Still worried about the flight model ... how planes move

[sd_flyer 6,041]

Well they just have confirmed they will continue to improve flight model. So hopefully everyone will learn how to fly coordinated and get basic sens of stick and rudder feel!

[Kopteeni 819]

16 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

21 pages about the flight model of a pre-release version seen in some videos? 

Did you ever think about the possibility that the public Alpha / Beta was not meant to test the flight dynamics? That the Alpha / Beta versions - which have been tested by several thousand people who probably have no idea about flying an airplane at all (as could be seen from many videos) - received a basic flight model while Asobo were testing and tweaking the actual flight models with some professionals?

 

 

I know the secret Asobo handshake that's mandatory for getting into the secret club where you can download the real flight model.

Edited August 6, 2020 by Kopteeni

[robert young 2,897]

25 minutes ago, joec63 said:

I dont recall ASOBO ever saying it would revolutionize aerodynamics, sounds a bit sensational. . Can you point me to the video?   All that and you've yet to fly it. Maybe hold the critique until you try it . There will be plenty to criticize I'm sure.  

OK, maybe not revolutionary, but certainly "new" and "from scratch", so this video claims.

[HiFlyer 9,359]

Just now, robert young said:

OK, maybe not revolutionary, but certainly "new" and "from scratch", so this video claims.

Blade element theory on a tabletop computer was new once as well, and how long has it taken Austin to get it where it is? A couple of decades?

[tweekz 2,165]

1 hour ago, robert young said:

Point taken hanger, but Asobo released a lot of PR about how wonderful its multipoint lift areas were and how this would revolutionise aerodynamics! Default aircraft flight models do not take so much work that the basic elements are missing. No-one expects perfection. But the flaws I observe are fundamental. You could even design a f/m template for, say, several aircraft in the same broad category, then alter the inertia, stability and lift values for individual models, which honestly does not take long to get to a reasonable standard. What I see is the same errors in stability for all the aircraft shown, whether large or small.

It's great that those flaws get named, so ASOBO can hopefully take care of it.

What's rather unnecessary are extensive speculations about how severe those flaws actually are or not are...

No one here actually knows! No one has seen the code. It could be a fundamental flaw that will never really get fixed - it could be that they didn't have the time to fix it because they are under heavy workload.

All in all I'd say: R-E-L-A-X - Putting out a sim of that scale in 5 years is quite a stressfull task with lots of bumps in the road.

Edited August 6, 2020 by tweekz

[Stoopy 1,571]

OK so while we are all relaxing (and I am, believe me), just one question:

Has anyone seen, or been able to confirm, if the flight models now allow for doing a proper spin?  Got some plans for that C152 Aerobat if so.

Thanks in advance for any feedback on the question.

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Stoopy

[bonchie 2,305]

They are working night and day to improve the FD for release. If it's not perfect on the 18th, give it a few months. But they are in noway just calling it a day.

[Stoopy 1,571]

2 minutes ago, bonchie said:

They are working night and day to improve the FD for release. If it's not perfect on the 18th, give it a few months. But they are in noway just calling it a day.

Thank you so much,  I see it's also addressed at the 8 minute mark in the video posted above.  

 

[joec63 253]

Quote

Microsoft Flight Simulator can’t please everyone. There will undoubtedly be die-hard members of the flight sim community who find that certain things are missing, while others new to the idea might find it overwhelming. But what Microsoft is shipping from day one looks like it will be an incredible technical achievement, one with a central idea so compelling that it should be easy to appreciate the release for what it is.

And this is only the first step. “When I pitched this product, the thing that Phil [Spencer] said to me was, ‘Hey, Jorg, if we go in, we’re going to stay in,’” Neumann says. “We know we can’t just go make a product and boogie and do something else. That is not how this works. We’re taking on a responsibility here for a hobby, and people trust us and we know that. It is our oldest franchise in the company. It is older than Windows and Office. It has a special place.”

https://www.theverge.com/21347809/microsoft-flight-simulator-2020-preview-interview-hands-on

[hangar 661]

@robert young

I know how frustrating it can be, Rob...especially for someone of your background. By the way, you likely dont remember me but we worked together on a project back in the FLY! days. You were helping Doug Moldenhauer and I build an airliner for that title (md-80 I believe it was). From what I can recall we really appreciated some of the testing and recommendations you had on offer at the time.

