12 hours ago, highflyer2020 said:

According to the PHB, the pilot's manual, everything is now correct. The power of the engine, the speed, the buoyancy are all correct. The plane has real performance. If the Cessna accelerates and takes off to 65 knots, it is exactly the same here. Computer simulations are not the reality, of course, you are not sitting in a real plane. The controller is not exactly the same, the screen is not exactly as big. However, all controllers have been tested and tuned by a real pilot to make it feel realistic

This is more or less completely meaningless marketing spiel, that doesn't bode well.

99% of the numbers you need for realistic flight are not in the phb (i assume they mean poh).

95% of flight is all about the numbers that are not in the handbook.

Stuff like weathervaning, stopping distance and acceleration under different w&b (poh just gives maximums for a limited amount of ideal conditions), stall characteristics (video they released so far was aweful) and everything else important change wildly with even simple changes to the physics.

Might as well claim they have discovered 42 was definately the answer to life the universe and everything.

20 minutes ago, mSparks said:

This is more or less completely meaningless marketing spiel, that doesn't bode well.

Oh, just stop with the Debbie Downer nonsense. You are worse than the Russian Bots...

59 minutes ago, n4gix said:

Oh, just stop with the Debbie Downer nonsense. You are worse than the Russian Bots...

Why are you on a flight sim forum if you think considering weathervaning and stall characteristics is nonsense?

There are so many ways you could of disagreed (such as it actually being "fine" that flight characteristic tuning for msfs2020 will always require a qualified test pilot, access to the real aircraft and a degree in aviation physics)

Yet all that seems to come from proponents of this new addition to the flight sim universe is how little they care about the details and would rather just try and start a fight.

That bodes even less well.

So yes, I am on the verge of completely writing it off as most likely another "flight" disaster and doing little more than returning to see how its progressed in 4 or 5 years.

If the point was encouraging people like me to invest developer money, resources and time, this kind of comment is exactly the kind of example of why that isn't going to happen.

After the XO19 announcement I was all about ready to go all in, the early responses to any concerns I had has already thrown water on that idea. Everything since then really is making me regret even giving it a chance in the first place.

Peace and fly safe.

 

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by mSparks

Ah he throws the bait again.

I'm glad the mods see him for what he his so I hope they won't allow him to kill another thread. #doit

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

Why are you on a flight sim forum if you think considering weathervaning and stall characteristics is nonsense?

There are so many ways you could of disagreed (such as it actually being "fine" that flight characteristic tuning for msfs2020 will always require a qualified test pilot, access to the real aircraft and a degree in aviation physics)

Yet all that seems to come from proponents of this new addition to the flight sim universe is how little they care about the details and would rather just try and start a fight.

That bodes even less well.

So yes, I am on the verge of completely writing it off as most likely another "flight" disaster and doing little more than returning to see how its progressed in 4 or 5 years.

If the point was encouraging people like me to invest developer money, resources and time, this kind of comment is exactly the kind of example of why that isn't going to happen.

After the XO19 announcement I was all about ready to go all in, the early responses to any concerns I had has already thrown water on that idea. Everything since then really is making me regret even giving it a chance in the first place.

Peace and fly safe.

 

From a couple of Alpha Testers.

https://www.reddit.com/r/flightsim/comments/efueez/fs2020_flight_model_alpha_testers/

Quote

Already dunks on X-Plane's model, that's for sure. Granted it has a few niggles here and there, some overdone turbulence but just flying a 172 in heavy winds feels genuinely dangerous at times.

Had a run where I was basically hovering like a kite for brief moments due to how strong the winds were, struggling to climb and really had to keep my focus, constantly turn the plane to not smash into strong headwinds. Times where I was even pushed towards the ground.

Also just seeing the planes go crazy as you pass over mountains and cliffs, get smashed by the ridge lift.

The wind and the overall feeling is just really organic and alive. X-Plane almost feels like a canned experienced in comparison.

Quote

This. I've flown (in real world) a 172 into unexpected weather and winds. I lost 3 pounds in sweat during the flight.

My butt received a workout of 2 years in that 1 hour flight. It was toned for the next year.

