6 minutes ago, Chock said:

I made one comment about it, then a further reply to a comment after you quoted me. This is hardly beating a dead horse.

You make this dig about "it only costs $50" in every thread where anyone says anything remotely negative about the sim and frankly it's exhausting.

6 minutes ago, Chock said:

Now this doesn't mean you can't have some reasonably realistic airliners with good systems replication, or some pretty good GA stuff, because we know that you could have that in P3D and FSX, which it shares the legacy flight model with if one chooses to use that as an option

The only thing the Legacy flight model option does in MSFS is screw everything up so the aircraft don't work and users come into the forums wondering why their aircraft are stuck to the ground or their rudder doesn't work.  Just because we had something in FSX doesn't mean it will be possible with this new flight model, if it can't do things like integrate moments into rotational displacements properly.

6 minutes ago, Chock said:

They're not gonna be cranking it up at Dryden to use it to test the aerodynamic loads on the next space shuttle.

In order for the entire premise of the Modern flight model to work properly it has to do some basic things like numerically integrate twice.

Edited January 19, 20215 yr by marsman2020

Just now, marsman2020 said:

You make this dig about "it only costs $50" in every thread where anyone says anything remotely negative about the sim and frankly it's exhausting.

Show me the evidence for that. I'd like to see it.

How about them complete the sdk and concentrate on what real matter in the sim ? rather than wasting their time working on objects; elevations and pink flamingos etc etc as there is tons of this staff already out there.

asobo concentrate to what it matter

I would guess that most of the 3PD would not bother with the old FSX modeling, even though it's there (I think broken anyhow), who knows we'll see.

Both the Xplane Zibo and the PMDG seemed to at least land much more accurately in low wind conditions, but may have still had issues when you set turbulence high enough. So that is why I'm not really expecting perfection when it comes to landing with a lot of turbulence (or even flying in it either),. Both flew relatively well on landings in general though under normal conditions, which is still an issue in MSFS. 

We just don't know until someone besides Carenado (like PMDG) releases something, so until then it's all speculating at the moon.

Edited January 19, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

Just now, arsenal82 said:

How about them complete the sdk and concentrate on what real matter in the sim ? rather than wasting their time working on objects; elevations and pink flamingos etc etc as there is tons of this staff already out there.

asobo concentrate to what it matter

As far as I am aware, they are doing exactly this, in conjunction with Aerosoft as part of the development process for their CRJ, by means of Aerosoft showing Asobo what they were attempting to do by sending Asobo their coding efforts for their CRJ, and then having the way the sim works and what it covers altered to suit these requirements and requests for specific functionality.

Now Aerosoft may not be everyone's favourite developer on occasion, but they have made several Airbuses and a DC-8 amongst other things, so it's not like they've not made some decent airliners in the past for previous sims and presumably if they can reference that experience, then this would be a good source to draw from. I guess the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, so we'll see, and fairly soon.

Ooops, nearly forgot, apparently I make this comment all the time, so best do it again: It's only fifty quid. 🤣

7 minutes ago, Chock said:

Show me the evidence for that. I'd like to see it.

Is he really worth the time of Day Alan?

Just now, Nyxx said:

Is he really worth the time of Day Alan?

Hey, I'll listen to anyone if they have a valid point. I've no wish to stifle a decent discussion and contrary to what some people might think, I'm not in the business of blowing sunshine up Asobo's wazoo, I just think we need to be realistic in terms of what they are aiming to produce, and on the whole I think they've done a pretty good job.

1 minute ago, Chock said:

Now Aerosoft may not be everyone's favourite developer on occasion, but they have made several Airbuses and a DC-8 amongst other things, so it's not like they've not made some decent airliners in the past for previous sims...

Ooops, nearly forgot, apparently I make this comment all the time, so best do it again: It's only fifty quid. 🤣

No issues with Aerosoft specifically, just don't have a lot of confidence that whomever they have doing the aerodynamics and modeling can really provide much input to Asobo. We really need A2A, Majestic, and hopefully PMDG are giving Asobo advice. I just don't expect they are, and if they are, I expect Asobo isn't listening.

I'm not basing it on anything specific (well a little), but it seems like Asobo kind of tunes others out when it comes to things. That's why many of us hold some fear in how this will all play out, hopefully we are all wrong, we shall see.

Personally, I think we'll see that where Aerosoft takes it will be enough of a jumping off point to allow the FSLs and A2As of the world to - possibly by occasionally stepping outside of the sim with the odd routine - take things where the hardcore simmers (TM) want things to be. This is pretty much what has occurred in the past with other sims and the SDK limitations of those things. Let's not forget that for years, everyone said that FSX wasn't even capable of simulating an A320 realistically, then FSL went and did it.

3 minutes ago, Chock said:

Personally, I think we'll see that where Aerosoft takes it will be enough of a jumping off point to allow the FSLs and A2As of the world to - possibly by occasionally stepping outside of the sim with the odd routine - take things where the hardcore simmers (TM) want things to be. This is pretty much what has occurred in the past with other sims and the SDK limitations of those things. Let's not forget that for years, everyone said that FSX wasn't even capable of simulating an A320 realistically, then FSL went and did it.

I personally can live with the landings and takeoffs the way they are, but I am not sure others (especially real pilots) will shelf Xplane Zibo or PDMG in P3D unless MSFS can improve the landings. It's harder for me to judge takeoffs since I am using a Logitech joystick, after all I'm just a developer, so I have different use for this thing than many of those in here. 

It's just so expensive to go fly in a TBM 930 in RL for me to go compare what I think is wrong, or even a King Air. The Cessnas I could easily go pay to fly in one right now (as a passenger, I'm not a pilot), but I am not that interested in Cessnas in Flight Sims, I only like fast aircraft (like at least 300+ kts). Maybe if I were training to be a pilot I would be more interested in using the Cessnas.

FS2020 has the best Flight Dynamics Engine ever made, but default airplanes have Simplified Flight Model. Here is some PC-6 tests:

 

Edited January 19, 20215 yr by OSM

19 minutes ago, Chock said:

Hey, I'll listen to anyone if they have a valid point. I've no wish to stifle a decent discussion and contrary to what some people might think, I'm not in the business of blowing sunshine up Asobo's wazoo, I just think we need to be realistic in terms of what they are aiming to produce, and on the whole I think they've done a pretty good job.

"Go play some Fortnite or something." Thats not a discussion.

Just now, Nyxx said:

"Go play some Fortnite or something." Thats not a discussion.

It is if you are my partner's twelve year old grandson and one of his friends says it.

4 minutes ago, Chock said:

It is if you are my partner's twelve year old grandson and one of his friends says it.

😂

9 minutes ago, OSM said:

FS2020 has the best Flight Dynamics Engine ever made, but default airplanes have Simplified Flight Model. Here is some PC-6 tests:

Hmm, I would say OOTB Xplane is the best, and P3D was fairly good only because 3PD's found weird ways of getting stuff working. I personally do not believe MSFS has any comparable releases to judge yet. From what I've seen thus far, XP 11 is ahead of MSFS in the landings, and in the air it would be more personal preference as I believe all of them are sorely wrong when it comes to responding to high levels of turbulent like bounces.

I think most serious cockpit builders that were also pilots (like the guys doing the giant garage cockpits) would generally agree, XP 11 was better as a starting template to do a flight model than MSFS.

Edited January 19, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery