2 minutes ago, median said:

They never mention anything about the flight model -- all the explicit praise is for graphics. 

12 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

Other aspects of NG3 that you can expect are an entirely new flight model designed using the new capabilities of MSFS

As an aside, I always felt the flight models shown were very life-like. Like a vessel in a fluid.

I based my concerns on the stream of new videos that came out today ... on what my eyes saw. Don't need to fly myself to see what's there.

7 minutes ago, RudyB24 said:

I based my concerns on the stream of new videos that came out today ... on what my eyes saw. Don't need to fly myself to see what's there.

Maybe you will be happy sticking to older sims since you seem to have already decided.

56 minutes ago, Chock said:

Which are using the built in flight modeling system which payware aircraft will probably have to use too. A payware aircraft is not going to magically have a completely different set of parameters to use which Asobo developed, but then somehow did not know how to use when making their aeroplanes. I'm pretty sure the company which actually made the way the thing simulates flight know how to use their own development tools.

It's two parts of the equation. The actual flight engine and the plane specific model. Both can be modified (first one by ASOBO only of course).

PMDG does not seem worried and calls it a huge improvement over other engines (explicitly FSX & P3D) in their latest update (see the other thread).

From what I've seen, some parameters need to be adjusted (twitchy reactions, crash tolerance, etc), but the general behavior seems OK.

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by tweekz

3 hours ago, RudyB24 said:

I based my concerns on the stream of new videos that came out today ... on what my eyes saw. Don't need to fly myself to see what's there.

Legitimate concerns. Expect that the old mantra "it is just the alpha" will now be replaced by the new mantra "It is default " .  I don't like mantras.  "default aircraft. repeat after me. default aircraft", my foot.

I have not made my mind just watching the videos.Too early. There are good things in the way the aircraft behave but there are things that I don't like either. I will judge when in the virtual left seat of the Xcub or the Caravan.  From the start Asobo has said that they'd put a lot of efforts in modeling their flight models, not that their default aircraft would be P3D or FSX lousy.  

 

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by Dominique_K

Before any real conclusion can be drawn on the FM, someone will need to measure the flight characteristics and then compare it the real charts. And then there is the feel factor, which is more subjective. I personally don't like how aircraft feel in XPlane 11, even if they may be accurate.I love how DCS aircraft feel even if there may be some errors in the FM.

I wouldn't make anything out of videos. Wait till the product release!!!!!

Why worry anyway, it is what it is. If one doesn't like it there are other options.

People are way to worked up about this product. As I've said before this forum is going to be littered with complaints starting 08/18!

 

Just now, tpete61 said:

I wouldn't make anything out of videos. Wait till the product release!!!!!

Why worry anyway, it is what it is. If one doesn't like it there are other options.

People are way to worked up about this product. As I've said before this forum is going to be littered with complaints starting 08/18!

 

And to think some people were worried about all the newbies when the real issue is all the old timers spazzing out because their favorite thing is missing.

It needs work. So did XP11 for years and P3D still needs work (that will probably never come). 

August 18th is the starting point. Development is going to continue. Get on board or play the old sims and wait. It's not worth fretting over. 

Believe me, the developers know about the issues. 13000 testers have been bombarding them with complaints. 

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by bonchie

49 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

People are so dramatic in this community, it hasn't been released and there are threads who are already worried or disappointed 😥. Wait until its release and then we can talk again. 

 Imagine a minute if Avsim  didn't ask us to leave at the forum door, blunt, pointed or sharp objects ! 

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by Dominique_K

Yep. This default argument will carry on and on. Keep the perspective. FSX and P3D, XP default aircraft were all garbage. Useless. Not sure why anyone expects more. Yet on the videos they are far better than any default out of the box sim ever. 

Not worried about it at all since major 3PDs are lining up. Just need some patience. Enjoy the visuals 

58 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

because you know more about the game than people who actually played it...right.

Based on the vast majority of leaked videos I've seen, from people who'd quite evidently be hard pressed to tell a Cessna from a Cesspit judging by the way they're 'flying', versus the fact that I've had a pilot's license for over twenty years, I sure as hell know a lot more about actually operating aeroplanes.

And to be perfectly frank, I'm a bit tired of this: 'I could tell you about the beta but then I'd have to kill you' attitude from people, because regardless of who is working things, I've got eyes, and those aeroplanes are not looking like they are moving correctly in many of the videos I've seen and certainly on the inverted flight video of the Pitts S2 I saw, the lift vector was very evidently off by 180 degrees, i.e. going the wrong way.