The feeling is there. I just wish we had good force feedback controllers still.

 

4 hours ago, mSparks said:

So yes, I am on the verge of completely writing it off as most likely another "flight" disaster and doing little more than returning to see how its progressed in 4 or 5 years.

 

Now that could be the most popular poll ever. Sign me up.

5 hours ago, Theboot100 said:

Had a run where I was basically hovering like a kite for brief moments due to how strong the winds were, struggling to climb and really had to keep my focus, constantly turn the plane to not smash into strong headwinds. Times where I was even pushed towards the ground.

So taking this as as good an example as any.

"realistic flight characteristics" has nothing to do with "taking off at 65kts", given in the poh, easy to test and replicate, no real importance.

and everything to do with the behaviour of the aircraft as you turn onto the crosswind leg after takeoff, 65kts groundspeed, 40kts headwind, 20kts ground speed (hovering like a kite) and transition to 40kts crosswind and 25kts air speed (not given in any handbook, and the behaviour of which is literally the difference between life and death)

Id be amazed if they didnt have this good for the cessna I would be amazed, its been done to death by a hundred different flight sims.

All the others that are potentially problematic.

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by mSparks

8 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Nonsense...

So your argument is that a developer's generalized comments in response to a non-aviator pc-gaming reporter are grounds for...whatever it is you're flailing to say?

I think you're right, you should proceed VFR direct back to XP and not check back for at least 4 to 5 years. Everyone will be much happier that way.

Be gone, troll.

As much as Mr. mSparks may look like a "naysayer" regarding MFS, I have to agree pretty much with everything he argues about.

He's comments have been valid so far, although sometimes he really shows where is heart still is.

I am not biased - I can easily Uninstall any flight simulator, being it civil or combat - and since I also visit the other sim "strong support" forums, I have known Sparks for a while now, since about 2 years when I started reading he's messages at those forums, and believe me, as much as he can point out what he finds wrong (by the time being only about what's being written about MFS, because most of us didn't yet have the chance to try it) he also can easily criticize XP, so.... he doesn't do it simply because he want's to do it with MFS.

I actually thought exactly the same he pointed out when I read that interview, and I am assuming what written there is a valid translation of the orignal german language text, so, I even gave him a "Like"...

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by jcomm

What surprises me is how much they are willing to say outside the sim community, but less to the target audience the want to sell to direct.   

1 hour ago, rjfry said:

What surprises me is how much they are willing to say outside the sim community, but less to the target audience the want to sell to direct.   

The target audience more or less knows (look at us), I think they're on the prowl for new blood (I mean fans) 😛

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

 I even gave him a "Like"...

Talk about feeding the troll. It's beyond my comprehension how anyone can like all the nonsense he posts like the 'aweful' stall characteristics, his incorrect POH claims, his weird life and death crosswind leg example etc.

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by FDEdev

2 hours ago, Noodle said:

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

Nonsense...

So your argument is that a developer's generalized comments in response to a non-aviator pc-gaming reporter are grounds for...whatever it is you're flailing to say?

my argument is that it shows a complete disregard for just how hard a problem "realistic flight model" actually is.

the kind of flippant, throw away comment that suggests "oh it was easy we just matched the poh" really suggests they have no interest in generalised "realistic" flight, or are just completely naive of the problems they will face when they start dealing with people who are actually serious about not dying rather than burning a few hours on fun and entertainment.

Marketed as the former - the longer this goes on the more it seems like the later.

If it is the later I completely wasted my time considering and following it.

But then why spend the time with manufacturers?

All This would suggest they dont intend much if any support for independent 3rd party developers. - that would be a surprise wouldnt it?

 

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by mSparks

9 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

Talk about feeding the troll. It's beyond my comprehension how anyone can like all the nonsense he posts like his incorrect POH claims, his weird life and death crosswind leg example etc.

Yeah the crosswind leg example was nonsense, on the other hand he's right that hitting all the POH numbers is only a tiny part of the overall flight model realism (but this is true for all sims).

But only you alpha-testers have more info on the actual, current flight model of MFS. 🙂