anyone have any idea when we might see a public beta of xp12? im expecting them to do similar as they do w xp11, release a beta and just keep improving it as we go. 

3 hours ago, rka said:

Me too. It's hard to grasp how people can change so quickly from "It's all great and needs no improvement, especially not graphically and flight model wise and everyone saying otherwise is a hater" to "I can't wait for all the graphical goodness to finally come to me and also there will be a brand new flight model, yay". 

But who am I...

Saying that one has certain priorities of what he likes to see and experience in his simulator does not neglect whether he will enjoy other aspects like graphics.

In other words, other than you wanting to provoke old discussions again, no one in here ever said that he does not want better graphics or something even remotely similar to your "quotes". It's more simple than that: we all wanted even more improvements to the flight model, we all wanted new graphics, we all knew they were coming, but it's only few selected users who always come here to badger about this and then claim that LR did that because you were vocal enough, rest assured, all those were planned before you and others started provoking more and more, no matter how many times you try claim otherwise.

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by mtaxp

3 hours ago, rka said:

Me too. It's hard to grasp how people can change so quickly from "It's all great and needs no improvement, especially not graphically and flight model wise and everyone saying otherwise is a hater" to "I can't wait for all the graphical goodness to finally come to me and also there will be a brand new flight model, yay". 

But who am I...

Here we go again ... popcorn.

Ok ... for those who don't know how science works (or only claim to do so, for the sake of brawling): a friend of mine is meteorologist. 4 years ago, he told me that they have improved their weather modeling. I asked him, why? The old one was rubbish? He said "Yes, it was completely wrong, so we had to improve it. But then it was (almost) perfect." But ... 2 years later, he had to admit "Sh.t ... we have to improve the modeling." I asked him, why? The old one was rubbish? He said "Yes, it was completely wrong, so we had to improve it. But then it was (almost) perfect.". Just 2 weeks ago, he told me, the modeling was improved again. I asked him, why? The old one was rubbish? He said "Yes, it was completely wrong, so we had to improve it. But now it is (almost) perfect.". I bet, in 2 years ... And so on, and so on.

Um ... I must admit, the above isn't true. Namely, that I don't have a friend, who is meteorologist. However, the rest is true - this is how science works. Don't mention it! I'm glad to help where I can.

2 minutes ago, uwespeed said:

Um ... I must admit, the above isn't true. Namely, that I don't have a friend, who is meteorologist. However, the rest is true - this is how science works. Don't mention it! I'm glad to help where I can.

But...  but, aren't we friends ? After all these years ? I even used your Madeira to land so many times starting XP10 ?  You really came as as surprise to me, and BTW, give me back that gamming laptop I gave you last month ! Incredible, how can he ?

I believe XP12 would benefit more from a single / detailled FM than from an "opted" one.

It would imply that developers create their aircraft for XP12 with a bit more of effort if porting them from XP11, but investment on a single, new, more complete / detailled flight dynamics model would surely benefit the platform, it's users and in the long run also the dvelopers community.

It was somehow justifiabe in XP11, just as the option for Vulkan, because both were introduced along the XP11 cycle, but XP12 is going to be a new fresh version of the sim.

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by jcomm

9 hours ago, jarmstro said:

This is something that has always confused me as I have never had a coherent answer to this question - What exactly, with regard to the standard flight model, needs to be improved? 

You won't have that answer into after it gets release. If someone finds something wrong with it and raise the issue to get it corrected, then you will know. 

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by BobFS88

8 hours ago, rka said:

Me too. It's hard to grasp how people can change so quickly from "It's all great and needs no improvement, especially not graphically and flight model wise and everyone saying otherwise is a hater" to "I can't wait for all the graphical goodness to finally come to me and also there will be a brand new flight model, yay". 

But who am I...

I was going to reply, but then I noticed that other people in the thread already evidenced your fallacious reasoning.

Just noting that you used a classical fallacy, the "straw man" argument. It's often used by trolls. Here, educate yourself, in case you didn't know about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

38 minutes ago, BobFS88 said:

You won't have that answer into after it gets release. If someone finds something wrong with it and raise the issue to get it corrected, then you will know. 

No, I meant the current XP11 standard flight model. What exactly is wrong with it and in need of improvement? Why is the experimental flight model better? Janov once told me that all it does is add a bit more drag?

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by jarmstro

27 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

No, I meant the current XP11 flight plan. What exactly is wrong with it and in need of improvement?

Again those improvements will be found in the new release in the new sim. They will list the improvements to the public once a release date is announce. Then you can deduct from that list from what is not found in the previous release version in 11.55 and then you will know what the improvements are and what fix have been implemented.

If they are generous they may do a presentation on those improvements between the old and the new in the video if so desire. 

