Flight model comparison - will it ever happen?

[Kilo60 660]

21 hours ago, marsman2020 said:

I am nervous about Asobo's comments on "everyone is right" that they are intentionally tuning the stock aircraft to perform worse than the POH based on internet feedback.  This would be a mistake in my opinion.  They should be working to the manufacturer data and then applying any de-rating as an optional add-on.

If you're nervous now, just wait till all the 3rd person fly Xbox users start posting opinions (internet feedback) about how it's too hard to fly from external view etc...!

[Mark VII 26]

2 hours ago, bonchie said:

Nonsense. I'm a real pilot and this sim is not "closer to an arcade" that an simulation with it's flight model. Not even close. Having problems doesn't mean hyperbole is helpful. 

Pls check you tube jet pilots FS opinions ( btw which jet do you pilot ? .. or are you a GA pilot instead ? This makes a huuuuuge difference) and if you are within the small percentage around 1% which has a different point of view on FS, that’s ok for the statistics 

[eslader 1,783]

The jets aren't the best right now, but that doesn't mean it's not a real simulator. It just means the jets are broken. 

If you're having a genuine problem with something in the sim it's fine to talk about it, but it's not cool to be deceptive and use the appeal to authority logical fallacy to justify your blanket untruths.

 

[Mark VII 26]

1 minute ago, eslader said:

The jets aren't the best right now, but that doesn't mean it's not a real simulator. It just means the jets are broken. 

If you're having a genuine problem with something in the sim it's fine to talk about it, but it's not cool to be deceptive and use the appeal to authority logical fallacy to justify your blanket untruths.

 

Pls check you tube real jet pilots opinions about FS, I have nothing to add, their comments are what you are trying to censure ? 😂

[eslader 1,783]

You've already been told that there are also real pilots on youtube who are impressed with the sim and think it's a good simulator. That's when you started asking if @bonchie flies jets, trying to cast them as though they can't possibly have a valid opinion on the matter. 

You're the one who started the "real pilots say X" about this sim thing, and then acted as though the real pilots who like it don't count because reasons. 

We're tired of people trashing the sim without justification. There's plenty broken in it, but there's also plenty of potential, and plenty that they've gotten right.

 

[marsman2020 1,310]

11 minutes ago, Mark VII said:

Pls check you tube real jet pilots opinions about FS, I have nothing to add, their comments are what you are trying to censure ? 😂

If you "have nothing to add" beyond telling people to go look up mysterious youtube videos....maybe don't post at all.  You're not really adding to the discussion in a productive way.

[ludekbrno 302]

15 minutes ago, Mark VII said:

Pls check you tube real jet pilots opinions about FS, I have nothing to add, their comments are what you are trying to censure ? 😂

Somebody expected, that default planes, especially a big jets, will be on professional simulation level as part of complete simulator for only 60$? 🙂 No, everybody knows, there doesn't exist any simulator, with so high level default planes. And everybody knows, that we must wait for some third party add-on, which will bring a much higher level.

Edited October 6, 2020 by ludekbrno

[Slides 1,552]

There's actually a video from an A320 pilot who compared real world take off performance with the MSFS default A320 and found it to be very close to the numbers. Of course there is still simplification of the systems and some of them are missing. 

[tweekz 2,165]

10 minutes ago, Slides said:

There's actually a video from an A320 pilot who compared real world take off performance with the MSFS default A320 and found it to be very close to the numbers. Of course there is still simplification of the systems and some of them are missing. 

Yes, it was V1. But they need to do something for climb and landing. This bird behaves really awkward in those situations.

[marsman2020 1,310]

The systems simulations and the aerodynamic 6DOF flight model are really two different things.

I think the stock airliners should be useable from a systems perspective, which they clearly are not at this point.

But that's a seperate question from things like is the physics engine properly modeling the static force balance and dynamic response of the aircraft.

I did notice in one video that I was watching that tbe 747 seemed to trim out to a very high pitch at cruise, which seemed unrealistic.  That might be a flight model thing.

