6 hours ago, RudyB24 said:

Completely off topic ... I notice a constant (micro)stuttering in the video. Frame rates seem to be OK but the scenery moves by in a stuttering way and when you rotate the camera to look out of the left window, that move is stuttery. Is this due to screen capture video running or is it similar when you don't video? If so ... something is very wrong here.

That's because I'm not smart enough to record a video while using the sim that doesn't result in the video looking very stuttery... I have occasional stutters in-sim, but didn't have any on that flight... I guess the solution is an external capture device...but I'm not that committed to making videos 😉

33 minutes ago, robert young said:

f you look at high performance single prop aircraft with decent sticks, you'll see that routinely pilots place their hand in their lap and use finger dexterity to control, rather than the whole arm, unless they are doing extreme maneouvres.

It’s my understanding usually takeoffs and landings are performed with free and correct controls, I wouldn’t really characterize those as extreme manoeuvres. But I do find fingertip flying much more precise in other stages of flight. Helicopter pilots (of which I have no experience) probably find the same thing applies more broadly speaking...

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by High_Alpha

Some negative RW pilot quotes from that Microsoft forum:

__________________________________________________________________

"raises a concern whether the flight model depends on the actual airframe or just programming lines."

" You could fly a turbulent approach on MSFS without any roll inputs. This is definitely wrong."

"problems are from the overly sensitive/jerky controls and poor trimming ability."

"the main thing i just cant stand is how aggresive the sim is when you pt flaps up while climbing. It just sinks like crazy"

"For realism ? The systems are way off and the entire plane is not close to being complete"

"I am not happy with the trim wheel on the cessna 152/172: you hit the switch the wheel turns just a notch and the pitch change is exagerated."

"As for the A320, I won’t talk about systems as that isn’t even close."

"if they put a bit more effort into it, and listen to type rated pilot feedback a bit more, they can make it pretty good"

"in the sim the rudder doesn’t seem to loose effectiveness."

"I tried the Baron with an engine out at Vmc-air and couldn’t get the prop to feather. I hardly needed the rudder"

"I couldn’t get an opposite wing-drop by using aileron in the stall with any aircraft that I tried. Same for accelerated stall."

"it feels pretty good, but not necessarily like the real aircraft."

"Taildraggers are unrealistic in the sim."

"Feels like they may have gone overboard with ground effect"

"even with trim set properly for takeoff after rotation the aircraft requires excessive back pressure or trim to hold the desired climb pitch attitude. This causes a very annoying oscillation when you try to trim and relieve back pressure at the same time"

"the A320, what a horrible flight model"

"Biggest complaint is how it reacts to weather( movements are over exaggerated)"

"G1000 needs a lot of work"

"The modern flight model seems to just fall off a cliff if left untouched. Like there is no air interacting on the wings, generally if you’re turning and neutralize the controls the plane rolls back to level. This just falls off the edge into a spiral."

"Overall, more adverse yaw needed for ALL aircraft and jets need a complete rework"

"when you take off at a slow airspeed and leave 5ft off the ground the airplane will sink back into the ground. FS2020 doesn’t do that, you can just climb out at stall speed off the runway."

"Multi-engine airplanes behave too nice when you fail one of the two engines. If you take off, fail the left engine and are below a certain speed the airplane will spin due to asymmetric thrust (Vmc roll-over) couldn’t get it to do that."

___________________________________________________________________

So, why did I post all of this?...

Well, I guess to show that for every positive thing mentioned in that thread there were 2 or 3 negatives mentioned immediately following by the same person much of the time.

I'm all for trying to stay positive and looking ahead, but at the same time I also think it's just as important to not sweep the really bad stuff under the rug. There's really alot that needs to be fixed here, and this is really only touching on the flgiht dynamics aspects and not even mentioning the quality of life features.

I think we need to stay positive, but also stand firm against the negative that is staring us straight in the face. We need to understand what things can be fixed and which ones can't for a start.

