multiple posts oops

Edited March 29, 20215 yr by TrafficPilot

Multiple post

Edited March 29, 20215 yr by TrafficPilot

9 hours ago, mrueedi said:

You should try FSX. It flies on rails.

 

What were you flying in FSX? I would not describe it as "flying on rails" unless you were flying the default MS aircraft.

In FSX AND FS2004 I could buy third party aircraft that flew to the numbers, that could stall and could spin (thank you Rob Young at RealAir Simulations!).

I see none of this in MSFS. I'm working on a MSFS video about stalls and spins. Only problem is no aircraft (including third party) are capable of simulating a stall or a spin in MSFS2020

As a "game" I don't see much of a future for MSFS. XBOX kids will get bored flying through buildings and under bridges then ditch it for something more exciting.

As a "flight simulator" MSFS is so awful it's laughable. A £100 mistake.

1 minute ago, TrafficPilot said:

What were you flying in FSX? I would not describe it as "flying on rails" unless you were flying the default MS aircraft.

In FSX AND FS2004 I could buy third party aircraft that flew to the numbers, that could stall and could spin (thank you Rob Young at RealAir Simulations!).

I see none of this in MSFS. I'm working on a MSFS video about stalls and spins. Only problem is no aircraft (including third party) are capable of simulating a stall or a spin in MSFS2020

As a "game" I don't see much of a future for MSFS. XBOX kids will get bored flying through buildings and under bridges then ditch it for something more exciting.

As a "flight simulator" MSFS is so awful it's laughable. A £100 mistake.

That's because they have been modelled. go back to FSX or XP11. Use default plane and you will see that none of them simulate stall and spin properly. XP11 C172 which is probably one of the best default aircraft in XP11 has been updated quite a lot since XP11 has been release. Also people sell addons for it to make it "more realistic".  If you want to blame someone, blame the 3PD who haven't taken the time to model stall and spin. It has nothing to do with MSFS not being capable of simulating it. 

47 minutes ago, TrafficPilot said:

What were you flying in FSX? I would not describe it as "flying on rails" unless you were flying the default MS aircraft.

Isn't it unfair to dismiss issues with FSX flight dynamics engine because they're default, while basing your comments about MSFS flight dynamics engine on default aircraft?

A flight dynamics engine does not care about how people want an aircraft to fly or people's beliefs, so comments based on feeling matter really little to me. On the other hand, my mathematical experiments have shown that it is better than FSX flight dynamics engine in so many aspects. FSX flight dynamics engine doesn't even model adverse roll caused by rudder input, it's really that bad - I find it almost laughable. Add-ons like PMDG, FSLabs, Majestic, A2A etc. heavily modify / override default flight dynamics engine of FSX, so they can't be used to comment on FSX flight dynamics engine. You can similarly override default flight dynamics engine in MSFS too.

As said before, flight dynamics engine of MSFS is far from being perfect, however it is not flawed in design, it just needs some (rather major) improvements in Cm & stability fits. It is definitely not X-Plane, but it is far better than FSX/P3D.

Edited March 29, 20215 yr by BiologicalNanobot

11 hours ago, mrueedi said:

Imho this number has not much use because just the "accuracy of a flight simulator" is a far too broad term. So the question is, the accuracy of what exactly is only 85%?

 

I'm trying to choose the right words as not to be confrontational or misunderstood.

 

I mentioned the accuracy of a real flight simulator to be at about 85% or so, close to the real airplane.

 

It is obvious that you did not have the opportunity to be exposed to such an environment or curriculum to get a type rating or even a training event.

 

You need to understand that when you get into a simulator there are many factors that differ from the real airplane, performance, avionics, cockpit layout, software versions, simulator maintenance, etc.

 

After many years I can share with you as an example that losing an engine in the simulator is totally different than losing one in the real-life.

 

You mentioned avionics, a funny thing last month when I had to do a sim session the FMC was 2 versions behind compared to the ones flying the line.

 

Even the real simulators get evaluated and re-certified from time to time to bring them as close as possible to the accuracy of the airplane and unfortunately, there are discrepancies.

 

And to answer to your question, there is no precise answer for "the accuracy of what exactly is only 85%?".

 

Regarding to MSFS aircraft model problem they did not succeeded at all, actually the other way around. From their presentations and showcase we can see that lots of calculations and studying was involved but very poorly applied to the aircraft models and for some unknown reason they still didn't fix it and manage to drive crazy the customer to the point of no return.

1 hour ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

You can similarly override default flight dynamics engine in MSFS too.

Can you though?   That is kind of the $60,000 question.

