Jump to content

Study Level Default Aircraft


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, micstatic said:

That's pretty cool to see.  A lot of pro pilots out there who started right here in flight sims.  This is a grumpy group here it seems.  But to the question at hand.  I think MSFS nailed it in terms of providing stock airplanes that are aligned with the desires of the typical user.  

Agreed, very cool to see people progress from a simulator to a professional athlete although we could start to argue they are professional simmers at this point.  

I respect there are simmers out there that have spent a GREAT deal of money on this hobby.  Would I consider someone who has set up a full simulated cockpit with all of the networking, nuances and frankly electrical engineering knowledge hard-core.  Absolutely.  I know of numerous users on this forum in the exact scenario.  Personally, I run full Opencockpits MCP, EFIS, Radio Stack, transponder, 49 inch ultrawide monitor, Brunner Yoke, MFG Rudders, ThrottleTek custom throttle base and a PC dedicated to nothing by FS.  It has 4 boot OS"s one strictly for P3D, one strictly for MSFS.  I would say I'm pretty hard core.  I've probably got well over $10,000 invested in this hobby.  Does that make me more hard core than someone with an X-Box controller, possibly.  Does it mean I am more knowledgeable, nope, more entitled, nope, it just means I take this hobby more seriously than others.  I do spend probably 45 minutes pre-flighting, matching my FP to a real world FP etc etc etc but I do all of this with add-ons. 

With that being said I wouldn't expect Asobo to provide a default aircraft with systems depth to match my personal; HW setup.  That's why it took LINDA, SPAD, OCBVA and a plethora of tweaking to get it all to play nicely together.  

Am I a hard core simmer.  I'd say so, I take it very seriously.  Does that mean I need to re-examine my priorities?  I don't think so.  Does it mean I need to set realistic expectations and not judge others, absolutely.  Does that go both ways, yes.  Does that mean if MSFS doesn't meet all my requirements it's not a sim, absolutely not, that's ridiculous.  People just need to try and see things from other's perspectives from time to time.  

This is indeed a grumpy bunch.  😉    I find this the most curmudgeonly group on any of the forums I visit LOL    Some of the MSFS users are SO in your face about what P3D can't do without an understanding of why some would still prefer it and some P3D users are still spreading such dated and garbage information it's disheartening and down right wrong.  Then you have those who try to hold MSFS to a level other sims never achieved without years of add-ons, unrealistic expectations or find one feature MSFS can't achieve and harp on it for ages.  The funny thing is I've already seen this movie and read the book.  Both with FS9, FSX, P3D V1 through V3, those of us who have been around have been there done that and back for another showing thank you very much.  

 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Have a Wonderful Day

-Paul Solk

Boeing777_Banner_BetaTeam.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

totally agree Paul.  I've also invested thousands in this hobby.  While some might say I need to examine my priorities I would say no thanks.  I'm hardcore in everything else I do also like family and work.  Well said Paul.  

  • Like 3

5800X3D, Gigabyte X570S MB, 4090FE, 64GB DDR4 3600 CL16, EVO 970 M.2's, Alienware 3821DW  and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x PSU,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Logitech Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, psolk said:

Some of the MSFS users are SO in your face about what P3D can't do without an understanding of why some would still prefer it and some P3D users are still spreading such dated and garbage information it's disheartening and down right wrong.

That's what really kinda gets me about this whole "debate."  The world is already too tribal, from politics to pandemics to car national origins. It's absurd that people get so up in arms about software. 

If you think MSFS sucks, more power to you. Go do something else, but do it quietly for cripes sake. I don't need to hear the whining. If you spend 23.5 hours a day in MSFS doing pattern work, also more power to you. 

Not just sims, but in general life, we could all do with a mentality shift to "if whatever you're doing is what you want to be doing and it doesn't hurt other people, who am I to give you grief about it?"

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jcjimmy said:

I was expecting better quality default aircraft than what we got.

I was only for the premium and deluxe additions.  The Longitude, for instance, is basically a pretty model.  With WT G3000 and Dakfly's mod it's a little better.  But it could have been so much better.

| FAA ZMP |
| PPL ASEL |
| Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 32GB 5600 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view is simple.  I would rather Asobo work on the sim and leave 'study level' aircraft to the third party developers - with one exception!  :smile:

The C152 already has an excellent freeware improvement programme, with even more improvements to come, so that can probably be left.

However, I feel the C172 is already very good (especially with the excellent G100Ni, but with classic gauges also), so if Asobo wanted to show they are capable of producing at least one 'study level' default aircraft, then this is the one to finish.