[BusheFlyer 87]

1 hour ago, Mark VII said:

Pls check you tube jet pilots FS opinions ( btw which jet do you pilot ? .. or are you a GA pilot instead ? This makes a huuuuuge difference) and if you are within the small percentage around 1% which has a different point of view on FS, that’s ok for the statistics 

Hello new member, so MSFS is no doubt your first flight sim, you have zero actual real world flying experience and you are relying on the word of a single Youtube pilot over the accuracy of the flight model. Okay, think we have understood enough. Have a nice day.

[lambourne 211]

On 10/5/2020 at 6:35 PM, BusheFlyer said:

This right here is the problem.. you simply can not compare real world flying to simulated flying.

So why has Microsoft released a new simulator trying to achieve greater realism? Why are any of us here on this forum?

You've mistaken the A2A style addon that takes into account wear and tear on an individual airframe for what a flight dynamics / simulation engine is designed to achieve.

If I have the numbers for dry operating weight, wing area, moments of inertia and interrelated drag coefficients as implemented by the MSFS engine, I should be able to input those into the MSFS equivalent of a .air file and then fly a simulated aircraft that is convincingly close to how the real thing handles. One of the problems with FS9, FSX and P3D was that the engine was fudged and simplified in places so addon devs had to find fudges and tweaks of their own to produce convincing or realistic flight characteristics.

Asobo said in its pre launch feature discovery series that MSFS would have a much better flight dynamics engine than what went previously. Sure, we've seen awesome reproduction of thermals, terrain/wind interaction and random light chop. That's 100% convincing to me. But in other areas are we seeing the promised improvement? That's the point of a sim engine comparison as the OP suggested.

[BusheFlyer 87]

8 minutes ago, lambourne said:

So why has Microsoft released a new simulator trying to achieve greater realism? Why are any of us here on this forum?

You've mistaken the A2A style addon that takes into account wear and tear on an individual airframe for what a flight dynamics / simulation engine is designed to achieve.

If I have the numbers for dry operating weight, wing area, moments of inertia and interrelated drag coefficients as implemented by the MSFS engine, I should be able to input those into the MSFS equivalent of a .air file and then fly a simulated aircraft that is convincingly close to how the real thing handles. One of the problems with FS9, FSX and P3D was that the engine was fudged and simplified in places so addon devs had to find fudges and tweaks of their own to produce convincing or realistic flight characteristics.

Asobo said in its pre launch feature discovery series that MSFS would have a much better flight dynamics engine than what went previously. Sure, we've seen awesome reproduction of thermals, terrain/wind interaction and random light chop. That's 100% convincing to me. But in other areas are we seeing the promised improvement? That's the point of a sim engine comparison as the OP suggested.

MSFS is close enough to be realistic in terms of performance. It might be off little bit here or there but then so are real world aircraft. This striving for exact numbers is the proverbial dragons tail. That is the point I am trying to make.

The second point was no matter how good the sim, real world flight especially when it involves flight in those extremes of the flight envelope just can not be compared. A spin in a real aircraft can not be simulated, neither can any aerobatic flight or even simple things like steep turns and stalls. The absence of any 'g' or any seat of the pants sensation makes any simulation anaemic.

Edited October 6, 2020 by BusheFlyer

[bean_sprout 1,201]

Just like training wheels, the arcade approach to flight models for FS2020 is the correct one IMO.  It will lure unknowing new users into the game until they start to understand that (and If they are looking for) more realistic flight models exist.

This is where 3rd party aircrafts come in.  Everyone who has flown a PMDG, A2A or RealAir plane can understand this.

 

Regards

bs

Edited October 6, 2020 by bean_sprout

[Chock 17,769]

On 10/5/2020 at 4:30 PM, Noel said:

And so it is w/ motorcycle operation.  Those first 45 days are peak, the next period is better, and right about the time the rider has gotten comfy w/ the basics of operation crash risk goes up so the data shows.  (Proficient Motorcycling, David Hough)

Nah, speaking as someone who actually died (and was revived obviously) following a motorcycle crash, and who had to have extensive surgery to sort me out including several metal plates in my skull and some reconstructive surgery, I can tell you that motorcycling is ALWAYS dangerous! 🤣

That motorcycle crash wasn't my fault by the way; it was caused by a private hire taxi driver pulling out on me - he buggered off from the scene of the crash, and the police never found him despite trying to. 😠