11 hours ago, snglecoil said:

Everyone has different perceptions that may be completely valid based on something small like variances in control response curves from one person to the next. When I asked his take on them, I’m genuinely interested in his opinion. An instructor myself, I have an embarrassingly high number of hours in a C172. One of my biggest pet peeves with … another sim’s C172 is how flap behavior is modeled. So again, I ask because I’m curious. 

@snglecoil

Let's say that, the last time I flew the C172,taking off with flaps 10 was quite a struggle.

I am also less than impressed with the A320 particularly in flare mode: it is, as if, all the mass was shifted aft.

My understanding is that, a lot of developing resources have been put on visual aspects (the corner stone of today's "immersion"), therefore I am looking forward some flight dynamic improvements (it is a flight simulator, isn't it?).

 

11 hours ago, DJJose said:

and I'm a CFII, SEL with hundreds of hours on a 172. I can't wait for him to share his feelings. 😀

@DJJose,

I am not talking about my "feelings" (I would hire a shrink for that). I am comparing performances (and when the aircraft can't climb, it's easy).

 

 

11 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

I’m CFI as well as long time 172 owner. I instructed in neatly all 172 models for B to S I’m anxious to hear perceptions on how 172 behave with flaps . Since all sims mostly model S model we won’t see much 40 degrees flaps though LOL

@sd_flyer

Regarding the use of flaps, if you are not yet familiar with it, you should read:

• your C172 pilot operating handbook:
  • Section 4 (normal procedures): normal and short field takeoffs, normal and short field landings
  • Section (Airplane & System Description): Wing Flap System
• the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge: Chapter 6 Flight Control / Secondary Flight Controls / Flaps

@sd_flyer, @DJJose

Which such "impressive" resumes, you guys should be the only ones allowed to write about C172 in this forum.

But I guess that it is, too often, the typical response on this sub-forum: go for the jugular first and show off the credentials (which, sorry to disappoint you, don't really impress me)!

Happy landings!

12 minutes ago, GearUp180 said:

My understanding is that, a lot of developing resources have been put on visual aspects (the corner stone of today's "immersion"), therefore I am looking forward some flight dynamic improvements (it is a flight simulator, isn't it?).

 

Sorry to say, when you lead off with this little nugget, its hard to care about anything that follows...

12 minutes ago, GearUp180 said:

@snglecoil

L

@sd_flyer

Regarding the use of flaps, if you are not yet familiar with it, you should read:

• your C172 pilot operating handbook:
  • Section 4 (normal procedures): normal and short field takeoffs, normal and short field landings
  • Section (Airplane & System Description): Wing Flap System
• the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge: Chapter 6 Flight Control / Secondary Flight Controls / Flaps

@sd_flyer, @DJJose

Which such "impressive" resumes, you guys should be the only ones allowed to write about C172 in this forum.

But I guess that it is, too often, the typical response on this sub-forum: go for the jugular first and show off the credentials (which, sorry to disappoint you, don't really impress me)!

Happy landings!

Anything else useful regarding topic you can produce other than your fragile ego? LOL

This is the closest to what I've always hoped for. Comparison between RL and FS, but here, obviously, without flight control movements replication in the sim. More like an attempt to make the sim look closest possible to RL. I think it could be done with no big budget with camera focused on yoke and pedals and later extrapolating movements with 3D scanning software to some meaningful numbers which can then be used as input to FS. Wonder when it will be done? MS could brag about it if they really beleive in their FM.

Edited February 17, 20224 yr by versus

7 hours ago, GearUp180 said:

 

@sd_flyer, @DJJose

Which such "impressive" resumes, you guys should be the only ones allowed to write about C172 in this forum.

But I guess that it is, too often, the typical response on this sub-forum: go for the jugular first and show off the credentials (which, sorry to disappoint you, don't really impress me)!

Happy landings!

Trust me, I could be more pedantic. 😀

But, I understand and know that this is a $100 game and not reality. Don't take this sim so seriously.

8 hours ago, GearUp180 said:

Let's say that, the last time I flew the C172,taking off with flaps 10 was quite a struggle.