I still haven't seen a decent definition of 'study level', and I don't know if there will ever be one, but close enough for me would be: -

1.  Every switch, button, device, and even breaker does what it should.
2.  The flight model is generally considered to be accurate, or certainly accurate enough by people who have flown them.
3.  The whole package has some value to people getting the feel of the aircraft and systems before trying the real thing (proper flight training).

Now a lot of us will never be able to afford proper flight training, but we would at least like to think we are having a go in a simulator that is a very close model of what the real C172 is like - 100% accurate can never be available in a non-motion simulator of course, but if a flight instructor told me 'you know, that is a really close model of how a C172 behaves' then that would be good enough to make me happy.

To make absolutely everyone happy, and agree on what is 'study level' or not, is impossible from my experience. :laugh:
 

  • Like 1

Rob (but call me Bob or Rob, I don't mind).

I like to trick airline passengers into thinking I have my own swimming pool in my back yard by painting a large blue rectangle on my patio.

Intel 14900K in a Z790 motherboard with water cooling, RTX 4080, 32 GB 6000 CL30 DDR5 RAM, W11 and MSFS on Samsung 980 Pro NVME SSD's.  Core Isolation Off, Game Mode Off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, robert young said:

 I'm afraid it is due to Asobo's misplaced interpretation of countering what they describe as the "on rails" feel of previous sims (which by the way was a complete misunderstanding).

 

This is very accurate.  I flew with my friend the other day (well I was flying for most of the flight).  We have no autopilot in our single piston engine Beechcraft.  You can trim that plane out so beautifully - you never have to touch the controls and it will fly straight and level for miles.  And I've done it.  A quality developer making a quality flight model in FSX was very apparent - because I could do this in the sim!  (your Legacy for example).  Both MSFS and XP11 got this wrong imo - as you say, especially the pitch control is touchy - like a paper airplane being tossed in the slightest wind.

  • Like 1

| FAA ZMP |
| PPL ASEL |
| Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 32GB 5600 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, psolk said:

Agreed, very cool to see people progress from a simulator to a professional athlete although we could start to argue they are professional simmers at this point.  

I respect there are simmers out there that have spent a GREAT deal of money on this hobby.  Would I consider someone who has set up a full simulated cockpit with all of the networking, nuances and frankly electrical engineering knowledge hard-core.  Absolutely.  I know of numerous users on this forum in the exact scenario.  Personally, I run full Opencockpits MCP, EFIS, Radio Stack, transponder, 49 inch ultrawide monitor, Brunner Yoke, MFG Rudders, ThrottleTek custom throttle base and a PC dedicated to nothing by FS.  It has 4 boot OS"s one strictly for P3D, one strictly for MSFS.  I would say I'm pretty hard core.  I've probably got well over $10,000 invested in this hobby.  Does that make me more hard core than someone with an X-Box controller, possibly.  Does it mean I am more knowledgeable, nope, more entitled, nope, it just means I take this hobby more seriously than others.  I do spend probably 45 minutes pre-flighting, matching my FP to a real world FP etc etc etc but I do all of this with add-ons. 

With that being said I wouldn't expect Asobo to provide a default aircraft with systems depth to match my personal; HW setup.  That's why it took LINDA, SPAD, OCBVA and a plethora of tweaking to get it all to play nicely together.  

Am I a hard core simmer.  I'd say so, I take it very seriously.  Does that mean I need to re-examine my priorities?  I don't think so.  Does it mean I need to set realistic expectations and not judge others, absolutely.  Does that go both ways, yes.  Does that mean if MSFS doesn't meet all my requirements it's not a sim, absolutely not, that's ridiculous.  People just need to try and see things from other's perspectives from time to time.  

This is indeed a grumpy bunch.  😉    I find this the most curmudgeonly group on any of the forums I visit LOL    Some of the MSFS users are SO in your face about what P3D can't do without an understanding of why some would still prefer it and some P3D users are still spreading such dated and garbage information it's disheartening and down right wrong.  Then you have those who try to hold MSFS to a level other sims never achieved without years of add-ons, unrealistic expectations or find one feature MSFS can't achieve and harp on it for ages.  The funny thing is I've already seen this movie and read the book.  Both with FS9, FSX, P3D V1 through V3, those of us who have been around have been there done that and back for another showing thank you very much.  

 

What it means is you enjoy your flight sims, its your hobby, what you spend on it and the time spent using them is your business nobody else's. MSFS and all the other sims  are there to be enjoyed by all, whatever standard you play at, hard core or casual.

