The Physics Model

[AviatorMan 253]

I have seen a number of references in this forum noting that the "physics model" of MSFS2020 is inferior to that of P3Dv5.  Just curious how we know this?

[Will Fly For Cheese 1,710]

Here we go . . .

[gb09f 298]

A large popcorn, please. 

[Armchair Pilot 261]

got space for one more? keen to see this unravel.

[Rimshot 1,135]

LOL, good question. Now how about X-Plane? I read something about that too!

[Chock 17,769]

28 minutes ago, AviatorMan said:

I have seen a number of references in this forum noting that the "physics model" of MSFS2020 is inferior to that of P3Dv5.  Just curious how we know this?

Depends what you mean by physics model. If you mean the flight modeling system, then the answer is nope, it isn't inferior, since it is capable of using the old ESP flight model system which is what P3D essentially uses, and it has its more modern system as well, with either of these being a selectable optional choice.

Beyond this, it's due a considerable update to the flight modeling physics fairly soon which will definitely put this beyond any doubt as to which is superior in terms of modeling flight and air mass reaction, being that it will leave behind the look up chart stuff of the older system in favour of a much more complex and realistic system.

But you might also mean the particle physics, which at present are not in MSFS (with the exception of contrails), however, this too is due for addition (in the next update in a week or so), with this being included in the SDK too and with expansion of that capability ongoing. P3D does have some particle effects, as did FSX, but this is graphically limited because of the engine it uses, which is why you don't see a ton of complex particle effects going on in it, although in fairness, the TrueSky stuff in P3D does redress this somewhat, but it's far from perfected in terms of GPU usage.

That's the facts, but when has that ever stopped people lol, so stand by with your popcorn for this topic to head for thread lock city at top speed, as people argue it regardless, in five, four, three...

Edited March 28, 2021 by Chock

[orchestra_nl 925]

IMO there are only two types of people who can know this: those who work at Asobo and possibly real world pilots who have been using both simulators. Everyone else is just using their gut feeling, with a dose of prejudice, expectations, hate and hope thrown in there as well.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

Tonic toxic topic

[Will Fly For Cheese 1,710]

[MarcG 2,929]

Having never flown a real plane in real life I can tell you the physics are 101% correct, including the Spitfire which I've never flown but from having watched tons of WWII Movies it looks right so it must be right.









/tongue firmly in cheek

[abrams_tank 7,393]

34 minutes ago, AviatorMan said:

I have seen a number of references in this forum noting that the "physics model" of MSFS2020 is inferior to that of P3Dv5.  Just curious how we know this?

A poster named noballer08, with a possible background in aerospace engineering over at the official MSFS forums dug into the SDK to determine exactly what the flight model was:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/modern-flight-model/232844/3

My guess is, noballer08 has some type of background in aerospace engineering (at least noballer08 seems to have a good grasp on the math/physics/engineering behind aerodynamics). Anyways, if you think noballer08 did a good analysis of the flight model, this is noballer08's initial impression is of the flight model:

  Quote

  Quote

But, just at first glance, it looks like a really good flight model. Accomplishes the same geometrically-dependent aerodynamic loads that XPlane does with it’s BET/wing-strip method, albeit with more resolution. Definitely the SDK needs much better organization, and the flight model as a whole probably needs additional corrections (such as for compressibility).

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/modern-flight-model/232844/11

Edited March 28, 2021 by abrams_tank

[Chock 17,769]

1 minute ago, MarcG said:

Having never flown a real plane in real life I can tell you the physics are 101% correct, including the Spitfire which I've never flown but from having watched tons of WWII Movies it looks right so it must be right.

There is clearly a massive career ahead of you as the most authoritative interwebs reviewer of flight sim stuff ever with these impeccable and peerless credentials. All of these people with youtube channels claiming to be real pilots can do nothing, but bow before your might.

And I'll fight any man in the room who says otherwise. 🤣

[MarcG 2,929]

3 minutes ago, Chock said:

There is clearly a massive career ahead of you as the most authoritative interwebs reviewer of flight sim stuff ever with these impeccable and peerless credentials. All of these people with youtube channels claiming to be real pilots can do nothing, but bow before your might.

And I'll fight any man in the room who says otherwise. 🤣

I'm bigger than YouTube!

[DrumsArt 270]

Only "Q" can answer this question 😎

Richard.

[omarsmak30 4,067]

I can't wait for P3D wanna be "serious simmers" to hijack this thread 😄