 

 

3 minutes ago, cwburnett said:

That's because I'm not smart enough to record a video while using the sim that doesn't result in the video looking very stuttery... I have occasional stutters in-sim, but didn't have any on that flight... I guess the solution is an external capture device...but I'm not that committed to making videos 😉

Use Nvidia recording. It was smooth for me.

18 minutes ago, robert young said:

The pathetic amount of total movement on even expensive joysticks is something now everyone accepts as normal. There is a chap in the UK who used to construct spitfire type sticks with an enormous total movement. With his stick you could control even the worst flight models because the finesse in movement was so refined. Another atrocious thing about most sticks is that they have a huge "palm rest". This forces you to move your hand right to the top of the stick, increasing the leverage and making it even less capable of any control finesse.

VKB makes joysticks with 100 or 200mm extenders and Hall Sensor transducers that afford a lot more ability for fine control.  There are also aftermarket extenders for the Thrustmaster Warthog stick.

But this isn't just a joystick problem--the problems with the excessive sensitivity are also apparent with my floor-mounted PFC yoke, which has a throw of about 30 cm stop-to-stop on the elevator axis.

10 minutes ago, hangar said:

___________________________________________________________________

So, why did I post all of this?...

Well, I guess to show that for every positive thing mentioned in that thread there were 2 or 3 negatives mentioned immediately following by the same person much of the time.

I'm all for trying to stay positive and looking ahead, but at the same time I also think it's just as important to not sweep the really bad stuff under the rug. There's really alot that needs to be fixed here, and this is really only touching on the flgiht dynamics aspects and not even mentioning the quality of life features.

I think we need to stay positive, but also stand firm against the negative that is staring us straight in the face. We need to understand what things can be fixed and which ones can't for a start.

 

 

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/real-world-pilots-please-state-your-feedback-about-the-flight-model/150771

11 minutes ago, cwburnett said:

It is true that not all performance numbers are created equal. But accelerate/stop is one of those that was drilled into me in training - these figures are best case with a test pilot. Same with takeoff or landing distance to clear a 50' obstacle. I bet if book said stop distance was 2,250' over a 50' obstacle, you'd hesitate to accept a 2,300' runway with an obstacle. You'd probably add the usual 50% at least - any why? Because the book value isn't a reliable number to hit every time by an average pilot - and I don't think I'm anything more than an average pilot. So we build in a buffer in case we make a mistake. I guess my point is, on any given day, based an a whole host of external factors, actual performance can vary from the 'book' value - sometimes significantly. But you're right, they're a good guide to how the aircraft is designed to operate, at its best. They tend to be more generous on things like cruise speed, fuel burn, etc...things that make the plane seem faster or have more range than may be realistic...

Oh, and yes, the Bonanza has bugged me for a long time. 140 TAS at full throttle at 11,500? Come on...lame!

Yes given tear and wear and other factors I interpolate performance numbers and round by a higher value for safety margin.

This bring back memory back in days when I was working on my instrument ticket  the flight school had beaten up 172N which was extremely popular for IFR checkrides. I could figure out why till I flew it!  So I discovered as long as you apply full power you get steady 90kts no more no less . So folks  kept throttle open all way in and speed was always with PTS limit (nowday ACS) . But on flip side performance of that 172 was so degraded for anything else that many CFI beg school owner to replace or at least overhaul O320!

11 hours ago, hangar said:

When we have direct evidence that actual numbers themselves are that far off from reality then something really needs to be done to rectify it because otherwise you might as well be flying a plane from GTA5, which is no longer plausable. We can't just explain away or fix everything that's wrong with the default aircraft with control sensitivities.

Sure, the C208 looks like the torque curve is off. But the specific complaint from @norman_99 was that at 1100lbs torque and 1750 rpm and 10 degrees flap, the aircraft should maintain 110 kts, yet it doesn't. The assumption being made is that the flight model is off. But couldn't it be that the engine instruments are off? There IS a power setting that allows the aircraft to maintain 110 kts with 10 degrees flap. So is that flight model? Engine model? Or instrument model?

