Impressions from a long time MSFS(Aces) developer

[darem 84]

23 hours ago, pjs37 said:

VR is so much more then TrackIR once you try it and look around your environment with decent perspective its hard to explain just how inadequate a monitor and Track IR is.  But man its a demand on any hardware it will be a while before I feel like I can enjoy MSFS in VR at the performance needed. But tried it in X-plane and you can see how its a game changer.

I have both. The VR set collects dust for flying. Not because my computer isn't up to the task (it is more than just up to it), but because I cannot wear a VR set for more than an hour. It's heavy, hot, and you either have your controllers in your hand or your yoke.

TrackIR and a 3840x1080 monitor, with all my panels in front of me, is much more to my liking. Maybe not as immersive, but much easier to use. The VR set is better for racing, because you don't have to fiddle with a million buttons in VR, TrackIR is better for flying, IMHO.

[bean_sprout 1,201]

57 minutes ago, darem said:

The VR set collects dust for flying.

I hear you.  TrackIR while a simple implementation was ok but I don't like to turn my head.  HoloLens would be fantastic also.

Cheers

bs

[pjs37 319]

2 hours ago, darem said:

I have both. The VR set collects dust for flying. Not because my computer isn't up to the task (it is more than just up to it), but because I cannot wear a VR set for more than an hour. It's heavy, hot, and you either have your controllers in your hand or your yoke.

TrackIR and a 3840x1080 monitor, with all my panels in front of me, is much more to my liking. Maybe not as immersive, but much easier to use. The VR set is better for racing, because you don't have to fiddle with a million buttons in VR, TrackIR is better for flying, IMHO.

That is entirely fair.  The more physical controls the better and with the quests Hand Tracking I can see a future where we can use our virtual hands to toggle switches while using a physical controller for most of your flying.  But we definitely are not there yet.

[filoux 9]

On 8/27/2020 at 1:53 AM, Donstim said:

The new flight model uses 640 different surfaces for which the fundamental equations are solved and normalized for on a local basis, that is based on the particular element's geometry and location. There is interdependency as well, so that airflow changes from one surface will affect surfaces behind it so that things like prop wash, rudder blanking, etc. come from this simulation.  Another example - the stall characteristics come from the local stall state of the surface -- so it matters whether stall originates at the wing tip (symmetrically or symmetrically) or nearer the root, etc.

Sorry but it’s marketing bla bla not to say bullshits to convince non educated people that what they have in hands is realistic.There is NO fundamental equations that can be applied to what you describe apart Navier Stokes, and that would mean CFD calculation. Anyone who has experience in this field know how difficult and complex it is to carry out a single calculation in 3d (1000 iterations for a single set of parameters (aoa, mach, density, TAS).

I built my conclusions after studying the SDK I had from alpha and from tests and tuning made on several aircrafts (DR400, DA40) I know very well in reality.

[Slides 1,552]

10 minutes ago, filoux said:

Sorry but it’s marketing bla bla not to say bullshits to convince non educated people that what they have in hands is realistic.There is NO fundamental equations that can be applied to what you describe apart Navier Stokes, and that would mean CFD calculation. Anyone who has experience in this field know how difficult and complex it is to carry out a single calculation in 3d (1000 iterations for a single set of parameters (aoa, mach, density, TAS).

I built my conclusions after studying the SDK I had from alpha and from tests and tuning made on several aircrafts (DR400, DA40) I know very well in reality.

Strawman argument. No one said they are doing realtime CFD calculations. Re-read his comment again. 

[KiwiDave 2]

New DelanClip Fusion is superior to TrackIR in many ways, one it's robust, two it's completely wireless, three it's a fraction of the price.

Ordered mine and it arrived within three weeks (Shipping from UK to NZ) setup was easy and it's performing very well for FS. 

Added to a wireless headset and don't even notice it's there, prefer this setup over VR for flight sims.

https://delanengineering.com/products/head-tracking-delanclip-fusion/

Edited August 29, 2020 by KiwiDave

[Slides 1,552]

Just now, KiwiDave said:

New DelanClip Fusion is superior to TrackIR in many ways, one it's robust, two it's completely wireless, three it's a fraction of the price.

Ordered mine and it arrived within three weeks (Shipping from UK to NZ) setup was easy and it's performing very well for FS. 

