Asobo Looking for Aircraft Experts for testing

[Tuskin38 6,490]

1 hour ago, Doug47 said:

I’m not a pilot so no. Although evidently some on Asobo’s team ARE pilots making this an odd request. 

Of small planes. Not all of the planes in the sim are small planes.

[Kilo60 660]

On 6/24/2021 at 3:09 AM, a321 said:

wow.. like making the default planes that we paid for flyable? such a small detail...easily over looked.

Lmao!

 

Agreed!!!!

[Cayenne 14]

They worked directly with Cub Crafters, made a movie about it, bragging and produced a dog of a flight model but a flawless visual model. What kind of "expert" are they looking for? The performance numbers are all publish open and free for all aircraft, and Asobo can't even get acceleration, and ground roll at sea level even close. Check me if i'm wrong but you dont need to be a pilot to make a virtual aircraft match published numbers. 

Edited June 26, 2021 by Cayenne

[highflyer2020 607]

17 minutes ago, Cayenne said:

They worked directly with Carbon Cub, made a movie about it, bragging and produced a dog of a flight model but a flawless visual model. What kind of "expert" are they looking for? The performance numbers are all publish open and free for all aircraft, and Asobo can't even get acceleration, and ground roll at sea level even close. Check me if i'm wrong but you dont need to be a pilot to make a virtual aircraft match published numbers. 

So why don't you sign up and give them that feedback?

 

[Cayenne 14]

3 minutes ago, highflyer2020 said:

So why don't you sign up and give them that feedback?

 

 Cub Crafters couldn't ensure that they represent their product realistically and professionally. NONE of the bug reports about super obvious flight model discrepancies that i (and hundreds of thousands of others) have reported since alpha have been addressed. If your serious about making a sim for hard core simmers you should start with realistic flight models and avionics not eye candy. I am done wasting my time reporting what every developer,  tester, and user sees every time they fire up the sim. 

 

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

2 minutes ago, Cayenne said:

 Cub Crafters couldn't ensure that they represent their product realistically and professionally. NONE of the bug reports about super obvious flight model discrepancies that i (and hundreds of thousands of others) have reported since alpha have been addressed. If your serious about making a sim for hard core simmers you should start with realistic flight models and avionics not eye candy. I am done wasting my time reporting what every developer,  tester, and user sees every time they fire up the sim. 

 

if you are done reporting , that means you should stop complaining. I am tired of this armchair expert that keep ranting nonstop but refuse to participate in the improvement process. If you don't go out to vote, you don't get to criticize the government. 

[robert young 2,897]

Most devs who are capable of creating virtual engines/flight models that work on one type are usually capable of doing the same for other types. As almost all the characteristics of a given aircraft are widely published Asobo needs people who fundamentally understand in practise how aircraft fly and are also capable of translating that into a believable flight model. It's often useful to have a couple of testers who are familiar with a type to advise and take an independent and critical role on the emerging flight model. You don't need much more than that.

Most aircraft fly according to remarkably similar rules unless they are very unusual.  What never works is to shove numbers into some algorithm or formula and expect the result to be believable. It almost never comes out as expected.

You don't need hundreds of people piling in with their knowledge on type. You need a very small number of people who understand how a particular machine feels and flies and a f/m designer who can translate that to a convincing sim. The more convoluted the process the more likely it will go wrong.

[OSM 683]

58 minutes ago, robert young said:

What never works is to shove numbers into some algorithm or formula and expect the result to be believable. It almost never comes out as expected.

Yes!!! 😄

PID controllers rules for the Fuel Flow, Propeller Governor and Autopilot never work as expected!

[CFIJose 5,485]

They are a little late. Shouldn't they have asked for help prior to the release of MSFS? Actually, they did. But, did they listen. NO!

Now they are asking the community to give them their time, without pay, to help them fix what should have already be fixed. The sim is still a stuttery mess. Fixing the airplanes is not addressing the main issues with the sim's core. Almost a full year gone and still no progress.

BTW, I can count on my hands the experts at AVSIM. It's really not that hard to find us. 😀

[psolk 3,040]

18 minutes ago, DJJose said:

They are a little late. Shouldn't they have asked for help prior to the release of MSFS? Actually, they did. But, did they listen. NO!

Now they are asking the community to give them their time, without pay, to help them fix what should have already be fixed. The sim is still a stuttery mess. Fixing the airplanes is not addressing the main issues with the sim's core. Almost a full year gone and still no progress.

BTW, I can count on my hands the experts at AVSIM. It's really not that hard to find us. 😀

The Sim is a stuttery mess?  Almost a year without progress?  I would have to disagree. Not to mention the Asobo default planes are by far the most advanced default planes we've EVER had in a sim.  So much so I don't think I have EVER flown a default plane in any other sim other than the Cessna at Meigs years ago... 

If I go to the screenshot forum your pics and praise would counter what you just wrote.  Are you being ironic or just jumping on the bandwagon? 

 

Edited June 27, 2021 by psolk

[Matchstick 1,886]

5 minutes ago, psolk said:

The Sim is a stuttery mess?  Almost a year without progress?  I would have to disagree. Not to mention the Asobo default planes are by far the most advanced default planes we've EVER had in a sim.  So much so I don't think I have EVER flown a default plane in any other sim other than the Cessna at Meigs years ago... 

If I go to the screenshot forum your pics and praise would counter what you just wrote.  Are you being ironic or just jumping on the bandwagon? 

Would the Da40TDi having a bug that prevents fuel being transferred quickly enough between tanks to actually refill the main tank still count as "the most advanced default planes we've EVER had in a sim" ?

[Dominique_K 10,138]

19 minutes ago, DJJose said:

The sim is still a stuttery mess.

What are you talking about ? It certainly is not. 

[Matchstick 1,886]

1 minute ago, Dominique_K said:

What are you talking about ? It certainly is not. 

It seems to be for some people - just as it's highly unstable for some and not for others,

[psolk 3,040]

4 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

Would the Da40TDi having a bug that prevents fuel being transferred quickly enough between tanks to actually refill the main tank still count as "the most advanced default planes we've EVER had in a sim" ?

The fact a default plane actually has working fuel transfer capabilities instead of dummy switches would say yes.  I don't remember the Da40TDi in any other sim having that capability... 

 

There are two types of people in the world, those that will find a solution to any problem and those that will find a problem with any solution.    There is SO much of the latter in these forums.  

Edited June 27, 2021 by psolk

[Matchstick 1,886]

Just now, psolk said:

The fact a default plane actually has working fuel transfer capabilities instead of dummy switches would say yes.  I don't remember the Da40TDi in any other sim having that capability... 

OK, I will file you under having drunk a little too much of the cool-aid then.