MSFS flight model

[Fielder 3,696]

On 9/2/2022 at 7:22 AM, tweekz said:

No, I constantly see real life pilots landing the Fenix or PMDG and experiencing the very same effect over and over again. Floaty flares / trouble to get it down, and extremely nervous ground handling. It is very noticable and there since the beginning.

The video shows how to correct floaty planes. Also gyrating auto pilot effects. I pray each SU for the ability to alter .cfg files of marketplace purchased planes. This works on Standard default planes, and planes purchased outside the marketplace. He just halves the value of the number in one line of the file. It's really fast cure.

 

A good freeware search utility (app) will show you every flight_model.cfg file in a list and the name of the path tells you which plane it is for. It would take about 10 seconds to make this list of every flight_model.cfg file on the C drive.

//  (two slashes and a space) before a line nullifies it. So I duplicate the line I'm changing and put //  before one of them and change the other one. This keeps track of the original value of the parameter.

I've been doing these quick edits on a lot of planes since MSFS release, and I noticed the default planes floating when landing.

 

[Fielder 3,696]

Normally you have to close msfs and reboot it too see effects from .cfg file changes, but there's a Dev mode trick published long ago in the forum to get around that.

[scotchegg 4,207]

I have the technical smarts of a 1970s PhysEd Teacher, but I do get the impression that a lot of very strong opinions about flight models are too fuzzy, if not nakedly unscientific. Given we’re all using imperfectly calibrated hardware with very little in the way of basic haptics, let alone more fundamental physics like gravity, how can it be helpful to say ‘it feels floaty’, especially when you haven’t even flown that plane irl…?

I’d give a lot more credence to comparisons showing how sim behaviour deviates from published numbers, and they’d probably be more helpful to the devs as well. Who knows, maybe we’ll find that actually look-up tables and their ‘rails’ experience were the most accurate model all along.

 

[lwt1971 7,441]

4 hours ago, Karelpatch said:

Without proper load factor simulation, nor proper stalling, nor weather simulation whatsoever (no thermals, no turbulences, unrealistic winds simulation, and so on...

What on earth are you talking about.. no thermals and turbulences in MSFS? Here, learn some more below about the already complex turbulence/updraft modelling in MSFS that is soon to get even better in SU11. Other legacy sims' turbulence/thermals/weather modelling is no where near this in their default state, and even with lots of add-ons/plugins they don't even come close to this level.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/live-dev-q-a-may-25th-2022/521293/2
Forums question – Could you explain what factors are currently taken into account in the thermal updraft model, and what are the future plans for realistic soaring weather? - Timestamp
Seb – In Sim Update 9, it computes the number of watts of energy received by the sun, which will depend on whether it’s day or night, how high the sun is in the sky, how thick of an atmosphere is crossed by the sunlight, if it’s humid, if there’s haze, if there are clouds. So there’s an amount of watts remaining that hits the ground at a certain angle. Then you know how much energy you get. Then, it calculates all sorts of things like how much energy is reflected, how much is kept. This transforms into heat. And then you know how much your ground is heating up. When your ground is significantly warmer than the air, it builds up hot air, which then wants to go up. And here, you have your thermals. Right now, this is Sim Update 9. What we are adding with Sim Update 10 is to make this a little bit more comfortable. We are blending in the wind factor, so that when you have absolutely zero wind, you will get fewer thermals. I know there have been a lot of requests when we added thermals, “Hey, I’m putting wind to 0 or just 1. How come I get so many thermals?” When you have low wind speeds, the thermals are going to be much less than before. If you want strong thermals, put at least 5 knots of wind or something. You don’t have to put a lot, just not close to zero. We also make the turbulence a little weaker at high altitudes (20,000 feet and above). You will see fewer thermals in Sim update 10. You will see more gusts, however, so be careful!

Something we are currently working on that will not be for Sim Update 10: The problem with this system is that it works very locally and generates local thermals that don’t combine when they go up. The air that goes up somewhere else needs to go back down. It doesn’t create any vortices, turbulence on the side of thermals, anything like that yet. So there’s research work going on that took the CFD of the airplanes and expanded that 20-ish km around the plane. So that’s a really, very, very, very big CFD running and it goes pretty high as well. And we hope that sometime this year, we’ll to get that to simulate the airflows in the atmosphere to get nicer updrafts that can combine so that only bigger fields get updrafts when you go higher up, that you get vortices with air going back down, and all sorts of different local wind effects that we don’t really get from live weather. Live weather gives us wind gusts and direction, but it’s something a bit more for the area.
 

4 hours ago, Karelpatch said:

I consider MSFS flight dynamics worse than P3D. As soon as you get out of the enveloppe in MSFS, you can fly almost as if you were playing in GTA. In MSFS anyone can unrealistically STOL land a XCub in ridiculous crosswinds and terrains after a few hours of "training" and it's the same with all the planes. Planes look on rail, a bit like in FSX/P3D and most of the movements are fake to give an impression of realism.

"Planes look on rail" lol? P3D is way more on-rails than MSFS. What actual planes have you flown in MSFS? Are they default aircrafts or properly flight-modeled 3rd party ones?

I sense an increase in the chorus of usual talking points against MSFS being spewed by stalwarts and acolytes of legacy sims recently, and it really is laughable that they try so hard... no matter what they do doesn't change the facts that a vast majority of the flight simming community now know, including a vast majority of 3rd party devs: MSFS is the all-rounder sim where you can have *both* the visuals and flight dynamics/systems realism too. The more they keep blabbering on about "oh but xbox!", "oh but Halo Drop Ship!", "eye candy only!", the more we'll keep laughing.. and the more MS/Asobo will keep marching on by regularly enhancing the core platform, flight dynamics, weather, visuals, etc even more.
 

