54 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Can I notice it? Not really but there again I am not a pilot. Are there any that can notice it?

Well, if "real pilots" are accepting and using it, then the stakes get raised "just a little".

From a ruined sunday afternoon playing with a flight simulator

Into the lives of the passengers and crew aboard their real aircraft and all the people and property on the ground they could take out on the way down.

I highly suspect you might notice an actual A330 crashing through your kitchen. Even something tiny like a C172 would make quite a mess.

Are you sure you are OK with MS insisting its safe for your local real world C172 pilots to learn how not to kill you or your family and friends in MSFS?

I'm very not. What Ive seen and heard from that side of the fence terrifies me more than the ground coming towards me in VR.

OTOH, would I expect you (or even really anyone but LR) to care the hstab in the XP helo flight model looks like it still needs work. No. Not really, and the xp sdk is developed enough I could easily fake it in an afternoon.

Then there is everything in between, I dont believe for a second even the greenest flight simmer would happily buy into an airliner with no working speedbrakes, and its those aspects of the flight model that will be making PMDG bleed - not whether "90% n1 means go quicker than 80% n1"

 

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Well, if "real pilots" are accepting and using it, then the stakes get raised "just a little".

From a ruined sunday afternoon playing with a flight simulator

Into the lives of the passengers and crew aboard their real aircraft and all the people and property on the ground they could take out on the way down.

I highly suspect you might notice an actual A330 crashing through your kitchen. Even something tiny like a C172 would make quite a mess.

Are you sure you are OK with MS insisting its safe for your local real world C172 pilots to learn how not to kill you or your family and friends in MSFS?

I'm very not. What Ive seen and heard from that side of the fence terrifies me more than the ground coming towards me in VR.

OTOH, would I expect you (or even really anyone but LR) to care the hstab in the XP helo flight model looks like it still needs work. No. Not really, and the xp sdk is developed enough I could easily fake it in an afternoon.

Then there is everything in between, I dont believe for a second even the greenest flight simmer would happily buy into an airliner with no working speedbrakes, and its those aspects of the flight model that will be making PMDG bleed - not whether "90% n1 means go quicker than 80% n1"

 

Not quite sure what point you are trying to make with that? As as said I do not in any way doubt that XP has the superior flight model. But as the recent survey showed well over 90% of the user base in either sim are not RW pilots. (And in fact the actual percentage is probably far higher than that).

For them, and me, it's therefore the illusion of flight that matters rather than its absolute accuracy. Of course we all want all parts of the plane to work and have an effect and we expect these to be as accurately modelled as possible in order for the illusion of real flight to be convincing. But the reality is that people are learning to fly the simulator rather than the plane.

Having learnt to use, say, the Zibo and the FBWA320 (or indeed the new XP12 A330) to the point where one can successfully complete a procedural flight between two airports the skills involved are not in essence much different than completing a quest in The Witcher 3 on the hardest difficulty. You've simply learnt to use the computer game.

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by jarmstro

4 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Not quite sure what point you are trying to make with that?

You asked the question 

7 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Can I notice it?

I was trying to help you answer it.

Since only you can answer that question.

Here is a more specific example. This is the speedbrake configuration of a 744 (An A330 will have similar, e.g. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/77017/why-shouldn-t-the-a330-40-s-speedbrakes-be-used-in-alternate-law )

Did I waste my time properly wiring them up in the sparky744 or not?

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by mSparks

42 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Did I waste my time properly wiring them up in the sparky744 or not?

Of course you didn't. It's obviously something you enjoy doing.

It's all a question of focus !

For years I was a very happy user of ELITE IFT and Aerowinx PS1 / PSX. Both have their very specific use.

Nowadays most if not all of what ELITE desktop simulation offer can easily be experienced by MFS or X-Plane users with the right configurations, hardware and add-ons, with the remarkable advantage of having very decent scenery and weather effects and visuals.

Aerowinx PS1 / PSX offer you a remarkable simulation of a Boeing 744, but the out-of-windshield visuals are so basic that most of you here would probably drop using it sooner than it took to install and start to configure and learn the GUI. Yet, if you're a rw 744 type rated or looking for type rating guy, you will easily give away the World graphics for the precision and detail provided by the 744 simulation.

I believe Flight Gear has one of the most powerful flight simulation engines when coupled with JSBSim. Mumur has ran some rather interesting tests. The secret of success is that you can pretty much transpose aero data from official flight test data reports into the sim and get a pretty close to real aircraft behaviour. OFC you need to have that data, because if you do not, just as with any flight simulation engine of the JSBSim type, which is usually defined as table-based, you will experience deviations from reality here & there.

MFS and X-Plane will coninue to evolve, each wth their own strong and weak points. Austin's approach to flight dynamics modelling is very interesting, but at least until X-Plane 11 simply pooring in the exact dimensions, angles, shapes ... of a real aircraft wasn't enough to get the performance numbers close to real at times. Developers have to use their skills / imagination to mitigate the limitations of a powerful but at the same time incomplete way of simulating flight dynamics. Same applies to MFS, FSX, DCS, IL2 and Flight Gear.

