X-Plane Technology Preview One

[BobFS88 651]

23 hours ago, mSparks said:

All this "Austin worshiper" meme seems to come from people who don't understand that when you have your sim set up to look as good as MSFS, with 30 or 40 aircraft in your hanger that all have completely modelled systems and fly just like the real thing, the promise that Microsoft might be able to enable PMDG at some point in the distant future to do the same just isn't that exciting.

You hit the point right on the head.

When they first made the announcement after the flightsimExpo in Orlando, one of the take away from that conference that people wanted to see were more hardware companies as the flight simulation desktop experience was transforming to more  physical experience much like the visual transition from 2D to 3D cockpits and the visual from 2D screen to VR headset. For example, more was needed to help improve the VR experience with more addons with VR in mind. Honeycomb has just showed off the new yoke and throttle system at that time. More aircraft developers were putting EFB that interact with web-based apps into the aircraft and so on.  More people were getting into cockpit building or advance systems setups to enhance the users experience. Then announcement came and now all attention has shifted back to software to get aircrafts and features running in the new sim.

The point I want to get to is simply that, when I want to move to something new in this case new simulator, I want to move to something that will let you pick up where you left off from the old one with all the improvements in a stable environment and somewhat complete. Not make you feel as if you have to start all over again leaving you with a few aircrafts and the wait time to get you back were you were before.  And before someone comes over here and says, “they did get VR in there” yes, they did but it took the community to get them to make it a priority. I'm not just looking VR, that’s just an example, its everything including the flight modeling of the aircrafts and its functions I have today. So you are right when it comes to get all excited over one study level aircraft to me is too long to keep waiting just to get you back to square 1.

[CarlosF 1,243]

On 6/1/2021 at 8:00 PM, Gilandred said:

especially given that LR hasn’t communicated a roadmap?

Very good point, the lack of info from them only opens the door for speculating. Anyway, there is no harm in people speculating. Why some make it such a big deal, is beyond me.

 

[FlyBaby 659]

On 6/4/2021 at 4:53 PM, sanh said:

I really wish LR had done this a couple of years ago. It doesn't have the wow factor in today's flight sim eco-system. Its just catching up to what is already out there.

 

On 6/5/2021 at 6:43 AM, rka said:

I'm basically with him. It is probably too late. Which is neither good for me nor for the simming community in general.

Not quite sure what you're on about regarding my "agenda". I try to keep a realistic view on the platforms and not let that be influenced by how much I personally am attached to that platform financially or emotionally. To be quite honest with you, that is something I would suggest some people in this thread try out themselves.

Regarding too late...

I think this is why LR has decided to release the videos in bits and pieces at a time, to draw out the conversation, build the anticipation, and get XP back in focus.

If LR had released all at once, the conversation may not have lasted all that long, but for however long these series last...LR can further build the anticipation.

On 6/5/2021 at 7:22 AM, Murmur said:

So, would you suggest that the competition is too late in improving their flight model & avionics to catch up with X-Plane?

The Dev with constant, frequent development will get the most attention...catch up or not. Users want to see improvement on a regular basis, not once every 2 years.

On 6/5/2021 at 2:42 AM, GoranM said:

Be careful.  Flybaby the Gatekeeper, will jump in here and scold you for including the "other" sim in this narrative.  According to him, it's FORBIDDEN to bring up the "other" sim.

Nope. It is actually the mods that close XP threads based on MSFS comparisons / debates. I think that the XP gatekeepers like to draw in the MSFS comparisons/ debates, to distract from the criticisms of XP....and then get the threads closed.

I mean....because it only makes sense that folk / mods can accept MSFS criticism on an XP thread, but not XP criticism.

BTW...that trailer vid still hasn't hit 100k views...

[rka 916]

On 6/6/2021 at 3:59 PM, mSparks said:

All this "Austin worshiper" meme seems to come from people who don't understand that when you have your sim set up to look as good as MSFS, with 30 or 40 aircraft in your hanger that all have completely modelled systems and fly just like the real thing, the promise that Microsoft might be able to enable PMDG at some point in the distant future to do the same just isn't that exciting.