Edited September 7, 2022 by lwt1971

[espent 1,411]

After testing XP12 I will laugh out loud to anyone claiming MSFS is on rails compared to XP12. That is clearly not the case.

Edited September 7, 2022 by espent

[flying_carpet 657]

53 minutes ago, espent said:

After testing XP12 I will laugh out loud to anyone claiming MSFS is on rails compared to XP12. That is clearly not the case.

😅😂🤣

[asanosho 55]

Indeed!

Testing XP12 with the SR-22 in the traffic pattern at KPDX under real world weather conditions I was surprised (or should I have said: shocked?) how „on rails“ this airplane felt.

[mrueedi 702]

Just now, flying_carpet said:

55 minutes ago, espent said:

After testing XP12 I will laugh out loud to anyone claiming MSFS is on rails compared to XP12. That is clearly not the case.

😅😂🤣

The video from my post before shows that the aircraft in MSFS moves much more lively, less static and "on rail" than in XP. Do you laugh at XP?

[Sceadu 117]

32 minutes ago, mrueedi said:

The video from my post before shows that the aircraft in MSFS moves much more lively, less static and "on rail" than in XP. Do you laugh at XP?

Read what you quoted again, apparently you're trying to argue with someone by agreeing with them.

(This place cracks me up sometimes)

[Krakin 5,810]

17 minutes ago, Sceadu said:

Read what you quoted again, apparently you're trying to argue with someone by agreeing with them.

(This place cracks me up sometimes)

He's not off. He's responding to flying carpet laughing at what Espent said. If you know flying carpet's comment history, you'd know that he is NOT laughing in agreement with what espent said.

 

On a side note, there's a lot of salt in this thread. I wonder if it has something to do with a new sim coming out with people for the most part choosing not to care lol.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Krakin

[Sceadu 117]

5 minutes ago, Krakin said:

He's not off. He's responding to flying carpet laughing at what Espent said. If you know flying carpet's comment history, you'd know that he is NOT laughing in agreement with what espent said

smh

[flying_carpet 657]

16 minutes ago, Krakin said:

He's not off. He's responding to flying carpet laughing at what Espent said. If you know flying carpet's comment history, you'd know that he is NOT laughing in agreement with what espent said.

 

On a side note, there's a lot of salt in this thread. I wonder if it has something to do with a new sim coming out with people for the most part choosing not to care lol.

If we know (and we all do) Krakin's comment history ... you can think for yourself the continuation of this sentence 😅.

MSFS does some things good, and some things bad. Hence the title of the topic. If you can’t handle that, maybe you should remove yourself?
BTW: these aren't my words, but copy & pasted from another thread (if you're interested, I'll link to it). I wouldn't be THIS unfriendly.

However, as this is an MSFS thread and no comparison to XP, we should concentrate on the deficencies of the subject of this subforum.

 

[Krakin 5,810]

37 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

If we know (and we all do) Krakin's comment history ... you can think for yourself the continuation of this sentence 😅.

MSFS does some things good, and some things bad. Hence the title of the topic. If you can’t handle that, maybe you should remove yourself?
BTW: these aren't my words, but copy & pasted from another thread (if you're interested, I'll link to it). I wouldn't be THIS unfriendly.

However, as this is an MSFS thread and no comparison to XP, we should concentrate on the deficencies of the subject of this subforum.

 

Sigh. Did you agree with what Espent said?

[jcomm 5,961]

IMHO it's a bit useless for now to compare XP12 to MFS in terms of Flight Dynamics because while X-Plane 12 is more finished in that area, probably getting some fine tuning here & there along this 12 version, but not requiring much updates / further development, MSF still needs a lot of attention from ASOBO to get to the same level of stability and only then being somehow comparable to X-Plane in this area.

I honestly think MFS will get better, but I am tempted to believe that just as I can't expect XP12s scenery to become as lively/amazing as MFS's, the flight dynamics in MFS will probably never reach the level of detail and complexity put into X-Plane's flight model.

They're similar in their approach in some aspects, but MFS still limits and simlifies some aspects of aircraft design, and I do not see mention to this being thought for future updates. I am talking about some aspects of aircraft geometry like those of aircraft with multiple wings or asymmetric wing shapes, mutlple tails, etc...

I should say that I will not be able to get my hands in Xp12 until next week, so I really do not know yet how it feels compared to XP11..

MFS OTOH is going to receive important updates with SU10 and SU11, including new soaring flight features and the already announced and even a bit detailled rotary wing flight dynamics.

 

[sd_flyer 6,072]

The funniest thing is to read simmers  comparing their believe systems on how they think real airplane should flies. LOL Sorry to disappoint all of you both sims a games. One have certain aspect better than another and vise versa  No XP12 won't get you log book endorsed. You won't convince aircraft insurance to lower your payment because you have 1000 hours in XP12 or MSFS. So  just be happy with your choice. You love XP12? Good for you. MSFS works better for me . LOL

Some flight school won't hire CFI unless they have at least 400 of more total and 200 dual. That is threshold of junior flight instructor. No body would be interested in your opinion  and there will be senior CFI who mentor you.

So guys relax. Stay with the sim you like. Stop comparing. Let both sims be. It's good for competition 

P.S. Withing a week I had alternator failure and partial engine failure follow by emergency landing. Be happy that in a sim your blood pressure and heart rate won't jump in any emergency. You won't die and still enjoy flying LOL