MSFS has the most advanced flight model?

[pmb 5,137]

31 minutes ago, mikealpha said:

Don't believe any of those. My own judgement of flight models has drastically changed after getting a Brunner FF yoke, which is the closest to the real thing you can get. Expensive, but it's a world of difference. 

I am not a RW pilot, thus I'll contain myself with judgement here. However, I was given stick/yoke and rudder in a real R400 and C172RG for half an hour each, and the biggest difference to all simulators I've flown in (including all the ones mentioned here) were the forces acting from the control surfaces back to the controls.

Edited June 7, 2021 by pmb

[CarlosF 1,241]

This is a topic in which there will never be a winner.

There were some that said P3D flight model was superior to FSX and XP, and others that swear on XP's flight model, its a never ending discussion. We're not all the same, we weren't mass conceived in an assembly line so our feel for things may differ. Why don't we just keep it simple. Fly what you like and whatever feels right for you.

 XP served me well for a few years, but for now MSFS2020 is my sim of choice. 

 

 

[LRBS 948]

44 minutes ago, Janov said:

 This is where our PC simulations usually hit the limit imposed by the skill of the aircraft designer.

 

Yep, that's quite right.

I think that their big problem is the aircraft designer and somebody stubborn that can't let it go being wrong.

I'm looking at FSLABS, PMDG, DCS designers that are small companies and their flight models are net superior compared to ASOBO.  It doesn't matter which sim platform it is; a good designer will do wonders.

It gets to the point where it really doesn't matter how many real pilots they have as "beta testers" when they don't listen and correct the flight model.

Very sad.

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by killthespam

[Janov 2,383]

Just now, killthespam said:

when they don't listen and correct the flight model

I think the core issue in the less than stellar reception of most default aircraft in MSFS was not a fundamental flaw of the flightmodel, but rather the lack of time to get it right, combined with the idea that "the majority" of users would be fine with it.

It takes a lot of effort and knowledge to tune a flightmodel in any simulator.

[fppilot 4,371]

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Some posters in that thread, who seem to have a knowledge of the physics/mathematics with aerodynamics, are saying that MSFS actually has a better flight model than X-Plane. 

They need to define more specifically what they include in "flight model"....  Flight dynamics?  Systems?  Avionics?  I have not found any single flight dynamic in MSFS equal to several GA models I continue to fly in other simulators.  Think A2A, Realair, Milviz......  Carenado models in MSFS seem to be equal if anything, but not superior.

[bobcat999 8,483]

I am not a pilot so I have never flown a C172.

I have flown the C172 a lot in Xplane, and I have flown it a lot in MSFS.

I like the way it flies in MSFS better.  I can't explain why as I can't put it into words.

It might not be realistic, but it doesn't matter too much to me, as I am an amateur simmer and I just fly what I like the feel of.  I don't  mind setting the throttle and mixture, and trimming out the aircraft for cruise, but I don't personally want the plane to be too much trouble, and how would I know what is realistic anyway?

Now, this is why any arguments around this are fairly useless...  I would rather fly the Zibo 737 any day in Xplane rather than the default MSFS B787.

All I can deduce from this is that both sims have the capability to simulate flight to a really good degree, so it maybe is about the specific planes in the sim and the skill used to refine them rather than the sim itself.

As a point of interest, I have the Just Flight PA-28 in both Xplane and in MSFS.  There is not much between them.  I think I maybe enjoy the MSFS version better because they have had chance to tweak it a bit more, and I enjoy the graphics of the scenery more.  Maybe as simple as that!

As for pilots opinions, as somebody else said, they all vary anyway.  Some pilots love flying the A320 in real life, and some hate it.  Some pilots have enjoyed flying a Spitfire and praise it highly, while some say it was nothing special and one of the most over rated aircraft of WW2.  Opinions... As many as people!  🙂

[bean_sprout 1,201]

I've flown the Piper Tomahawk and Piper Warrior in RL and that makes me an expert on every plane in MSFS - NOT!

Cheers

bs

Edited June 7, 2021 by bean_sprout

[177B 730]

I finally deleted X-plane and all the payware and freeware extras, well over $2,000.00's worth.

Why?

Because finally MSFS really is "there" for me now. Air Manager finally works perfectly and all my peripherals as well. I use a 5 or 6 screen setup when I fly, only 3 are views out the windscreen and of instruments. The other screens are for Airmanager touchscreen with Knobster control. And additional laptops and iPads for plates, chats, WX info etc.