I find this promise extremely exciting. Recently, rsr said releases can be expected this year (DC6 soon and 737 later). XP has nothing of PMDG quality (no, flight factor is not on PMDG level).

I will not comment on the "look as good" part for obvious (pun intended) reasons 🙂

 

[FlyBaby 659]

On 6/4/2021 at 4:03 PM, mSparks said:

What do you think isn't "solid" - that is better elsewhere?

Then any criticism of xplane is overshadowed by these 5M+ pilots, no?

LOL.So is that 5M over the last 26 years years or within the last year???

Also, there is a big difference between someone buying a product, using it to see what it can or can't do, and then criticizing the product based on what they know / experienced. As opposed to someone sitting on the sidelines...spouting things that they heard about the sim (that may not be accurate).

So when it comes to criticizing MSFS weather , flight model etc., are you a member of the 2M+ within the last year with first hand experience / knowledge...or do you (and the other XP gatekeepers so eager to bring up MSFS) fall into the category below...

On 6/5/2021 at 1:36 PM, Murmur said:

Answer is easy, most of the people in this thread are simply uninformed or in bad faith.

 

[akita 429]

26 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

LOL.So is that 5M over the last 26 years years or within the last year???

According to the stats in google store, September 2015.

I wonder if LR at some point will open their marketplace for the mobile to 3pds.

Edited June 7, 2021 by akita

[Humpty 751]

32 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

LOL.So is that 5M over the last 26 years years or within the last year???

Also, there is a big difference between someone buying a product, using it to see what it can or can't do, and then criticizing the product based on what they know / experienced. As opposed to someone sitting on the sidelines...spouting things that they heard about the sim (that may not be accurate).

So when it comes to criticizing MSFS weather , flight model etc., are you a member of the 2M+ within the last year with first hand experience / knowledge...or do you (and the other XP gatekeepers so eager to bring up MSFS) fall into the category below...

 

Hey chill , take out your Gsxr and do some revving 🙂 just did with my FZ 🙂  wanna race let me know 

from what i understand MFS is here MORE for  business  , ofc so is LR but in a way i feel it's Austin's enthusiasm that is the reason behind XP.   Considering even a 5M user base for such a small firm is pretty good  even after 26 yrs , because XP is still standing.  They have survived and I am sure in the future they still would.  I won't say i am not biased i do have a liking towards XP more than MFS (mfs only tried it a few times and didn't bother renewing my subscription , not renewing also is due to a few things like my system which a 10 year old and don't run MFS too well , and ofc MFS doesn't hold any interest for me because it has no helis and i highly doubt they will even come close to DCS / XP for rotary but time will tell. To me MFS is nothing but a scenery simulator which is gorgeous )  

 All arguments are fine provided it don't go personal with the two of you (you know who two 🙂  ) 

Edited June 7, 2021 by HumptyDumpty

[FlyBaby 659]

4 minutes ago, akita said:

According to the stats in google store, September 2015.

I wonder if LR at some point will open their marketplace for the mobile to 3pds.

Ok, I thought that the 5M represented the desktop app.

For the desktop app, I think that LR needs a marketplace to fund constant  / frequent development. The initial / one time desktop sale just doesn't seem to be enough, dlc is where the money  /funding is at.  

[Alec 370]

18 hours ago, Janov said:

Let me know which airplane you would like to see me land at the maximum demonstrated or certified crosswind limit - I will have the video ready for you tomorrow.

That can be done both in MSFS and X-Plane. And the two of  them uses basically the same trick, but different implementation. MSFS will start gradually reducing the Crosswind component below a certain threshold airspeed, to lessen the unrealistic XWind Weathervaning of the Plane. X-Plane does the same but using Height over the Runway as a Slope for the XWind component to be way lower by the time you get near to touchdown. This Slope has been demonstrated to be way more agressive than some documentation on how the wind surface should behave in real life.

 

18 hours ago, Murmur said:

One thing said in that thread was correct though, i.e. the fact that XP flight model has had decades of improvements, whereas MSFS is less than a year old, so it has a lot of room for improvement. Although, I'm not really convinced that the approach they've taken for the MSFS flight model is the right one. From how it is described in the SDK, seems like it's a bit of a mess.