Myself, I have been using sims since the Commodore 64, so I dread to think how much money and time I have spent on them, the pc I use now I specifically built for MSFS cost me £4000, does that make me hard core, no, I just enjoy flight sims, flying GA and vintage aircraft.

Asus Maximus Hero X11, Intel i9 10850k, 32gb Corsair Dominator ram, 2tb Corsair mp510 ssd  m2, Gigybyte turbo RTX 3090

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

This is very accurate.  I flew with my friend the other day (well I was flying for most of the flight).  We have no autopilot in our single piston engine Beechcraft.  You can trim that plane out so beautifully - you never have to touch the controls and it will fly straight and level for miles.  And I've done it.  A quality developer making a quality flight model in FSX was very apparent - because I could do this in the sim!  (your Legacy for example).  Both MSFS and XP11 got this wrong imo - as you say, especially the pitch control is touchy - like a paper airplane being tossed in the slightest wind.

Thanks Ryan. I just re-installed x plane 11 and my goodness, the default scenery is bloody awful, but out of the box the default xplane C172 actually handles quite nicely, with no hint of FS2020's default pitch twitchiness. I have tweaked alll of the standard aircraft flight models to get rid of the standard bucking and weaving of the lighter default aircraft. Such ungainly, clumsy flight modelling. I just wish I could get my hands on the default Baron which is a gorgeous machine to look at but it flies appallingly!

  • Like 1

Robert Young - retired full time developer - see my Nexus Mod Page and my GitHub Mod page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, robert young said:

Thanks Ryan. I just re-installed x plane 11 and my goodness, the default scenery is bloody awful, but out of the box the default xplane C172 actually handles quite nicely, with no hint of FS2020's default pitch twitchiness. I have tweaked alll of the standard aircraft flight models to get rid of the standard bucking and weaving of the lighter default aircraft. Such ungainly, clumsy flight modelling. I just wish I could get my hands on the default Baron which is a gorgeous machine to look at but it flies appallingly!

I have a couple of hundred hours flying a real C 172, and never thought the X plane C 172 felt anything like the real 172. 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 3

spacer.png

BOBSK8             MSFS 2020  PMDG 777    ,PMDG 737-600-800 Fenix A320, FSLTL , TrackIR ,  Avliasoft EFB2  ,  Beyond  ATC  , Flightsim First  Officer A320,777

A Pilots LIfe V2 ,  CLX PC , Auto FPS, ACTIVE Sky FS,  PMDG DC6 , A2A Comanche, , Milviz C 310

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

I have a couple of hundred hours flying a real C 172, and never thought the X plane C 172 felt anything like the real 172. 

Its in the mind of the beholders I have tried Xplane 10 and the cessna 172 and it never seemed right. FSX nope P3D never had the 172 until A2A dropped the accusim. Best 172 in any sim by far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robert young said:

Thanks Ryan. I just re-installed x plane 11 and my goodness, the default scenery is bloody awful, but out of the box the default xplane C172 actually handles quite nicely, with no hint of FS2020's default pitch twitchiness. I have tweaked alll of the standard aircraft flight models to get rid of the standard bucking and weaving of the lighter default aircraft. Such ungainly, clumsy flight modelling. I just wish I could get my hands on the default Baron which is a gorgeous machine to look at but it flies appallingly!

I'm far from knowledgeable about how well sim flight models mimic reality, but it's not lost on me how odd the flight modeling is w/ lighter aircraft in MSFS.  It's like they are bobbing/floating in water and just does not seem natural or realistic for flight.  How hard can this be for MS/A?  They must have access to old code for FS series, no?  I did read Working Title group was supposed to be tasked w/ improving this very fundamental component.  Fortuantely I"m flying the B78X HD most of the time and it's heavy enough to avoid this odd bobbing behavior.  But I do not like hand flying anything else in light weight classes.  I've thought perhaps it was my controller sensitivities but alas have not been able to improve it enough with changes there.

  • Like 1

Noel

System:  7800x3D, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Noctua NH-U12A, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL Ripjaws S5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Edge Sync for near zero Frame Time Variance achieving ultra-fluid animation at lower frame rates.

