17 minutes ago, FPStewy said:

I do like what I have seen in the 152 but the lack of a GPS even a 295 or 430 is disconcerting. I'm looking forward to the 172/GNS though.

What about good old  dead reckoning! Remember, magenta drivers are not real pilots! LOL

 

Putting a GPS in a 152, is like putting a sound system on a shopping trolley.

11 minutes ago, Chock said:

Putting a GPS in a 152, is like putting a sound system on a shopping trolley.

Bad example, that actually sounds like an awesome way to shop.

15 minutes ago, Chock said:

Putting a GPS in a 152, is like putting a sound system on a shopping trolley.

Someone on the beta forums complained tonight that the 152 doesn't have an autopilot.

1 hour ago, FPStewy said:

I do like what I have seen in the 152 but the lack of a GPS even a 295 or 430 is disconcerting. I'm looking forward to the 172/GNS though.

This is the main reason I am really looking forward to the 152. We need some old school airplanes to play with. The 152 I flew 10 years ago had a "gps" I don't remember it having much of a display but it did show ground speed so that was cool. 🤣

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by reignman40

4 hours ago, FlyingInACessna said:

I think it’s cool they included a plane without a GPS 🙂

Could make for some really cool realistic VFR flights with nav logs

Could actually make for some really cool IFR flights without any distraction by a GPS.

Back on topic though and that first instructor video, I don’t care about the aerodynamics. I just want that stall horn. 🤣

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by badderjet

While the 152 doesn't have a GPS, you have already seen the VFR Map which performs some of the same functions.  Of course, this is a map cheat... 😄 

Hook

I’m not a real world pilot so what do I know, but when I see an appeal to authority argument being used and they say, “I’ve seen some videos”, alarm bells ring in my head. Kind of like, “I read it on Facebook”. As a scientist I instinctively evaluate the quality of evidence being marshalled in an argument so I think I’ll go with those who have real life experience and understand the subtleties of the situation (not to mention keeping in mind the obvious conflict of interests of some).

8 hours ago, snglecoil said:

Rob, I have the utmost respect for you, but the ground handling characteristics, especially during a taxi as he was demonstrating, are not a significant measure of a the flight model. The twitchy rudder during the take off and landing roll is mainly attributed to controller sensitivity settings.

You'll be happy to see that the team has identified inaccurate inertia as one of the issues it is currently refining. I'm not saying the flight models are perfect in MSFS, I'm saying this video is filled with uninformed opinion based on experiences with other flight simulators.

Fair enough. But an over-strong rudder on the ground is likely to be over-strong in the air, depending on what weather-vaning parameters are implemented. I'm glad to hear they are addressing the inertia vaues. They look to be very low values at the moment.

8 hours ago, Slides said:

There are dozens of 152 pilots saying the stalls are accurate. As of right now, you and the YouTuber seem to be the odd one out 

Well, just look at the two examples. With all due respect to other comments, I'm looking at the evidence of my eyes.

15 minutes ago, Bottle said:

I’m not a real world pilot so what do I know, but when I see an appeal to authority argument being used and they say, “I’ve seen some videos”, alarm bells ring in my head. Kind of like, “I read it on Facebook”. As a scientist I instinctively evaluate the quality of evidence being marshalled in an argument so I think I’ll go with those who have real life experience and understand the subtleties of the situation (not to mention keeping in mind the obvious conflict of interests of some).

Watching a video, provided you can see the control input and the reaction to it, is similar to sitting in the right seat and observing what happens. You don't need to have your own hands on a joystick to see how its movement promotes one reaction or another, particularly when you've worked for many years on the subject. That is why instructors demonstrate a maneouvre before letting a student repeat the exercise. They fly the maneouvre, the student watches, then they try the same maneouvre 

I've been creating flight models for 25 years and I DO have real.life experience. I got my PPL in 1974!

Edited August 7, 20205 yr by robert young

Do videos routinely list the engine details, plane modifications, fuel and payload weight and balance, atmospheric conditions, etc.? Can you typically see what the pilot is doing with the rudder pedals or what the trim settings are?

I appreciate that there is meaningful data in a video, but it’s quite incomplete and there are factors that significantly affect how a plane performs that are not visually apparent.

It also seems to me to be very clear that a pilot’s understanding of a plane is very type and experience specific. They are forever qualifying their remarks with, “I’ve flown this type of plane” or “l haven’t flown this type of plane”. This appears to be a significant factor in the authority with which they can pass judgement. Kind of like ophthalmologists passing judgement on specifics about Covid19.

38 minutes ago, robert young said:

I've been creating flight models for 25 years

Then you can continue creating flight models in MSFS.  This isn't a problem, it's a opportunity!

Hook

2 minutes ago, LHookins said:

Then you can continue creating flight models in MSFS.  This isn't a problem, it's a opportunity!

Hook

True!

1 hour ago, robert young said:

I've been creating flight models for 25 years

This seems like an awfully long time. I know software deadlines can slip, but do you have any idea when they'll be finished? 🤣