I think MSFS flight model manifests itself as the result of the work of a physicist with no experience in aerodynamics, whereas I think it should have been designed by an aerodynamicist.

That's what I said also on the MSFS Forum. The FM on MSFS2020 needs to be continuously worked on and improved over the next years, and I believe it has tons of potential. But I agree, there's some stuff there that doesn't seem created by someone who have studied aerodynamics , the terms used and explanations are just too out of place to what is used on articles and publications on the subject.

On a sidenote: Jose said you are having fun with RC Planes now! That's the best thing one can do! Wish I had the open space to have fun doing that 🙂

 

10 hours ago, Janov said:

I know - but if someone calls the flightmodel for gliders "rubbish" - I start having doubts about that persons expertise.

Jcomm (aka the "uninstaller") is known for a very special desire for fidelity in certain features that he deems "conditio sine qua non" or absolutely essential for the enjoyment of a flightsimulator. He gets excited about the implementation (or lack of) some esoteric aerodynamic effect...finds out that the simulator he so loved a few minutes ago doesn´t exactly get it right - then uninstalls the simulator in a wave of hyperbole and disappointment and (although I haven´t heard him say it) - proclaims the flightmodel to be "rubbish".

While this post was well received by my friend Jose, and thankfully everything seems fine, I still feel the need to say a few words here on his behalf.

1 - If you fly an Airliners you are used to fly for the past 20-30 years of your life, and it's nothing like you know it should be, you have the right to call it "rubbish", if it seems appropriate. Jose has been flying these Gliders for longer than I have been living, and while he can't give an evaluation on a Prop Plane, Airliner, etc, he can evaluate a Glider Flight Model better than anyone I know, because he not only has thousands of hours flying them, but he knows all there is to know about their specific aerodynamics, over the years of study of the subject due to his love for gliding. Most probably don't know, but not only he has so much experience flying Gliders, but he also have a Degree in Math, and used to be a Programming teacher at an university, so if there's anyone I can say should understand a thing or two about  these things, it's him.

2 - His Cycle of constant unsatisfaction with Simulators is something known to all the Simulation Community, and always brings a good laugh. Maybe some compare him to some users who are know to go around foruns saying stupid things just to get attention, and knows as much about aviation as a 10 year old kid, but knowing him personally for around 10 years, I can say he is an incredibly hard working man, unfortunately leaving barely any free time for any leasure activity. Much of his frustrations come from going home, having 30 minutes to relax a little after a long day, opening a Sim, and getting his plane blown by a 10knots crosswind like it was made out of paper. I can relate to that, he doesn't have time or tranquility in to see a simulator as a fun and relaxing experience. The best thing he did over the last months was to uninstall it all, and go enjoy actually relaxing activies after a long day, such as watching a good TV Show, that will not make anyone angry because it CTD 10minutes from destination.

Also, if it wasn't for him, I wouldn't been able to be living in Portugal, as he was the only person who offered to become my "rent guarantor".  Could you believe someone trusted me at that level? Not even I trust in myself that much!!

 

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Alec

[FlyBaby 659]

3 minutes ago, HumptyDumpty said:

Hey chill , take out your Gsxr and do some revving 🙂 just did with my FZ 🙂  wanna race let me know 

 

I have a Street Triple 765...you can win the race...I just want some long stretched back roads with little traffic.

5 minutes ago, HumptyDumpty said:

 I won't say i am not biased i do have a liking towards XP more than MFS (mfs only tried it a few times and didn't bother renewing my subscription , not renewing also is due to a few things like my system which a 10 year old and don't run MFS too well , and ofc MFS doesn't hold any interest for me because it has no helis and i highly doubt they will even come close to DCS / XP for rotary but time will tell.

I agree about the helis....I only use XP for Helis and I don't think that will change any time soon. low and slow at dusk / night is where XP shines for me. I think DCS heli flight model is much better (huey), but DCS does not have many civil Helis and their night lighting just doesn't look right to me.

10 minutes ago, HumptyDumpty said:

 All arguments are fine provided it don't go personal with the two of you (you know who two 🙂  ) 

I don't mind debating...none of us are cashing any of the Dev's checks. I think too many people take other's opinions too personal.