I think concluding that the problem is with the flight model or flight physics is a stretch from that single data point. It is more likely that there is a problem with modeling and displaying proper turbine engine output...

From my own personal experience, the Baron and Bonanza are both off....but as I mentioned in my other post, this stuff is complicated. And has never been always accurate in previous sims either. The Baron climbs too well, but the takeoff roll is about right. If we lower the power output to get the climb rate under control, what will happen to the takeoff run? Will I no longer be able to realistically get off the ground from KSQL like I can in real life?

In order to really test this stuff, we need to document all the factors that would play into it. CG, weights, atmospheric conditions, etc.

My point was, that even if it takes 1300lbs of torque to keep the 208 at 110 knots on downwind, that hasn't changed the fact that I've loved flying it to all the strips in Tanzania and Kenya that I've flown to in real life...and revisiting those places in an aircraft designed to do just that. And, torque settings aside, I didn't find that flight experience to be wildly unrealistic.

3 hours ago, hangar said:

the exact version is meaningless with numbers that far off (55% less speed causing a stall is not a version discrepancy).

I think you're misunderstanding the problem @norman_99 has highlighted. (or I am). As I understood, his observation was that if he tries to fly the 208 by the power settings he knows from real world flying, he doesn't get the same result. Not that the stall speed is 55% off. The plane stalled at 55 knots - that's right - it's just that at 1100lbs of torque it shouldn't have gotten that slow - in his experience that power setting should have allowed him to maintain 110kts. But how much torque does it take to maintain 110kts with flaps 10 in MSFS? If the answer is 1300, then it's only off by 18%... (I don't know the answer, but can test later, or someone else can...)

Many payware models for P3D are off by 18% in some respect.

3 minutes ago, w6kd said:

VKB makes joysticks with 100 or 200mm extenders and Hall Sensor transducers that afford a lot more ability for fine control.  There are also aftermarket extenders for the Thrustmaster Warthog stick.

But this isn't just a joystick problem--the problems with the excessive sensitivity are also apparent with my floor-mounted PFC yoke, which has a throw of about 30 cm stop-to-stop on the elevator axis.

Agreed about your last comment. I've looked a the VKB sticks. I don't have access to a second mortgage at the moment to stump up the eye watering prices!

Last night I took the DA-20 from Schaumburg to Olson Airport, a super quick flight. I currently fly Piper Cherokees in RW but I do have some time in the DA-20 back when you could rent them in Schaumburg. Although I landed somewhat successfully at Olson Airport, controlling the plane was a battle from take off to landing. All in all a very unpleasant flight. Last week I did eight various take offs and landings at Lake in the Hills as part of my BFR and it was so much easier compared to MSFS. I hope this gets sorted out soon.

20 minutes ago, cwburnett said:

That's because I'm not smart enough to record a video while using the sim that doesn't result in the video looking very stuttery... I have occasional stutters in-sim, but didn't have any on that flight... I guess the solution is an external capture device...but I'm not that committed to making videos 😉

Hi Again, I'm afraid I cannot test the FS2020 Baron as I only have the standard edition and that's not included. But I have found all your posts to be very enlightening and helpful. Thank you.

I have the VKB Gladiator. Most precise stick I have ever owned.

5 minutes ago, awf said:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/real-world-pilots-please-state-your-feedback-about-the-flight-model/150771

The quotes I posted from the microsoft forum were all from the real world pilots posting there, and not from the armchair's, if that was your point.

If not, then sorry for misunderstanding 🙂

 

By the way I still keep my notes, manuals and others stuff! Was I a good student or what? LOL

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3dp4wa08i3k3qnb/thumbnail.jpg?dl=0

 

Edited August 20, 20205 yr by sd_flyer

Just now, sd_flyer said:

 

By the way I still keep my notes, manuals and others stuff! Was I a good student or what? LOL

 

 

Image not showing up