Ah, yes. I remember when the sim was first released the initial climb in the 172 without flaps was anemic. With flaps theoretically it would be “worse” in terms of pure climb rate (as opposed to climb distance for those that may not fully appreciate the difference) , I’ll have to try it out in the sim and see how it behaves. I know some tweaks have been made to address the climb numbers in the 172, but I can’t remember ever trying short-field technique in the sim.

I’m so accustomed to vintage (‘60s and early ‘70s) 135hp 172s that I forget short-field takeoffs can be done with flaps in 160/180hp models.  😄

6 hours ago, versus said:

This is the closest to what I've always hoped for. Comparison between RL and FS, but here, obviously, without flight control movements replication in the sim. More like an attempt to make the sim look closest possible to RL. I think it could be done with no big budget with camera focused on yoke and pedals and later extrapolating movements with 3D scanning software to some meaningful numbers which can then be used as input to FS. Wonder when it will be done? MS could brag about it if they really beleive in their FM.

Hmmm…Interesting idea. I think the difficulty comes when you factor in that the amount of control deflection inside the cockpit doesn’t necessarily result in a 1:1 correlation to what the plane actually does inside of a very dynamic air mass. 
 

It really blows my mind just how complex a problem it is to authentically represent fluid mechanics in real time on our home PCs…while displaying all the “visual” elements that are just as important to the flight sim experience as the physics. I love fact that all major sims are attempting to do that. At the end of the day, though, we are left sitting in front of computer screens absent the physical sensations and feedback of the real thing. That’s a big gap that, frankly, the flight model calculated to the highest fidelity just can’t overcome. It doesn’t mean sim makers should stop trying, but we sim users need to have realistic expectations and stop throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

There are some videos where you can see inside/outside cockpit at the same time. While it presents interesting  info, I don't see any possibility to implement it in any sim with variety of peripherals,  calibrations, setups and etc . Unless it's of course specifically build certified hardware  where everything is calibrated and match real counterpart in terms of deflection, pound of force and so on. And tuned and integrated with in MSFS for particular airplane. Butt who would like that realism? It would cost as much as ATD!

Truth to be told many real pilots are actually unware of how much control deflection they use because their primary focus on flying airplane via appropriate input. Of course most of us aware of only certain dramatic control deflections like during slow flight or stalls. However, I was surprised to discover that many pilot don't registered that during banks over 30 degrees they actually move yoke little bit in opposite direction of turn in order to keep the same angle of bank. Fewer pilots care to check correct control surfaces deflection on the ground. Say when one turns yoke left left aileron must go up. Most people just move yoke around and say controls are free. Great!  And what if mechanic didn't rigged airplane correctly?

 

Here is interesting vid below where pilot actually mounted cameras to show a lot if thing flying tail draggers

 

3 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Here is interesting vid below where pilot actually mounted cameras to show a lot if thing flying tail draggers

I want somebody to post a video of them landing the Cub in MSFS, and right after touchdown apply full left rudder like the pilot of this video does. 🤣

No really, I'm curious. When I used to fly the default aircraft the rudder sensitivity was like riding a unicycle on-top of a beach ball floating in a pool. I've heard that's changed. Curious to see if it has.

For me aerodynamics modelling and weather are the most important aspects of the sim.  So looking forward to the update.,

46 minutes ago, WestAir said:

I want somebody to post a video of them landing the Cub in MSFS, and right after touchdown apply full left rudder like the pilot of this video does. 🤣

No really, I'm curious. When I used to fly the default aircraft the rudder sensitivity was like riding a unicycle on-top of a beach ball floating in a pool. I've heard that's changed. Curious to see if it has.

The first thing I do in any sim is to tweaking my rudder sensitivity. I'm currently using Logitech Pro Rudder with max resistance ! Not ideal but much better that CH rudder I used before.

3 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

The first thing I do in any sim is to tweaking my rudder sensitivity. I'm currently using Logitech Pro Rudder with max resistance ! Not ideal but much better that CH rudder I used before.

Oof. I use the CH Rudders. Must be part of my problem. 😭

58 minutes ago, WestAir said:

Oof. I use the CH Rudders. Must be part of my problem. 😭

I heard the best option is Thrustmaster TPR Pedals, but I can't afford.  I'm putting new G5 HSI in my airplane with new metal panel. That blows my sim budget out of window LOL Now I will have to slave instruct a lot  to cover costs LOL