I have no loyalty per se, just which platform works best for my given scenario. I do, however, think that LR has neglected its user base for too long.

13 minutes ago, HumptyDumpty said:

To me MFS is nothing but a scenery simulator which is gorgeous ) 

For a guy going for his PPL...trying to get familiar with the landmarks for cross country prep...and practicing some dead reckoning...MSFS, as a scenery simulator, is perfect.

[mSparks 2,094]

2 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

represented the desktop app.

that is just googles linux.

there are 4 other operating systems also supported by the "almost" one codebase, the largest will be ios, which we dont have numbers for, but guessing there is probably another 10M on ios and 1M or 2M accross the three remaining desktop OS's.

On the desktop OS's there are about 10,000 hardcore users or so that regularly buy 3PD content. 

about 2,000 of them are on my 744 discord.

46 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

criticizing MSFS weather , flight model etc., are you a member of the 2M+ within the last year with first hand experience / knowledge...or do you (and the other XP gatekeepers so eager to bring up MSFS) fall into the category below...

neither, I haven't critiqued it at all, its not available for any operating system I own, nor is it ever likely to be.

 

1 hour ago, FlyBaby said:

BTW...that trailer vid still hasn't hit 100k views...

it is however now among the most viewed video on their channel.

The most viewed being

 

[Janov 2,383]

1 minute ago, Alec said:

Jose has been flying these Gliders for longer than I have been living, and while he can't give an evaluation on a Prop Plane, Airliner, etc, he can evaluate a Glider Flight Model better than anyone I know, because he not only has thousands of hours flying them, but he knows all there is to know about their specific aerodynamics, over the years of study of the subject due to his love for gliding.

Hi Alexis,

I believe that Jose can judge the performance of a glider, but I also believe that he will tend to exaggerate his judgement. "Rubbish" is in my book something that is not usable, and I have flown the default glider (ASK) in X-Plane and also some of the freeware (more sophisticated) ones and I could not find any flaw with them that violated the laws of physics or aerodynamics as far as I know them... I would certainly not argue with an experienced gliderpilot that says the flightmodel is not highly realistic or mispresents certain specifics of a glider - but "rubbish"?

4 minutes ago, Alec said:

X-Plane does the same but using Height over the Runway as a Slope for the XWind component to be way lower by the time you get near to touchdown. This Slope has been demonstrated to be way more agressive than some documentation on how the wind surface should behave in real life.

The attenuation of wind in the surface friction level is a real phenomenon. I agree that it may be a bit too strong in X-Plane (cant speak for MSFS), but Austin took official wind data from wind turbine studies to model this. The crosswind limit specified in handbooks (or the demonstrated crosswind) is the "tower reported wind" - not the wind actually acting on the aircraft at the time of touchdown. It is measured at a height considerably above the height of a C-172s tailfin, and therefore the effective wind acting on a small aircraft will be less than the "reported" wind.

You knew these things, I just mention them for the sake of completeness. I will not say that X-Plane gets the ground interaction completely right (I still feel there is too little sideforce-traction), but I can easily land the C172 at a full crosswind of 18G23 repeatedly and safely.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Humpty 751]

3 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

I have a Street Triple 765...you can win the race...I just want some long stretched back roads with little traffic.

I agree about the helis....I only use XP for Helis and I don't think that will change any time soon. low and slow at dusk / night is where XP shines for me. I think DCS heli flight model is much better (huey), but DCS does not have many civil Helis and their night lighting just doesn't look right to me.

I don't mind debating...none of us are cashing any of the Dev's checks. I think too many people take other's opinions too personal.

I have no loyalty per se, just which platform works best for my given scenario. I do, however, think that LR has neglected its user base for too long.

For a guy going for his PPL...trying to get familiar with the landmarks for cross country prep...and practicing some dead reckoning...MSFS, as a scenery simulator, is perfect.

Oh thought it was a gsxr , Street triple a good bike. oh yeah long stretched no traffic and lotsa curves with lotsa rev match and trail braking 🙂

Fair enough about the PPL thing.  

