6 hours ago, robert young said:

I haven't downloaded the SDK. But if it is anything like previous SDks you get something like this:

parameter 201: sideslip on yaw  --- Explanation: This parameter adjusts sideslip on yaw

That's how helpful most aircraft container SDKs are!!!

It might help to get the SDK.  

Here is the most likely matching parameter, copied directly from the C152 flight_model.cfg file:

yaw_moment_slip_angle = 0.929 ; The change in yaw moment per change sideslip angle(WEATHER VANING EFFECT)

Notice that this is not in an .air file, but in easily readable and editable text in a config file.  I will not miss .air files.

If there is a way to get the SDK without having purchased MSFS I'd like to get a link.  The normal way to get the SDK is a link inside MSFS.  This should make it easy to get the SDK for anyone who has MSFS.  I'm still on the fence as to whether or not to buy.  The above line comes from a folder saved from the Beta and may not reflect the current release version.

Hook

6 hours ago, RudyB24 said:

Can we all agree that by default a control input like a joystick axis, or a yoke axis, or a throttle, sends out a number via USB to the PC. This number usually ranges from 0-1023, but other ranges are possible, like 0-127 or 0-511.

That's interesting and may explain why some people need to change their sensitivity to get a reasonable control response.  I have CH Products controllers (I use the Combatstick, Pro Throttle and Pro Pedals) and never touched sensitivity for MSFS.

Hook

Its called the resolution of the controller. It’s eother 8 bits, 10 bits, 12 bits. This is why Saitek yoke feels super twitchy due to 45 degrees movement and only 8 bits ( 0-1024). My honeycomb has 0-4096  and 90 degrees of movement. My controls feels smooth and adequate. 

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by fogboundturtle

9 minutes ago, norman_99 said:

But the ratios should still be consistent.

I disagree. In the real aircraft you have feedback, resistance, pressure from the controls along with g forces that you can feel.

We don't have that in the sim and it's much easier to be heavy handed. That's why we have needed sensitivity curves for all flight sims for decades.

I feel like that's also part of the disconnect where some people feel that Asobo's flight models are garbage and others feel they're good but not perfect for every plane or flight envelope.

3 hours ago, w6kd said:

There are some really good ones,

Can you name a really good one?

11 minutes ago, norman_99 said:

The fact that the simulator aircraft responds with roll rates multiple times greater than what the real world aircraft is physically capable of, is not due to control setup, but grossly incorrect control surface authority/effectiveness within the aircraft FDE.

Which aircraft display roll rates multiple times greater than the real world aircraft? I'd like to try it out and see what you mean. (really asking, not opining on the validity of your statement)

There fact that multiple real world pilots can have such differing views on the flight models acceptability for a default aircraft means that this is not a simple right or wrong discussion.

it's not just about the numbers otherwise every flight model would be accurate if you could plug in the numbers from the real aircraft. It's about the feel and that's going to be subjective for everyone. 

31 minutes ago, cwburnett said:

At least in the United States, you cannot earn a pilot certificate of any type in a simulator alone - all you can do in a sim alone is earn a type rating and conduct recurrent training. And no airline allows a pilot to earn a type rating and then immediately go fly it without hours and hours of supervised operation in the real thing.

Actually, you can earn an ATP rating in a simulator...the type ride and the ATP check are pretty much the same thing.  You just need all the prerequisites and a Level-D sim. 

That's how I did mine...but I guarantee you that the checkride I took in the jet as part of my qualiification in the 89th Airlift Wing afterwards made the FAA/sim type check look pretty easy.  That wasn't so much a check ride as a hazing.  🙂

11 minutes ago, cwburnett said:

Which aircraft display roll rates multiple times greater than the real world aircraft? I'd like to try it out and see what you mean.

The quantifying numbers on both sides of the equation would help as well.

2 hours ago, robert young said:

All of the light aircraft in this sim fly like toys. They display completely unrealistic reactions to turbulence, controls, air mass and lift. I can't express this strongly enough. I started out being reasonably restrained about it, but there is no point in doing so any longer.

How is it that so many real world pilots fundamentally disagree with your sweeping assessment then? There has to be a fundamental difference in expectation or experience here.

To me the 152 doesn't fly that differently than other sims with the exception of in windy conditions.

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by Slides

17 minutes ago, Slides said:

Can you name a really good one?

RealAir B60T Duke, PMDG B737NG series in P3D.  A2A has a good reputation on may of their add-ons, though I don't have them.

4 minutes ago, Slides said:

How is it that so many real world pilots fundamentally disagree with your sweeping assessment then?

So many?  I've seen a few with a less critical assessment than Rob's, but i wouldn't characterize it as "many."

2 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Actually, you can earn an ATP rating in a simulator...the type ride and the ATP check are pretty much the same thing.  You just need all the prerequisites and a Level-D sim. 

That's how I did mine...but I guarantee you that the checkride I took in the jet as part of my qualiification in the 89th Airlift Wing afterwards made the FAA/sim type check look pretty easy.  That wasn't so much a check ride as a hazing.  🙂

You are right, thanks for the correction. The ATP is all about that accumulated experience flying real airplanes - 1500 hours total time... I would assume that was a cakewalk compared with your Air Force qualification! I've heard some pretty amazing stories from a friend that flies E-8s out of Robins.

9 minutes ago, w6kd said:

So many?  I've seen a few with a less critical assessment than Rob's, but i wouldn't characterize it as "many."

Well about a dozen or so across the internet who fundamentally disagree. That's enough of a sample size to know it's not a clear cut answer. If it was as flawed as Rob is saying it would be universally panned and that's not been the case.

Also there are pilots at Asobo who would have known if it was that bad. They're not dumb people. 

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by Slides

19 minutes ago, w6kd said:

So many?  I've seen a few with a less critical assessment than Rob's, but i wouldn't characterize it as "many."

Well there where several also in the beta plus aircraft owners, but we are still under NDA 😉

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by awf