Anyway...our only choice right now, if we want this to succeed, is to just see what happens as far as MS's commitment to fixing what is important to get fixed. I was under the impression that what lies beneath the hood might be good enough for a new engine...at least as a new starting point. Maybe you won't get what you were expecting out of the box, but perhaps it will get there nonetheless. That is my ultimate hope for the franchise. This sim means something different to different people. I understand what it means to you, and I DO share in your sector of that passion.

Building for FLY! was an exciting time because, as you know, it offered a new type of physics engine that relied upon airfoil and airframe numbers which at the time was so different than we were all used to coming from the MS platform. It never got there over nite and ultimately ran out of time for obvious reasons... but good times they were, as I remember...and I hope, as you do, that this will all be a new beginning for an old friend (MSFS series).

BTW...if the physics end up turning you on at some point...are you thinking of...er, nevermind hehe. Lets just say Duke could use a new home 🙂

Edited August 6, 2020 by hangar

[robert young 2,897]

12 minutes ago, hangar said:

@robert young

I know how frustrating it can be, Rob...especially for someone of your background. By the way, you likely dont remember me but we worked together on a project back in the FLY! days. You were helping Doug Moldenhauer and I build an airliner for that title (md-80 I believe it was). From what I can recall we really appreciated some of the testing and recommendations you had on offer at the time.

Anyway...our only choice right now, if we want this to succeed, is to just see what happens as far as MS's commitment to fixing what is important to get fixed. I was under the impression that what lies beneath the hood might be good enough for a new engine...at least as a new starting point. Maybe you won't get what you were expecting out of the box, but perhaps it will get there nonetheless. That is my ultimate hope for the franchise. This sim means something different to different people. I understand what it means to you, and I DO share in your sector of that passion.

Building for FLY! was an exciting time because, as you know, it offered a new type of physics engine that relied upon airfoil and airframe numbers which at the time was so different than we were all used to coming from the MS platform. It never got there over nite and ultimately ran out of time for obvious reasons... but good times they were, as I remember...and I hope, as you do, that this will all be a new beginning for an old friend (MSFS series).

BTW...if the physics end up turning you on at some point...are you thinking of...er, nevermind hehe. Lets just say Duke could use a new home 🙂

I forgot that project with Doug. It was a very long time ago but I vaguely remember it now. It's been good to exchange views with you. As for the Duke, I really am retired now and anyway have no opportunity to revisit RealAir stuff for all sorts of reasons. But I might have a go at some tweaking for fun one day.

[hangar 661]

8 minutes ago, robert young said:

I really am retired now and anyway have no opportunity to revisit RealAir stuff for all sorts of reasons. But I might have a go at some tweaking for fun one day.

Well, good for you...I hope you get to do that!

Be well, Rob...perhaps after release we can fly a few together 🛩️...send me a PM if you're ever up to it.

[robert young 2,897]

Just now, hangar said:

Well, good for you...I hope you get to do that!

Be well, Rob...perhaps after release we can fly a few together 🛩️...send me a PM if you're ever up to it.

Will do!

[RudyB24 296]

It's mentioned on the Feedback Snapshot, Asobo is working on it:

Insufficient Inertia on Some Planes: IN PROGRESS

This is a post on a French forum by a forum moderator and MSFS tester that was found in another thread here in AVSim:

(Translated by Deepl, maybe Dominique can help out).

I've just browsed through the latest SDK (0.4.1.0) where the doc part has been deepened: it's edifying.

The model based on more than 1000 points that we were presented during this promotion campaign only exists for the moment... on paper. Variables for the future have been created, empty for the moment, nothing has been used yet.
For all those who have already modified a plane under FSX, you only have to read this doc to get a precise idea of what is in this simulator.

I'm not saying that in 10 years, it will not have evolved but at the moment apart from a breakdown of the data used in the FSX flight model (model based on the aircraft.cfg file and the .air file of the aircraft) in editable files that's all that has been modified compared to FSX/P3D. I even found a redirection to ... the ESP v1.0 file from FSX, to say the least.

From the 18th, I'll make a specific post on the subject.

 

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by RudyB24

[dilore 126]

41 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

The model based on more than 1000 points that we were presented during this promotion campaign only exists for the moment... on paper. Variables for the future have been created, empty for the moment, nothing has been used yet....at the moment apart from a breakdown of the data used in the FSX flight model (model based on the aircraft.cfg file and the .air file of the aircraft) in editable files that's all that has been modified compared to FSX/P3D.

Do I understand this correctly, it's basically the FSX/P3D flight model we're getting?