This is not conclusive I know, but it is what it is, on screen right there, and so if this is the best the preview videos can show, then it doesn't seem a very smart way to go about things if there is some much more capable stuff which for some mysterious reason is unable to be shown to anyone despite the fact that this would be a positive selling point to exploit. Whereas if there is some better demonstration of an impressive flight model which serves to illustrate its existence, then let's see it. Until then, we can only judge things off what is there on screen, and at the moment it looks a bit ropey, but, I guess we'll find out.

I'm still looking forward to it and I am pretty sure it will be an improvement on what has gone before, but I see no reason to be blowing sunshine up the developer's @ss until it's been clearly shown that it is warranted. And a bunch of leaked videos from people not knowing how to fly a 747 would not be my choice for marketing it; if it was up to me I'd be getting Patty Wagstaff to fly the @ss off the Pitts in the new sim on full detail at 4K showing a 100 fps to prove it was good, and then banging that video all over Facebook. It's not like MS could not afford to do this.

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by Chock

1 minute ago, Chock said:

Based on the vast majority of leaked videos I've seen, from people who'd quite evidently be hard pressed to tell a Cessna from a Cesspit judging by the way they're 'flying', versus the fact that I've had a pilot's license for over twenty years, I sure as hell know a lot more about actually operating aeroplanes.

And to be perfectly frank, I'm a bit tired of this: 'I could tell you about the beta but then I'd have to kill you' attitude from people, because regardless of who is working things, I've got eyes, and those aeroplanes are not looking like they are moving correctly in many of the videos I've seen and certainly on the inverted flight video of the Pitts S2 I saw, the lift vector was very evidently off by 180 degrees, i.e. going the wrong way.

This is not conclusive I know, but it is what it is, on screen right there, and so if this is the best the preview videos can show, then it doesn't seem a very smart way to go about things if there is some much more capable stuff which for some mysterious reason is unable to be shown to anyone despite the fact that this would be a positive selling point to exploit. Whereas if there is some better demonstration of an impressive flight model which serves to illustrate its existence, then let's see it. Until then, we can only judge things off what is there on screen, and at the moment it looks a bit ropey, but, I guess we'll find out.

I'm still looking forward to it and I am pretty sure it will be an improvement on what has gone before, but I see no reason to be blowing sunshine up the developer's @ss until it's been clearly shown that it is warranted.

You have to re-adjust your expectation of default aircraft. If you look at the Cessna 152 hoping that it will fly the A2A version, you are 100% dead wrong. Also we don't know if whoever was creating the content has turn off some of the reality settings. You are making assumption left and right about a game that you haven't played.  So get off your AVSIM elitist attitude.  The default aircraft always has been about accessibility to the masses and not a full hardcore plane. If any indication P3D and FSX were horrendous yet we got the Maddog X and the Majestic Dash8. You need to step back or go flight in real life and come back when an reputable 3rd party aircraft is release.  

The default aircraft are serviceable. It's all they should be and the flight model is way more advanced that FSX/P3D in many ways that I can't divulge.  

14 minutes ago, Chock said:

the inverted flight video of the Pitts S2 I saw, the lift vector was very evidently off by 180 degrees, i.e. going the wrong way.

Could you show me that part?

Again: There is no question there are flaws. The ultimate question is, if these are fundamental flaws, or if it is possible to adjust the formula. It might even be tricky, cause as you turn one knob, two others are affected. But it can be done.

Things that calm my concerns in that regard: Based on what they told us, it can't be worse than P3D, otherwise their attempt would've been a total failure and that I can't believe. Second: PMDG seems genuinely happy with the new possibilities.

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by tweekz

2 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

You have to re-adjust your expectation of default aircraft. If you look at the Cessna 152 hoping that it will fly the A2A version, you are 100% dead wrong. Also we don't know if whoever was creating the content has turn off some of the reality settings. You are making assumption left and right about a game that you haven't played.  So get off your AVSIM elitist attitude.  The default aircraft always has been about accessibility to the masses and not a full hardcore plane. If any indication P3D and FSX were horrendous yet we got the Maddog X and the Majestic Dash8. You need to step back or go flight in real life and come back when an reputable 3rd party aircraft is release.  

The default aircraft are serviceable. It's all they should be and the flight model is way more advanced that FSX/P3D in many ways that I can't divulge.  

It's got nothing to do with expectations, the only thing I expect is a sim on the 18th which I've bought. From that point I'll decide for myself if it is good or bad. In the interim, I'm merely making observations on what has been shown and being critical of things which can be observed to be questionable. Pointing out bits of flight simulation which don't appear to look like an especially accurate simulation of flight, in a product which is called flight simulator, is hardly elitist.

I'll tell you what is elitist though: Cracking on that you are the keeper of some NDA secret about the flight model's hidden capabilities, which for some unfathomable reason, Asobo have decided not to showcase, at all.