If yes, then great, I'm confident we'll eventually see aircraft that behave as well as A2A or RealAir did in P3D or FSX.

1 minute ago, Mace said:

Can you though?   That is kind of the $60,000 question.

Of course you can, have you tried Aerowinx PSX in MSFS? There is an upcoming helicopter add-on which uses completely custom flight dynamics engine too.

16 hours ago, killthespam said:

 

They have fixed base (no motion) and full base simulators (full motion) and we do training in both. I mentioned this because there are so many "experts" here implying as to be a problem that there is no motion.

 

Many years ago, a friend of mine gave me the honor of flying my simulator for a couple hours. He was a senior trainer for a world class company on the md80, and he was in charge of the "real" simulators.

When I asked him the unavoidable question about how "real" it felt, he gave me his verdict: "You realize, of course, that without motion this is not real at all". Then he added: "And even the simulators we have back at the airport, with state of the art motion, are not the real thing, and an experienced pilot can tell".

"Then" he said, "if you want to talk about the numbers, this MD80 you are showing me is pretty much on the spot: speeds, angles, consumptions, it all adds up; and also the panel is pretty good, and the standard procedures I have to follow are ok, so, from this point of view, it is a great job. But flying an MD80 is another thing."

Then he invited me to play with "his" simulator.

And I realized that what he had said was true. Btw I did not crash when he presented me with a head-on incoming Learjet precisely after Vr. Apparently I did what I had to do to avoid the intruder. This still makes me feel very proud. But the experience was important: on our desks we can have a wonderful procedural and systems simulation, like PSX, and also a beautiful visual experience, like that of MSFS (especially when they fix some glitches and give us a stutter-free experience). One day I have to try and combine PSX for systems and flight model with MSFS for visuals. If it works it should be cool.

But flying is another thing. I still trust my friend, who was a real expert with no "".

A.

1 hour ago, ADamiani said:

One day I have to try and combine PSX for systems and flight model with MSFS for visuals. If it works it should be cool.

Aerowinx PSX already works and it is really nice. Too bad that I'm more into A320s and Prosim is really expensive.

Edited March 29, 20215 yr by BiologicalNanobot

This one time, I turned my computer on and loaded up *insert flight sim/game of choice* and enjoyed my time playing pixel planes.

Its true! 

3 hours ago, Mace said:

4 hours ago, BiologicalNanobot said:

You can similarly override default flight dynamics engine in MSFS too.

Can you though?   That is kind of the $60,000 question.

Certainly.   That's what all the various replay tools are doing, effectively.   They're reading a recording they made of your previous flight and moving your plane to mirror that.   It's a small conceptual step (if a much larger one in effort) to expand that so you're taking in control inputs and environmental parameters and calculating the whole thing.

13 hours ago, killthespam said:

It is obvious that you did not have the opportunity to be exposed to such an environment or curriculum to get a type rating or even a training event.

My full motion simulator experience is described here (let the browser translate it, as it is in German):

Erfahrungsbericht Swiss MD11 Simulator - Aviatik-Stammtisch - ILS Flightforum 

So your first impressionw as wrong, I had indeed a training event in such a simulator. Btw. one of the purposes of the session was to reverese engineer the flight performance of the MD-11 by flying some very specific and simple manoeuvres.

 

13 hours ago, killthespam said:

You mentioned avionics, a funny thing last month when I had to do a sim session the FMC was 2 versions behind compared to the ones flying the line.

And by how much % did the two versions differ? And by how many % were the procedures different? How many menues were different between the two versions?

 

13 hours ago, killthespam said:

From their presentations and showcase we can see that lots of calculations and studying was involved but very poorly applied to the aircraft models...

I can also find many pilots praising the flight model.

 

13 hours ago, killthespam said:

... and for some unknown reason they still didn't fix it and manage to drive crazy the customer to the point of no return.

Yes, that seems to be the case. I have also noticed many posters in this forum who said, that they were leaving MSFS. Interestingly it took not long and they were back. Or, they just bothered to write posts in this subforum. But - how should somebody how is done with the sim loose time writing forum posts about it?

13 hours ago, kaosfere said:

Certainly.   That's what all the various replay tools are doing, effectively.   They're reading a recording they made of your previous flight and moving your plane to mirror that.   It's a small conceptual step (if a much larger one in effort) to expand that so you're taking in control inputs and environmental parameters and calculating the whole thing.

Overriding default aerodynamics aside. I hope you guys will have an opportunity to help ASOBO improve the flight dynamics as well.

A cheap game where you push pixels around with a chintzy yoystick has a "physics model"?

Let me go into a corner and collapse with laughter.

Edited March 30, 20215 yr by Ricardo41