Flight model comparison - will it ever happen?

[marsman2020 1,310]

9 hours ago, Janov said:

I think the verifiable flightmodel in a desktop sim boils down to things like:

• Does the aircraft perform realistically (climb rates, glide distance, maximum speed, service ceiling, takeoff run at weight X)?
• Does the aircraft exhibit correct flight-control response (roll rate at certain speeds, elevator authority, rudder authority)
• Does the aircraft show correct pitch/power/airspeed performance (i.e. flies level at 100kts IAS with X degrees nose up)

I think most of these things are "fairly" easy to evaluate with the help of a real plane and a stopwatch and a POH. Anything beyond that "the plane feels too nimble, the plane feels too stable, the plane just feels right" is drifting off into the personal hear-say anecdotal range and you won´t get two pilots to agree here unless something is seriously wrong.

I agree.  Rather then throwing the baby out with the bathwater and saying there is no way a desktop simulator can be accurate, there are basic flight parameters that can be tested.

A big question for me would be if I defined a theoretical "generic aircraft" with standard airfoil parameters, weight distribution, a realistic MOI, control surfaces sizes, typical drag functions - would stall speed, L/D, static and dynamic stability, etc act the way they are supposed to?  Or does it take a bunch of "correction factors" to dial it in? 

 

[bonchie 2,305]

On 10/6/2020 at 1:14 PM, 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 

I don't need to check with "youtube pilots." I'm a commercial pilot. I've flown twin engine planes. 

Whether the default A320 is spot on is not my concern. But the idea that MSFS is more arcade that simulation is nonsense. 

Edited October 9, 2020 by bonchie

[HighBypass 2,339]

On 10/8/2020 at 2:41 AM, n4gix said:

I have a wireless XBox controller

You need to get that HOTAS 3d printed kit  

[SPowell42 7]

On 10/5/2020 at 9:40 AM, BusheFlyer said:

Yes, I am not knocking those devices or purchase decisions. If you can afford it then why not. The beautiful thing about a sim is the aircraft is always ready to fly, real world aircraft ownership can often be a case of opening your wallet and watching as many hands dip into it on a continuous basis until the day comes you sell it.

Private flying is and always has been impossible to reason financially.

Not sure I agree with that. 40 years ago the cost of a new C172 was about the same as the cost of a new car. Now it's 8x or more. I think many more people actually owned their own airplanes back then, where now the only way a normal family can afford a plane is through rental, joint ownership, or a flying club. All three of those have serious drawbacks for someone who just wants to go out and fly.

I will admit though I am uncertain how the ongoing, recurrent costs such as annuals, hangering, etc. are compared to the past.

Scott

[BusheFlyer 87]

6 hours ago, SPowell42 said:

Not sure I agree with that. 40 years ago the cost of a new C172 was about the same as the cost of a new car. Now it's 8x or more. I think many more people actually owned their own airplanes back then, where now the only way a normal family can afford a plane is through rental, joint ownership, or a flying club. All three of those have serious drawbacks for someone who just wants to go out and fly.

I will admit though I am uncertain how the ongoing, recurrent costs such as annuals, hangering, etc. are compared to the past.

Scott

Scott, I can only go on my own experience of aircraft ownership (and the experience of aviation buddies) the fixed and operating costs are easy to assess from an affordability standpoint. The thing that gets you, is all the unexpected costs.. things like sudden oil leaks appearing.. because a seal has failed, dings in props needing filing, avionics playing up (crackly radios and so on). Most aircraft the majority of people own are old or near ancient machines which have in many cases changed hands a dozen times, little faults and snags come up all the time.

I highly doubt you will find an aircraft owner that will make a financial argument to you about private ownership. 

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

On 10/5/2020 at 10:03 AM, BusheFlyer said:

Well, statistically most pilot error accidents are not by newly qualified pilots. New pilots are very much aware of their limitations and lack of experience and tend to be pretty switched on. The danger zone is something like 600 - 1000 hour pilots, who are experienced enough to feel confident which naturally can lead to complacency.

Although I am not sure on the statistics for deaths whilst using a simulator.. I am sure the blood pressure issues that software bugs can induce have claimed a few victims.

Possibly true, but statistics are often incorrect due to incomplete data or just poor statistical modeling, most companies that work in statistics make everything overly complicated because if they just plug in a simple regression model into Matlab, Python, R (or whatever).... They won't make any money, because it only takes a few hours versus doing spread plots which can take months to compile. I don't trust many statistics, as too many companies in that field intentionally produce overly complex models when simple models work better. It's not that it cannot be accurate, it's just they over-complicate everything to the point where it doesn't usually work out right. The managers in that business tend to be "wallstreet wolf" type people to run those types of analytical companies, there is a lot of bull involved. Even the most simple statistics can easily be messed up, just look at election stats or covid, neither were correct. Those stats were very simple to do and any person in statistics knows it was intentional they picked whichever models favored their own viewpoint. The companies involved also need to find ways to make the contracts cost millions, and the entire business is full of lobbyists and questionable contracts by people that don't want you to show a certain outcome, it's hard to know though.

I would think 200-300 hours or so would be the most dangerous point, but not sure. I think most pilots are pretty cautious overall, but some of them make terrible weather decisions, maybe under pressure to be somewhere.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2020 by SceneryFX