[Humpty 751]

20 minutes ago, Alec said:

That can be done both in MSFS and X-Plane. And the two of  them uses basically the same trick, but different implementation. MSFS will start gradually reducing the Crosswind component below a certain threshold airspeed, to lessen the unrealistic XWind Weathervaning of the Plane. X-Plane does the same but using Height over the Runway as a Slope for the XWind component to be way lower by the time you get near to touchdown. This Slope has been demonstrated to be way more agressive than some documentation on how the wind surface should behave in real life.

 

That's what I said also on the MSFS Forum. The FM on MSFS2020 needs to be continuously worked on and improved over the next years, and I believe it has tons of potential. But I agree, there's some stuff there that doesn't seem created by someone who have studied aerodynamics , the terms used and explanations are just too out of place to what is used on articles and publications on the subject.

On a sidenote: Jose said you are having fun with RC Planes now! That's the best thing one can do! Wish I had the open space to have fun doing that 🙂

 

While this post was well received by my friend Jose, and thankfully everything seems fine, I still feel the need to say a few words here on his behalf.

1 - If you fly an Airliners you are used to fly for the past 20-30 years of your life, and it's nothing like you know it should be, you have the right to call it "rubbish", if it seems appropriate. Jose has been flying these Gliders for longer than I have been living, and while he can't give an evaluation on a Prop Plane, Airliner, etc, he can evaluate a Glider Flight Model better than anyone I know, because he not only has thousands of hours flying them, but he knows all there is to know about their specific aerodynamics, over the years of study of the subject due to his love for gliding. Most probably don't know, but not only he has so much experience flying Gliders, but he also have a Degree in Math, and used to be a Programming teacher at an university, so if there's anyone I can say should understand a thing or two about  these things, it's him.

2 - His Cycle of constant unsatisfaction with Simulators is something known to all the Simulation Community, and always brings a good laugh. Maybe some compare him to some users who are know to go around foruns saying stupid things just to get attention, and knows as much about aviation as a 10 year old kid, but knowing him personally for around 10 years, I can say he is an incredibly hard working man, unfortunately leaving barely any free time for any leasure activity. Much of his frustrations come from going home, having 30 minutes to relax a little after a long day, opening a Sim, and getting his plane blown by a 10knots crosswind like it was made out of paper. I can relate to that, he doesn't have time or tranquility in to see a simulator as a fun and relaxing experience. The best thing he did over the last months was to uninstall it all, and go enjoy actually relaxing activies after a long day, such as watching a good TV Show, that will not make anyone angry because it CTD 10minutes from destination.

Also, if it wasn't for him, I wouldn't been able to be living in Portugal, as he was the only person who offered to become my "rent guarantor".  Could you believe someone trusted me at that level? Not even I trust in myself that much!!

 

 

Huh , are you that same Alexis from discord ? 

[Humpty 751]

12 minutes ago, Janov said:

Hi Alexis,

I believe that Jose can judge the performance of a glider, but I also believe that he will tend to exaggerate his judgement. "Rubbish" is in my book something that is not usable, and I have flown the default glider (ASK) in X-Plane and also some of the freeware (more sophisticated) ones and I could not find any flaw with them that violated the laws of physics or aerodynamics as far as I know them... I would certainly not argue with an experienced gliderpilot that says the flightmodel is not highly realistic or mispresents certain specifics of a glider - but "rubbish"?

The attenuation of wind in the surface friction level is a real phenomenon. I agree that it may be a bit too strong in X-Plane (cant speak for MSFS), but Austin took official wind data from wind turbine studies to model this. The crosswind limit specified in handbooks (or the demonstrated crosswind) is the "tower reported wind" - not the wind actually acting on the aircraft at the time of touchdown. It is measured at a height considerably above the height of a C-172s tailfin, and therefore the effective wind acting on a small aircraft will be less than the "reported" wind.

You knew these things, I just mention them for the sake of completeness. I will not say that X-Plane gets the ground interaction completely right (I still feel there is too little sideforce-traction), but I can easily land the C172 at a full crosswind of 18G23 repeatedly and safely.

Cheers, Jan

 

Lol Jcomm is going to be really mad with me , that rubbish thing he says was on in the chat with him in the discord group. 😀  well i did get scolded by him LOL