There maybe issue we don't know about but who has time to research and list them. I certainly don't and really don't care at this point with 12 just around the corner.  As far X Plane 11 development, that has stop so there is nothing to look forward to on the platform let alone any improvements. all their focus is on XP12 atm.

X Plane 11 works fine for me and I will continue to use it for compatibility and benchmarking comparison purpose until the new one becomes stable.

   

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by BobFS88

XP11 got an update to its flightmodel with some improvements during its version 11 run. And yes, Jarmstro, while X-Plane always took pride in it´s flightmodel, Laminar is not too proud to acknowlegde that nothing is ever perfect and strives to improve it continuously.

The improved flightmodel (mostly downwash flow improvements and oblique airstream on non-lift-bodies) in XP11 was called the "experimental" flight model, for lack of a better term.

As a gesture of good will (and to not fuel the old prejudice that "X-Plane´s flight model is a moving target, so it doesn´t make sense to develop planes for it") this new model was made optional, so developers did not have to upgrade their (payware) models.

During the recent work on the Alia aircraft Austin became aware of some other small inaccuracies with the flightmodel, mostly effects of small rotors on fuselage and other objects. These improvements will be applied to the experimental flight model and I believe that the resultant flight model will be the

X-Plane 12 flight model

The difference to the XP11 "experimental" flight model is very small (too small to notice for most people), the difference to the "legacy" XP11 flight model is small enough so that those aircraft will probably fly fine in XP12, albeit not "by the numbers" - in other words they will require some upgrading by the airplane authors to meet the POH numbers again.

 

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by Janov

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

No, I meant the current XP11 standard flight model. What exactly is wrong with it and in need of improvement? Why is the experimental flight model better? Janov once told me that all it does is add a bit more drag?

There are various fine tuning details in the Experimental FM.

It's been a long time since I last read about it, but among the major innovations were the propwash calculations, allowing for a better modelling of the interaction between propwash and aerodynamic surfaces that are also lift / drag generators.

But Janov above just gave us a better explanation of the benefits of the Experimental FM in XP11 and the new one for XP12.

 

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by jcomm

56 minutes ago, jcomm said:

There are various fine tuning details in the Experimental FM.

It's been a long time since I last read about it, but among the major innovations were the propwash calculations, allowing for a better modelling of the interaction between propwash and aerodynamic surfaces that are also lift / drag generators.

But Janov above just gave us a better explanation of the benefits of the Experimental FM in XP11 and the new one for XP12.

 

Yeah. Right. That will make all the difference. Ie you have no answer.😀

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by jarmstro

7 hours ago, jcomm said:

But...  but, aren't we friends ? After all these years ? I even used your Madeira to land so many times starting XP10 ?  You really came as as surprise to me, and BTW, give me back that gamming laptop I gave you last month ! Incredible, how can he ?

Oh ... actually, I meant another friend of mine, who indeed isn't a meteorologist, but an engineer.

We, of course are friends 😉. With the gaming laptop ... I have sent it back already some time ago - didn't it arrive yet? You should have told me 😄 .

 

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

No, I meant the current XP11 standard flight model. What exactly is wrong with it and in need of improvement? Why is the experimental flight model better? Janov once told me that all it does is add a bit more drag?

Simply put: nothing! It's this easy! But you know this yourself, do you?

Unless you define (let's say) 95% or even 99% accuracy as "wrong". However, if so, all the calculations in this world for weather, climate, car crash simulations, trussed arch bridges, combustion calculations for gas turbines, flooding prediction, ... you name it ... are "wrong". Good, that someone finally exposed this big scandal 😄 .

7 hours ago, mtaxp said:

and then claim that LR did that because you were vocal enough

Well, I think it was probably not because you (general you, not you personally) were vocal enough 😄

Good thing is: the graphical update is finally coming and everyone can decide whether he likes the final product using the demo, which I intend to do.

 

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by rka

11 minutes ago, uwespeed said:

Oh ... actually, I meant another friend of mine, who indeed isn't a meteorologist, but an engineer.

We, of course are friends 😉. With the gaming laptop ... I have sent it back already some time ago - didn't it arrive yet? You should have told me 😄 .

 

Simply put: nothing! It's this easy! But you know this yourself, do you?

Unless you define (let's say) 95% or even 99% accuracy as "wrong". However, if so, all the calculations in this world for weather, climate, car crash simulations, trussed arch bridges, combustion calculations for gas turbines, flooding prediction, ... you name it ... are "wrong". Good, that someone finally exposed this big scandal 😄 .

Exactly. So what's the big deal about the flight model when it's  impossible to replicate all the multiple environmental variables on a home PC sim? All that is necessary is that it is near enough. Thank God LR have finally realised that what really matters is eye candy.

Edited January 18, 20224 yr by jarmstro