Aircraft used in A Pilot's Life V2:  PMDG 738, Aerosoft CRJ700, FBW A320nx, WT 787X

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Noel said:

I'm far from knowledgeable about how well sim flight models mimic reality, but it's not lost on me how odd the flight modeling is w/ lighter aircraft in MSFS.  It's like they are bobbing/floating in water and just does not seem natural or realistic for flight.  How hard can this be for MS/A?  They must have access to old code for FS series, no?  I did read Working Title group was supposed to be tasked w/ improving this very fundamental component.  Fortuantely I"m flying the B78X HD most of the time and it's heavy enough to avoid this odd bobbing behavior.  But I do not like hand flying anything else in light weight classes.  I've thought perhaps it was my controller sensitivities but alas have not been able to improve it enough with changes there.

Even with my Prosim 738 flying over mountains always there is always extreme turbulence. In reality I have rarely experienced that. Especially in the LOWI area over the Alps or the hills in the Balcan.

But I hope that with the ‘improved’ and popcorn clouds free weather engine this will be worked out.

I have still not decided if I am going to make a P3D server that uses my current 2 MSFS pc’s as outside view clients. P3D is more compatible for cockpit builders at this moment. However, then I would lose my external lights which I don’t want to lose.

Hopefully the SDK/Simconnect will be improved and more enhanced in the near future.

 

13900 8 cores @ 5.5-5.8 GHz / 8 cores @ 4.3 GHz (hyperthreading on) - Asus ROG Strix Gaming D4 - GSkill Ripjaws 2x 16 Gb 4266 mhz @ 3200 mhz / cas 13 -  Inno3D RTX4090 X3 iCHILL 24 Gb - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 2TB - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 1Tb - Sata 600 SSD 500 Mb - Thermaltake Level 10 GT case - EKWB Extreme 240 liquid cooling set push/pull - 2x 55’ Sony 4K tv's as front view and right view.

13600  6 cores @ 5.1 GHz / 8 cores @ 4.0 GHz (hypterthreading on) - Asus ROG Strix Gaming D - GSkill Trident 4x Gb 3200 MHz cas 15 - Asus TUF RTX 4080 16 Gb  - 1x SSD M2 2800/1800 2TB - 2x  Sata 600 SSD 500 Mb - Corsair D4000 Airflow case - NXT Krajen Z63 AIO liquide cooling - 1x 65” Sony 4K tv as left view.

FOV : 190 degrees

My flightsim vids :  https://www.youtube.com/user/fswidesim/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I have a couple of hundred hours flying a real C 172, and never thought the X plane C 172 felt anything like the real 172. 

Sure - I didn't say it was perfect but it doesn't have the extreme pitch bobbing that the default Asobo one has. I got my PPL in 1973 and flew a shedload of light GA aircraft over many years, including Cessna and Pipers, and a few tail draggers. They were all remarkably stable in pitch even if they could be a handful in turbulence in yaw and roll. The extreme elasticity in pitch is very marked in Fs2020. Even the Caravan bobs up and down at the slightest pitch input. They really shouldn't do this. I note that many YT videos demonstrate how delicately a lot of even seasoned pilots baby their way in control of these default aircraft and don't seem to comment on how over the top the bobbing up and down is. I personally cannot stand the response. For example when slow and nearing the flare at ten knots above the stall, most light GA aircraft should have you close to having the stick in your lap. They should be quite sluggish in response at low speeds.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Robert Young - retired full time developer - see my Nexus Mod Page and my GitHub Mod page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noel said:

 I've thought perhaps it was my controller sensitivities but alas have not been able to improve it enough with changes there.

Your hunch is right - no amount of control sensitivity adjustment can mask the underlying pitch instability of a badly tuned flight model. And yes, heavier aircraft with much greater inertia can also mask the problem so you can get away with a bad flight model more easily on heavy aircraft.

Robert Young - retired full time developer - see my Nexus Mod Page and my GitHub Mod page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to understand why this thread has gone so long.

MSFS sim is the platform along with the ecosystem, which means: The sim, sdk, partnerships, communication platform, user support and community engagement system, the content, etc etc etc etc. And of course the 3 party developers. And that is what Microsoft is delivering through Asobo and partners. This platform and ecosystem are there for the developers to build 'study level' or whatever level of aircraft models the market wants and is willing to pay for.

I personally think we now have something much better and comprehensive that we ever had before ( all sims included). But this is just one's opinion of course.

 

 

 

  • Like 4

AHS712D Alvaro Escorcia KSGR/OMAA
AirHispania Virtual Airline
MSFS / ASUS TUF Gaming F15-Refresh-144Hz / 11GenIntel (R)Core (TM) i7-11800H
NVIDIA-GeForce-RTX3060GPU / 1TB-Samsung SSD / 32GB-RAM
SAMSUNG-SmartMonitor-M7-32"4K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...