The strongest aspects for comparison are usually graphics and weather effects and rendering. In this particular area, while the graphics aren't great, Flight Gear already offers a quite sophisticated Advanced Weather Model that has long been doing stuff that only recently first MFS now X-Plane 12 is trying to model, angood example being geopotential height variation due to temperature - the temperature side of the "from high to low" adagio...

I didn't bring DCS and IL-2 to the comparison yet, but they're somehow similar to a table-based vs blade element approach, DCS getting their air data from CFD software whenever there aren't enough sources / documents from rw flight tests available. IL-2 is closer to X-Plane in it's approach as we can infer from the FM engine description published on their site and inherited fro 777's Rise of Flight.

A rw pilot will mostly use a flight simulator as a game - I do a lot playing IL2 or DCS - or as a tool to train procedures, most of them not requiring a precise behaviour / response to extreme ange of attack / post stall conditions. They look for as close to real performance, like being able to get close to real speeds / consumptions for a given power setting, and so on... or for trainning instrument procedures. Emmergencies trainning is yet another possibility, but if they involve trainning "land out" scenarios then an acceptable scenery is mandatory...

The more I get old the less I feel interested in sophisticated aircraft packages that will put me studying the systems and operations so that I can act as a real bizz jet or airliner pilot. Instead I look for simple to use GA, Aerobatic, Heli, WW2 aircraft, or, if possible but so far very difficult to find - good gliders.

A sim that gives me this will win my "Wow" s  but I tend to be very exigent regarding accuracy / soundness of the weather modelling part of the simulation.

 

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by jcomm

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

Of course you didn't. It's obviously something you enjoy doing.

very much, something I wouldnt if I had to get into the crazy flight model calculations to accurately represent the change in flight characteristics of spoilers 3 4 9 and 10 being at 45 degrees and 5 6 7 and 8 being at 20 degrees.

The question its trying to answer tho is "would you notice the speedbrake not working".

This is the kind of report that comes in for that:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues/118

Generally I would say for that sort of thing, its the side effects of it being wrong you will notice.

e.g. without them you might overrun the runway when you did nothing wrong or just relying on the brakes during rto your tires will pop

Even then it gets into a situation of "best guess" of what would probably happen. Not going to really be possible to answer if they should still pop if the reverse thrust and speedbrakes were actually deployed. (actually got me thinking they probably should)

Like, the boeing 742 flight simulator insisted

wasnt possible and would have crashed.

 

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by mSparks

7 hours ago, mSparks said:

very much, something I wouldnt if I had to get into the crazy flight model calculations to accurately represent the change in flight characteristics of spoilers 3 4 9 and 10 being at 45 degrees and 5 6 7 and 8 being at 20 degrees.

The question its trying to answer tho is "would you notice the speedbrake not working".

This is the kind of report that comes in for that:

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/issues/118

Generally I would say for that sort of thing, its the side effects of it being wrong you will notice.

e.g. without them you might overrun the runway when you did nothing wrong or just relying on the brakes during rto your tires will pop

Even then it gets into a situation of "best guess" of what would probably happen. Not going to really be possible to answer if they should still pop if the reverse thrust and speedbrakes were actually deployed. (actually got me thinking they probably should)

Like, the boeing 742 flight simulator insisted wasn't possible and would have crashed.

 

Not really the point I was making. Indeed all simmers are going to notice if the speed brakes aren't working at all. But I would suggest that most wouldn't notice if the drag was out by, say, 10% compared to the real plane. They would just learn to fly the plane as it is modelled in the sim and would be happy enough unless it is pointed out to them that the drag is out.

PS I saw that video by MentourPilot. OMG what an amazing story!!

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by Ray Proudfoot
Embedded videos removed

10 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

that most wouldn't notice if the drag was out by, say, 10% compared to the real plane.

getting closer to the same point.

What I am saying is no one notices "drag is out by 10%" - even developers.

These things are causes of things you will notice. So for something as simple as drag what you notice will be fuel consumption is way out, landing profile is all wrong - all the things drag effects.

What I am adding to that is from a development perspective its waaaay harder than just "drag" which is far to blunt a simplification that a simple change to it will fix the things you will notice.

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

getting closer to the same point.

What I am saying is no one notices "drag is out by 10%" - even developers.

These things are causes of things you will notice. So for something as simple as drag what you notice will be fuel consumption is way out, landing profile is all wrong - all the things drag effects.

What I am adding to that is from a development perspective its waaaay harder than just "drag" which is far to blunt a simplification that a simple change to it will fix the things you will notice.

Yes I take your point.

These conversations are starting to get real tedious!

 

Edited January 20, 20224 yr by CarlosF

Looking forward to XP12

Hopefully they keep the default MD80 and maybe refine and polish it up a bit.

1 hour ago, Gulfstream said:

I personally know Asobo employees

I'd say you did a very good job of making my point for me 🤣

This topic has drifted off course as well as causing two posts to be reported. Those comments will be removed. Get back on topic or I’ll lock it.

11 hours ago, CarlosF said:

These conversations are starting to get real tedious!

 

'Starting', lol... The conversations have been tedious for more then a couple of years now.

10 hours ago, strider1 said:

'Starting', lol... The conversations have been tedious for more then a couple of years now.

LOL, indeed!