11 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Asobo has constructed a whole new architecture, it is impossible to assess its « tweakability » at this time. 

Well, I misunderstood you. I was referring to ASOBO being able to "tweak" their own code in terms of improving the sim.

For devs it will take some time until they can utilize the possibilities of the new sim. That's obvious in the CRJ post from Aerosoft. So prepare for some angry devs in the beginning.

But again - there's just no way I can imagine ASOBO will provide less functionality / worse tech than in FSX (in time).

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by tweekz

3 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

If my memory serves me well, this was the case with Fly! ?

<ahem>

"Gee... I wonder if they can do that..."

Hook

14 minutes ago, LHookins said:

<ahem>

"Gee... I wonder if they can do that..."

Hook

Actually, a lot of significant params can already be tweaked using a text file in both FSX and P3d. Many of them sufficiently over-ride the air file entries to significantly alter aircraft behaviour. In fact the inertia is, as far as I am aware, only set through the aircraft cfg (text file). Apart from prop modelling and some jet thrust detail, many jet engine params can be set via the aircraft config file. Even high alpha params can be set within the flight_tuning section of the aircraft cfg file.

The .air file can alter a lot of detail, but you can theoretically construct almost an entire flight model just using the cfg file, although you do need the presence of an .air file. Indeed there are a few commercial 3rd party products that are designed in this way.

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by robert young

5 minutes ago, tweekz said:

Well, I misunderstood you. I was referring to ASOBO being able to "tweak" their own code in terms of improving the sim.

For devs it will take some time until they can utilize the possibilities of the new sim. That's obvious in the CRJ post from Aerosoft. So prepare for some angry devs in the beginning.

Lockheed Martin which did an overall good rehab and evolution job on the old ESP couldn’t tweak its foundations for the turboprop, supposing they wanted to. 

Now, we have seen over the years the ingenuity of TPD to bypass such or such limitation. We’ll see that again 🤞.

59 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

 

Here is yet another example of pitch stability and floppy controls at low speed. This time a 737 approach to Porto by Maria, a YT channel pilot vlogger, flown beautifully.

Note how very pitch stable the aircraft is. Note also the quite large yoke aileron movements for quite modest roll reaction. Note how much she pulls back the yoke on flare for a not very large nose up movement. Observe how STABLE pitch is EVEN WITH LARGE INPUTS. At higher speeds and lower angle of attack the response will be quicker, but there is ZERO bobbing up and down in pitch. The input is made and the nose stays where it is put. This is a million miles from what I'm seeing in the MSFS promo videos.

 

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by robert young

@robert youngThank you for a very good post! I thoroughly enjoyed reading that. Your conclusion gives me hope, though, that if is pretty easy to fix, then I would expect a solution to be forthcoming. 

@robert young do you have an example of a video from a sim where you the think pitch stability is correctly modeled for GA?

6 minutes ago, Slides said:

@robert young do you have an example of a video from a sim where you the think pitch stability is correctly modeled for GA?

Yup. A2A are pretty good, generally speaking. Without wishing to be immodest, both RealAir Dukes are satisfactory in pitch, as is the Lancair Legacy even though it is a high performance GA capable of quite high G maneouvres. There are plenty of other products that demonstrate reasonably authentic pitch stability in both FSX and P3d.

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by robert young

3 hours ago, robert young said:

Here is yet another example of pitch stability and floppy controls at low speed. This time a 737 approach to Porto by Maria, a YT channel pilot vlogger, flown beautifully.

I know we’re diametrically opposed on this, but I don’t see anything in the promo videos from which you can draw any information about pitch stability or otherwise. You can equally attribute them to control sensitivity, amongst other things. It’s fairly clear to me from the first video you posted that he has very high sensitivity settings - his other videos show that. Tiny stick movements for big control inputs. You can absolutely make an aircraft look pitchy with constant and strong inputs as he does. In fact looking at his videos he never makes more than about a 1/2’ stick deflection! You can’t possibly comment on flight control accuracy when a guy has his controls set to a point that from takeoff to landing you never move the stick more than half an inch!

Your comment re: roll rate with aileron input on the 737 video is invalid. You have no idea what roll she is commanding. The adjustments she’s making are in reaction to the aircraft rolling - she’s just acting to keep wings level. I can fly an approach banging the controls from stop to stop and from the jump seat you’d see wings level.

Without  set of controls calibrated to those in the 737 (of which very few have the requisite range of movement) then you just can’t pass these judgements in my view. 

Ultimately one of us will be right or wrong come the 18th! But I don’t see anything of concern in these videos.

 

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by n4gix
PLEASE!!! Leave out the linked videos when replying!!!

46 minutes ago, robert young said:

Yup. A2A are pretty good, generally speaking. Without wishing to be immodest, both RealAir Dukes are satisfactory in pitch, as is the Lancair Legacy even though it is a high performance GA capable of quite high G maneouvres. There are plenty of other products that demonstrate reasonably authentic pitch stability in both FSX and P3d.

I'm confused about this stuff. 

How can stability be an issue in a sim where it doesn't even simulate moving air masses?

P3d/fsx don't simulate air loving over the airplane right? Or do they? I thought x plane was superior to p3d because of this.

5 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

The adjustments she’s making are in reaction to the aircraft rolling - she’s just acting to keep wings level.

This.

8 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

It’s fairly clear to me from the first video you posted that he has very high sensitivity settings - his other videos show that.

Default settings in MSFS are to have very sensitive controls that default to 100% sensitivity.  I suspect this is to allow greater sensitivity than you would normally get.  It might have been better to have the default sensitivity set lower.

Hook

The other issue is that for most controls you don’t pull against trim. It’s intensely easy on a computer joystick/yoke setup to oscillate, particularly in pitch. It’s very difficult to explain to someone who doesn’t fly (not saying anyone does or doesn’t - I have no idea), but on flaring you effectively pull the thing out of trim (same on rotation) and the weight against the controls gives a feeling that I haven’t yet seen replicated in any ‘normal’ control setup. 

If you overflare in real life, you don’t put in a pitch down input, you just ‘relax’ a little of the back pressure. Almost imperceptible stick movement. The guy in the videos is doing the opposite. Sharp and jerky movements on what is already an incredibly sensitive control setup!

24 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

The other issue is that for most controls you don’t pull against trim. It’s intensely easy on a computer joystick/yoke setup to oscillate, particularly in pitch. It’s very difficult to explain to someone who doesn’t fly (not saying anyone does or doesn’t - I have no idea), but on flaring you effectively pull the thing out of trim (same on rotation) and the weight against the controls gives a feeling that I haven’t yet seen replicated in any ‘normal’ control setup. 

If you overflare in real life, you don’t put in a pitch down input, you just ‘relax’ a little of the back pressure. Almost imperceptible stick movement. The guy in the videos is doing the opposite. Sharp and jerky movements on what is already an incredibly sensitive control setup!

That's an excellent point. In real life you have the seat of the pants input to help you not do a PIO. Even then it can happen sometimes. No such feel in the sim.

1 hour ago, robert young said:

Yup. A2A are pretty good, generally speaking. Without wishing to be immodest, both RealAir Dukes are satisfactory in pitch, as is the Lancair Legacy even though it is a high performance GA capable of quite high G maneouvres. There are plenty of other products that demonstrate reasonably authentic pitch stability in both FSX and P3d.

How about "outta the box" default planes, Rob?

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by hangar