The Carenado PA34 is the most realistic sim plane I have ever flown. And now all the instruments can be replicated in AiManager. So my sim cockpit is now complete.

The flight model for this plane is as good as any I have flown in P3D or XPlane. And as we all know the atmospheric model in MSFS is superb as is the rendering of clouds and not to mention scenery. To me flying in real planes (I have about 2000 hrs in GA aircraft) is a very visual experience and that is what I love most in MSFS.

No simulator is like actual flying IMHO, there is so much missing in sensations and the real 3D environment, the way hail or rain will scare the ..... out of you or turbulence make you hit your head so hard it stunts you for a few seconds.

Having said all that I really always enjoyed Xplane and P3D  but now I have cleared more than a TB of word not allowed off my sim machine and it feels purer somehow. And it is simpler just to jump into one sim. And one plane, I usually spend a lot of time setting up my peripherals so my cockpit  replicates a specific plane, now it is the Seneca for a while at least.

But as many have said whatever floats your amphibian or whatever is fine. This is just my thoughts at the moment.

It is 96 ºF here in Northern NH. With high humidity, very strange for this time of year, so I have stayed inside messing with the Sim machine the last few days after not touching it for more than a month. Spring weather is just to nice usually not to be out gardening or biking, not to mention actual flying both RC and full scale...

[OSM 683]

Simulation is a more psychological phenomenon than a technical one.

Even if one day someone makes a plane absolutely similar to the real one, only real pilots of this particular plane will be able to "feel" that it looks like a real one based on their real experience. Their brain will be able to synthesize this sensation based only on visual and audio information from the computer. But if you do not have such experience, your brain will not be able to make such a synthesis. Here is an example, looking at this area, some people based on their experience feel cold, and others warm.

[sd_flyer 6,042]

1 hour ago, Janov said:

I feel your pain! We also have a bunch of MSFS fans coming over to the X-Plane forums, trying to stir things up. Why can´t they use MSFS and be content with that?

Isn't it ironic? So one thing we can do to avoid to become hypocrites, is to stick to want we believe and lead by personal example. I have not visited .org and x-aviation forum since last year. I have absolutely not problem if people love Xp11 and consider it  better. I only have problem when people come here to convince me with their believe system LOL

[MarkSC 122]

5 hours ago, keithb77 said:

Theoreticals aside I'd say the proof of the pudding is in the eating...if MSFS FM is so good why do the planes fly so bad?

Maybe one day....

You must not have flown the Just Flight Arrow.

[bean_sprout 1,201]

The flight models in MSFS are the best because it is the only sim I care about.

Regards

bs

[Doug47 574]

5 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

All I know is when I try a simulator, I compare how it feels to how it feels when I fly an aircraft in real life.  X Plane never made me feel like I was flying a real aircraft. MSFS 2020, with the aircraft I have tried, the C 172, Mooney, JF Arrow and Seminole twin, feel to me just like what I feel flying a real aircraft. 

How do you….feel? You literally don’t feel anything. A silly argument. 

Visually it’s hands down the best looking sim by 15,000 million miles. 
However, the flight dynamics are some of the worst. FS2002 at best. 
Watching real pilots on YouTube throw the airplanes around, bouncing up and down like toy planes at a little kiddies party is embarrassingly poor. 

Forget the tree LOD, omg, and work on the flight dynamics already!
 

 

[abrams_tank 7,419]

3 hours ago, Chock said:

What any flight sim needs to really be good in regards to flight modeling, is stuff like ridge lift, wave lift, thermal activity etc.

MSFS does simulate the downdraft and updraft on ridges though.  It's actually a specific lesson in FS Academy VFR, where on one side of the ridge, there is an updraft of wind:

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by abrams_tank

[MarkSC 122]

1 hour ago, fppilot said:

They need to define more specifically what they include in "flight model"....  Flight dynamics?  Systems?  Avionics?  I have not found any single flight dynamic in MSFS equal to several GA models I continue to fly in other simulators.  Think A2A, Realair, Milviz......  Carenado models in MSFS seem to be equal if anything, but not superior.

I recently purchased the JF Turbo Arrow. Try it out. I think you will agree it is superior to even A2A, RealAir, etc. and shows how good MSFS can be with the right planes. In my maiden flight, I was buffeted by cross winds, and the plane's response just felt so believable.  I had a big grin as I struggled to land and thought, "MSFS has finally arrived."