Added to a wireless headset and don't even notice it's there, prefer this setup over VR for flight sims.

https://delanengineering.com/products/head-tracking-delanclip-fusion/

I ordered mine too. I already had TrackIR but the TrackIR pro clip plastic housing has been falling apart after years of use. It's not very sturdily built. Also looking forward to wireless.

What camera will you be using the Delanclip with?

[KiwiDave 2]

1 minute ago, Slides said:

I ordered mine too. I already had TrackIR but the TrackIR pro clip plastic housing has been falling apart after years of use. It's not very sturdily built. Also looking forward to wireless.

What camera will you be using the Delanclip with?

Yes the TrackIR camera works and is the best solution as it has higher FPS over the optional PS3 Camera  and good software. 

[dtrjones 356]

On 8/28/2020 at 6:31 PM, cepact said:

this is not my review, I just found it and shared it

Whoops ok! 🤪

[robert young 2,897]

On 8/28/2020 at 12:17 AM, dtrjones said:

disappointed

Thanks @cepact I liked your frank review. I agree some of the system modelling could be better, and there's no excuse for the of the strange behaviour of the autopilot and some aspects of the flight model. Many things are akin to an early access release.

The Asobo aircraft are all using the absolutely bog standard FSX autopilot. I haven't looked at all the a/p settings for each aircraft but the ones I have seen so far are direct, or almost direct ports from FSX. The autopilot routines in FSX are one of the more successful among its flight modelling/systems. If you have a reasonably good aircraft with a decent flight model, the a/p controls should be pretty good. If they are not good in Fs2020 it is generally speaking not the a/p params themselves but something else:

I'm currently working on a way to confirm this by tweaking a couple of aircraft to improve the a/p stability, not by tweaking the a/p settings or parameters, but by adjusting the way the aircraft reacts generally. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that at least half of the currently experienced a/p problems are caused by the baked in and permanent oscillation movements in this sim which are quite separate from either weather or individual flight models.

There might be inherent a/p problems caused by avionics settings in some of the larger aircraft, but the general instability (yawing, weaving and pitch/roll) oscilations) can only be defeated by adjusting params in the flight models which hide as far as possible the baked in effects. You cannot get rid of them altogether but only lessen their effect. At the moment I'm close to completing a new flight model in the Bonanza, which when I started was yawing and rolling permanently on autopilot the higher you get. I've fixed that so the a/p is almost rock solid, but I'm doing a lot of tests to make doubly sure!

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

21 minutes ago, robert young said:

The Asobo aircraft are all using the absolutely bog standard FSX autopilot. I haven't looked at all the a/p settings for each aircraft but the ones I have seen so far are direct, or almost direct ports from FSX. The autopilot routines in FSX are one of the more successful among its flight modelling/systems. If you have a reasonably good aircraft with a decent flight model, the a/p controls should be pretty good. If they are not good in Fs2020 it is generally speaking not the a/p params themselves but something else:

 

Not entirely sure... The Carenado C182 is zig zagging for me when following the GPS flight plan.  This is not instability, but a forced correction every few seconds, as it deviates from the magenta line..   Never saw that in FSX..

[KiwiDave 2]

2 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Not entirely sure... The Carenado C182 is zig zagging for me when following the GPS flight plan.  This is not instability, but a forced correction every few seconds, as it deviates from the magenta line..   Never saw that in FSX..

Wind that changes with the terrain, never saw that in FSX. Know which I find a bigger leap forward in FS technology and more important towards a much improved FS experience and one that's just a minor bug. 

I think the review misses the mark by a long shot and doesn't grasp the potential of FS2020 over anything we've ever seen before. It's a significant leap forward not the same old tech we've had in sims for past 20 years. First few weeks out of the box this is vastly superior to anything we've seen before.  As a real world commercial helicopter pilot what I've been looking forward to the most is new dynamics like wind effect over terrain.

[robert young 2,897]

1 minute ago, Bert Pieke said:

Not entirely sure... The Carenado C182 is zig zagging for me when following the GPS flight plan.  This is not instability, but a forced correction every few seconds, as it deviates from the magenta line..   Never saw that in FSX..

You have a point there. I just noticed from the systems.cfg file of some aircraft that the nav derivative controls have been stripped out. That could imply that Asobo are using a customised lateral nav system. In which case I'm happy to revise that part of my previous post. But the oscillations/instability which is a separate issue is still there.