Guys, please. PLEASE just ignore him!

1 minute ago, Murmur said:

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. 🙂

They've clearly done more than just hit the numbers since they're going to to the manufacturers and having real pilots fine tune things but I guess we've forgotten about that?

7 minutes ago, Murmur said:

on the other hand he's right that hitting all the POH numbers is only a tiny part of the overall flight model realism

I don't know what else should Asobo/MS write about?  It's one of the few things even a non-pilot can check. 

I doubt that they could have impressed many people by e.g. reporting how many yaw/roll oscillations are happening on a specific aircraft after e.g. full rudder input at different airspeeds or the maximum roll rate at different airspeeds etc...

Especially since no-one except the company test-pilots know these figures (and some companies don't even record items like the maximum roll rate)

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by FDEdev

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

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.

Does it get hard on your back, constantly picking up and dragging those goalposts around?

11 hours ago, mSparks said:

After the XO19 announcement I was all about ready to go all in,

Based on your post history here and on the X-Plane forum, I don't think I've ever believed a statement less in my entire life.

You'd make a terrible analyst. You seem incapable of applying critical thinking skills. 

Why would a developer regale a non-flightsimming reporter for a gaming site with information about topocs like Dutch Roll, positive longitudinal stability, minimum controllable airspeed, or post-stall gyrations?

That wouldn't make much sense. The cited article is a puff piece, and does not provide enough information to draw any reasonable inferences regarding the depth of flight modeling except that, at minimum, aircraft performance should match data published in the flight manual.

Your analysis is biased, and is not supported by the cited information.

In the same reddit post there is another reply saying that

"The wind is far better than X-Plane, but other things are less accurate, e.g. almost no P-factor, odd prop wash, wrong c.g. in all the planes."

From what we've heard so far, the real developers are in direct contact with the Studio. They aren't basing their business decisions on interviews. And a lot of them are already on board.

8 minutes ago, Pastaiolo said:

In the same reddit post there is another reply saying that

"The wind is far better than X-Plane, but other things are less accurate, e.g. almost no P-factor, odd prop wash, wrong c.g. in all the planes."

Considering that MSFS isn't even in beta and that it took x-plane a few decades to get the basics right does sound promising IMO.

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

The process to get there, any details already captured, how and who plans to develop all the parts they acknowledge are going to be missing at launch.

How they plan to compete with the likes of

Any actual "flight stuff", rather than marketing spiel that will eventually just get people madder than an xenviro fan meeting the realities of Vulkan gfx drivers.

I realize I should refrain from calling people names, but you have some... issues. You appear to be living in a peculiar universe where your God, Austin Meyers is the one and only person who can accurately implement flight dynamics. I've read your other posts where you boldly proclaim that "Asobo can only dream about flight model as accurate as X-Plane's".

Do you seriously think Austin - and you - are the only people in the world who know anything about flight dynamics, fluid simulation, numerical methods? Do you think just because Austin wrote that "Angle = initial angle - angular velocity * time" on whiteboard (which for your curious mind seems probably like Navier-Stokes or whatnot) means that no one else has access to such forbidden knowledge? 

While X-Plane's (11) flight model is... decent, nothing implemented there is by any means innovative in terms of techniques used. Things like finite/blade element theory, turbulence factors as emulation of nonlaminar flow etc. are routinely used in all sorts of industrial simulators (and not only the ones where you fly). Sure, it's challenging to implement all of that accurately, debug it, optimize for medium-end hardware, test and so on, but it's not like Austin is doing some cutting-edge research in computational fluid dynamics. You could get anyone with a PhD in something related to computational fluid dynamics and couple of years of industry experience to draft you an implementation of a decent flight model. But I guess in your universe only Austin knows what pressure or velocity is. 

You're in denial, and it's seriously worrying. But sure, all the test pilots who tested handling of MSFS's airplanes are wrong, they obviously don't know their stuff. I mean, it would be rather silly to expect a test pilot to know how an airplane behaves. Or I guess Microsoft/Iluminati bribed them. 

(I fully understand if admins choose to remove this post, but mSpark's deluded babbling seems to get on many people's nerves)

2 hours ago, FDEdev said:

I don't know what else should Asobo/MS write about?  It's one of the few things even a non-pilot can check. 

I doubt that they could have impressed many people by e.g. reporting how many yaw/roll oscillations are happening on a specific aircraft after e.g. full rudder input at different airspeeds or the maximum roll rate at different airspeeds etc...

Oh I agree with that, I was just pointing out that hitting the POH numbers is a good nice info to give in an interview but (for those who didn't already had access to the alpha) doesn't tell anything of particular significance on the flight model.

Personally speaking, I'd love to have a lot more info on the intricacies of the new finite element FM. Devs of other sims with a similar FM (DCS, IL2, XP) write a lot of enthusiastic posts about the smallest advancements they implement now and then in their FM. Maybe one of the new updates could be focused on that? Although I realise that would be very technical and less popular than updates on ATC, airports, etc.

1 hour ago, FDEdev said:

Considering that MSFS isn't even in beta and that it took x-plane a few decades to get the basics right does sound promising IMO.

All the sensible simmers know this, but it doesn't suit trolls and their biased agenda.

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by eaim

1 hour ago, alkan said:

I realize I should refrain from calling people names, but you have some... issues. You appear to be living in a peculiar universe where your God, Austin Meyers is the one and only person who can accurately implement flight dynamics. 

 

Mod's don't remove this post, as alkan is 100% right, if anything/anyone should be removed, it should be the troll.

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by 188AHC
Pruned long quote

1 hour ago, alkan said:

I realize I should refrain from calling people names, but you have some... issues. You appear to be living in a peculiar universe where your God, Austin Meyers is the one and only person who can accurately implement flight dynamics. I've read your other posts where you boldly proclaim that "Asobo can only dream about flight model as accurate as X-Plane. 

Please don't remove this post.  While i think Austin is a talented person, this post is 100% spot on.  There is a host of people in the aerospace industry, scientific community and programmers that deal with this stuff daily.

If anything Sparks constant trolling is doing more harm than good to X-Plane.   And he's readily admitted on the org forums that he's trolling.

 

Edited December 29, 20196 yr by 188AHC
Pruned long quote

2 minutes ago, Theboot100 said:

If anything Sparks constant trolling is doing more harm than good to X-Plane.   And he's readily admitted on the org forums that he's trolling.

link?

5 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

link?

I can attest to that. And he got that thread locked too. Too lazy to find his exact post though but I am sure theboot can provide the link along with the exact pg and post #.