the concepts or at least some of them. Flight modelling details have been the previous versions weak point. Getting the right thrust calculations on single engine pistpn aircraft, prop wash and coefficient lift and drag with proper physics calculations has been dumbed down in previous versions such as FSX, proper Jet modelling and engine modelling is so important to be able to get correct N1 and N2 performance. 

External air and weather effects on the airframe is another key feature, such as wake turbulence as an example should be implemented in this version. 

Please Microsoft you have real world pilots on your team developing this new sim, also please use people such as A2A simulations, PMDG and Flightsimlabs as external developers and have vast knowledge on flight physics for piston, jet and fly by wire aircraft that have kept your previous versions alive and still used today!! All we ask is that you excel in all things related to the Flight Dynamics and modelling of default aircraft but also what is possible through the SDK. 

Thanks 

Blessings 

 

Duncan Odgers 

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by Duncan Odgers

On 8/30/2019 at 8:20 PM, viz said:

Anyone reckon we'll be seeing something like this in FS?

 

Awesome. 

On 8/30/2019 at 1:59 PM, F737NG said:

I doubt it we'll see it at the beginning. I think it's more important for MS to get a well-performing sim at launch.
When it becomes a stable and mature platform after a few point releases, then maybe.

Watching that video, I thought the wake turbulence and vortices were under-powered for an IL-76, but then seeing the wake of the SU-27 under load was great, I think they ED have got it spot on!

I'd very much like MS to bring this to MSFS.

And here's a vid of a random selection of airliners, because who here doesn't like seeing things like this?

 

I'm in agreeance here as MFS "hoping" from the beginning will be in focus of a stable platform and advance the physic as time goes by. MS has a lot of resources at their disposal and one can only hope they choose the right people/partners on guiding this Sim and advance flight dynamics, physics from the get go.

 

DS has had lots of yrs at getting where they are today.

 

1 hour ago, Duncan Odgers said:

 

They would also be smart to get themselves the service of good old Rob Young as a special consultant !

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by domkle

On 8/30/2019 at 11:31 PM, PhilipG said:

Don't know about P3D, but X-Plane has wake turbulence.  The developer of X-Plane is also real world pilot, and takes the flight model very seriously.  I hope MSFS's flight model can come close to this:

The problem with x-plane is that every new idea Austin has means one step forward and two back. This happens with almost every new feature x-plane.

It's a Flight model designers nightmare due to the constant changes, it's a moving target 

Like in case of the ground effect it can take literaly years until a new feature works in a realistic or at least acceptable way.

Having designed airplanes and FMs for x-plane since its beginning, his new ideas sound more like a threat than a promise for (ex) x-plane designers like me.

17 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

The problem with x-plane is that every new idea Austin has means one step forward and two back. This happens with almost every new feature x-plane.

It's a Flight model designers nightmare due to the constant changes, it's a moving target 

Like in case of the ground effect it can take literaly years until a new feature works in a realistic or at least acceptable way.

Having designed airplanes and FMs for x-plane since its beginning, his new ideas sound more like a threat than a promise for (ex) x-plane designers like me.

Isn't that made at least a little easier now with the optional "Use experimental flight model" check box that arrived in 11.30? That allows a secondary flight model for either Laminar or 3rd party developers to test changes without affecting the current version of the aircraft model. Maybe not a complete solution, but it's supposed to ease some of the strain of developing for a moving target.

I know a sim in constant evolution is rough on 3rd party developers. However, from the end-user perspective, I prefer that paradigm to one where we would have to wait 4 years for any changes with the next numbered version of XP, or wait even longer now in the case of MSFS as the next version of FSX.

FSX has been a paradise for 3rd party developers for all these years now, but it wasn't that great for the end-users in terms of updated flight and engine modeling.

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by Paraffin

8 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

FSX has been a paradise for 3rd party developers for all these years now, but it wasn't that great for the end-users in terms of updated flight and engine modeling.

The blade-element theory is in no way superior to the table based simulation method (which is being used by 'real' Level-D sims).

In fact designing FMs in x-plane is much more restrictive than the FSX/P3D method concerning aerodynamics in many areas. 

X-plane is a great tool when you want to invent a new airplane and check out how e.g. a certain configuration would approximately work IRL, but if you want to e.g. fine tune specific spin entry, spin attitude and recovery behaviour, the FSX/P3D method is definitely better.

If MS improves the FSX/P3D flight modelling and its tools in MSFS, it will be hopefully great for developers and end users. 🙂 

Edited September 1, 20196 yr by FDEdev

32 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

The blade-element theory is in no way superior to the table based simulation method (which is being used by 'real' Level-D sims).

I didn't say it was superior, did I? It's just different, and I realize the trade-offs for 3rd party developers. 😉

What I was addressing was mainly the question of whether it's better to have most of the heavy lifting in steady flight model and engine/systems model improvements done by the sim developer on a rolling basis, or whether it's better to have a fairly static base sim, where the 3rd party developers have to improve the flight model with add-ons. 

The reason why helicopters are so much better modeled in XP, is due to the continuing improvements Laminar have built into the sim. Including some new changes coming in 11.40 With FSX, there are very few high-end helicopters because the base sim doesn't support that flight model very well. Everything to make it better has to be done by the 3rd party aircraft developer.

Personally, I think the "moving target" is a better approach, because internal changes in the sim can apply to all aircraft, and not just a few where the 3rd party dev can use their special voodoo to make an accurate model. Laminar doesn't move as fast as some might like, but it is steady progress. To bring things back on topic, I hope MSFS follows that moving target model.

3 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

I hope MSFS follows that moving target model.

99% sure that this will not happen. If the basics are correct there's simply no need to produce a 'moving target'.

In the first x-plane version you couldn't even perform a loop!