MSFS 2020 Crash Physics?

[bonchie 2,305]

I have no problem with it being included. But I hope it's way, way down the list of things they are working on if they want to do it. 

[Quasimodo 505]

4 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

unknown dynamic kicks in

lots of people like to affirm themselves at the expense of others with fake indignation.

To paraphrase the OP: when thing go awry and one finds oneself in a crash situation it would good it the structural failure and crash was simulated.

To paraphrase some of the replies: you're a despicable human being! Check your privilege! go to the back of the class.

Good Grief! give it a rest😛

Edited January 22, 2020 by Avidean

[Nedo68 533]

Dont forget we need passengers in full ragdoll mode too! (talk about the game "Turbo Dismount" ) imagine a full Airbus with them and i do a looping  😅

😉

[Murmur 3,973]

True, detailed crash modeling is not required in a "serious" sim (whatever that term could mean), just like 3D rivets, advanced sound and 1000 other things aren't required either.

But I'd love to have advanced crash physics where you can clip a wing when over-g'ing or colliding with a tree or crash and burn in a building or on the ground.

Just as you could in Flight Unlimited, in XP, in Aerofly FS1, in DCS, in GTA5 and in countless other games (with none of the consequences feared by some here).

So please Asobo, even if you can't do that for default aircrafts, give 3rd parties the SDK hooks to do that in their add-ons!

 

[martin-w 3,276]

2 hours ago, Mengy said:

 

However, all of that said, I will freely admit that realistic crash physics is a feature I've longed for in MS Flight Sim for many versions now.  I'd personally love to see it because I'd love to have some actual physical feedback when I do something wrong in the sim.  Like when I come in too low over treetops to a short bush strip and clip a wing.  Or when I land too hard and crush a landing strut.  Or when I accidentally over-speed and rip the wings off.  I'd like to see some visual decisive feedback when I mess up.

 

 

Yep, well said, agree entirely. It's about "feedback". Just as I welcomed the variation in sound and vibration when landing in the recent update, I would also welcome feedback in terms of physical damage. 

Edited January 22, 2020 by martin-w

[martin-w 3,276]

6 minutes ago, Murmur said:

 

So please Asobo, even if you can't do that for default aircrafts, give 3rd parties the SDK hooks to do that in their add-ons!

 

 

3rd parties  licence their products with the manufacturer too though. Not sure iof always, but most of the best add-on aircraft are I believe. 

[jpc55 185]

I don’t see any problem with crashing, If you do if should destroy your computer! That would seem fair to me!

[ILSFREAK 56]

16 hours ago, Casualcas said:

But if you WANT to crash, go right ahead. Lol me, I'll avoid it lol

Who in his right mind would do that?

 

[Casualcas 830]

Someone who knows better than to fly into a thunder storm. Lol

[Slayer 190]

X-Plane already has this with the default Cessna , you crash it it will break apart and have burning wreckage.

Don't know of any payware that has this feature.

Also I guess nobody remembers Microsoft Combat flight simulator. If memory serves it used the same  engine as FS2004?

[Slayer 190]

Aeroplane heaven has crash damage in P3D 4.5

[tweekz 2,165]

On 1/22/2020 at 4:09 AM, FDEdev said:

I would say the kind of system/equipment failure/damage you see in multi-million dollar Level-D sims (and e.g. x-plane) should be sufficient for the new sim.

Overstressing the structure to a point where it fails and colliding with the ground terminates a flight, IRL and in the sim. No need IMO to 'simulate' this in a non-combat sim.  

I can definitely see situations where it could be useful. For example if you try to practise emergencies including emergency landings on and off the runway. This is very well a simulation aspect IMO.

Landing a 737 in a cornfield without a problem, is not very realistic.

[FDEdev 955]

13 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Landing a 737 in a cornfield without a problem, is not very realistic.

Why?  There's even a gravel kit for the 737.

During the hijacking of a 737 they had to land their aircraft parallel to the runway in the dirt because the runway was blocked.  A few hourse later they took off again. 

In another case a 737 landed with both engines failed on a grass levee without receiving any damage.

Furthermore, as I have mentioned before, gear collapse and tire failures should be definitely included! 

Edited January 23, 2020 by FDEdev

[tweekz 2,165]

25 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

Why?  There's even a gravel kit for the 737.

During the hijacking of a 737 they had to land their aircraft parallel to the runway in the dirt because the runway was blocked.  A few hourse later they took off again. 

In another case a 737 landed with both engines failed on a grass levee without receiving any damage.

Furthermore, as I have mentioned before, gear collapse and tire failures should be definitely included! 

 

I have the slight suspicion that the right engine nacelle usually doesn't point that way. 😉

I think there is no need to discuss the dangers of off field landings. I'd like to be able to practise those things and see how good I can handle such situations.

And I agree. Collapsed gear should be a minimum. You shouldn't be able to slam the aicraft into the ground with no consequence.

Edited January 23, 2020 by tweekz

[RALF9636 2,006]

For now I would be happy if we get aircraft with 1000 points that react properly when hitting the air.

1000 points that react properly when hitting the ground, a tree, a building or any object other than air may come at a later stage of the announced ten years project... 😉