The X-Plane difference.

[Noel 4,576]

7 minutes ago, Murmur said:

It's incredible how nasty some people are against those who are here, just because we simply enjoy XP more than other sims. It's like it makes them mad for whatever reason.

Who is being nasty, Murmur?

[Murmur 3,978]

2 minutes ago, Noel said:

Who is being nasty, Murmur?

Various people, some of them not even XP users!

[JRBarrett 3,208]

Frozen pitot tubes may be likely on GA aircraft in winter, but as practical matter, frozen pitot tubes on transport category jet aircraft are very rare. The pitot heaters are very efficient and very hot. On most modern aircraft, the pilots will receive an amber CAS warning if a heater fails (or is not turned on when it is supposed to be.)

There are exceptions. The most infamous example was Air France 447 in 2009, where the pitot heaters could not cope with the ingress of large amounts of liquid water at an altitude where water would normally not be in liquid form. The ambient temperature was low enough that the water subsequently froze (despite the pitot heaters), and the crew badly mishandled the loss of airspeed data in IMC and stalled the airplane.

Another example I mentioned in another post was a Northwest Airlines 727 in 1974, where the pilots forgot to turn the pitot heaters on before takeoff. Being an old-technology aircraft, there was no obvious warning that this had been overlooked. The pitot inlets and drains froze while climbing in IMC conditions.  The ASI began acting like an altimeter, and the crew stalled the airplane out of the mistaken belief that they were over-speeding.

In 45 years of working on aircraft air data systems, the most common reason for blockages in the pitot or static systems has been due to insects - specifically mud dauber wasps.

Apparently, Brisbane Australia has a severe mud dauber problem in warm weather months - to the extent that airliners arriving at the gate at YBBN are required to install covers on all pitot tubes just as soon as they park, lest wasps immediately start to build nests in the pitot inlets. This has been in the aviation news recently because on two occasions in the past year, pilots or ground engineers forgot to remove the covers before pushing back for departure. Once it was caught before they reached the runway, on another occasion, they actually began the takeoff with the covers still on

Gulfstream aircraft (specifically) are prone to insect blockages - not so much in the pitot tubes, but in the static ports. On most aircraft, the static ports are very small, but on the GIV, the fuselage-mounted static ports are about the width of a pencil, and very attractive to mud daubers. A GIV we used to manage got a static port blockage twice due to this. Once while parked outside in summer in New York State, and two years later while parked on a ramp in Bangkok. On both occasions, only one of the two static systems was blocked, and both times it was not obvious that there was a problem until the aircraft took off, and one of the two PFDs showed major errors with altitude, VS and airspeed. (Yes, they do make static ports covers for the GIV, and both times the pilots neglected to install them when parked.)

On another occasion, a local Cessna 172 lost his airspeed indicator on takeoff. It turned out a grasshopper hit the pitot inlet square on, and the debris thoroughly plugged it. The only way I was able to clear the blockage was to remove the pitot tube and blow it out with compressed air.

It would be interesting if XP or MSFS modeled a failure mode for pitot and static systems not dependent on temperature, but on “random insect blockage”. This would actually be more a problem in warm weather than cold. In XP, the only aircraft I know of that has working pitot and static covers is the Hotstart Challenger 650, but there may be others. I do know that in the Hotstart, if you takeoff with the covers on, you will see all the classic symptoms of a blocked pitot tube.

 

[Noel 4,576]

8 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Various people, some of them not even XP users!

Where in Italy are you?  How about yourself, are you using the current version of MSFS--not that there is another version... ;o)

[SAS443 1,750]

 

@Murmur, this community isn't really helping themselves with patronizing a whole userbase such as below. Wouldn't you agree? Nobody likes that kind of attitude, regardless walk of life.
 

5 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

falling from the sky due to icing or damaged flaps at overspeed, wake turbulences, microbursts, ... (to name a few), will overwhelm the most users (the ones who "want to fly over their house", the Xbox users, ...) as they won't even understand what went wrong and will wonder "What's wrong with this game? I flew correct (although they didn't) and I'm falling from the sky. I don't like this #%&§ and won't play it any more!!"

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by SAS443

[Murmur 3,978]

2 minutes ago, Noel said:

How about yourself, are you using the current version of MSFS--not that there is another version... ;o)

Yes, using it rarely. It's a very good product and certainly deserves its success.

[mSparks 2,129]

17 minutes ago, Murmur said:

It's incredible how nasty some people are 

I find generally find it amusing tbh. easiest way to not rise to the bait is to laugh, rather than try compete (not that you are doing either).

Anyway, just reminded of some personal experience from way back during early days of flight training.

On one of my first preflight checks I found quite a decent size droplet of water coming out of one of the static ports - that seems like a possible way for a static port to fail simply by taking an aircraft into sub zero conditions (e.g. high) without pitot heat.

On the topic generally, one of the things on my wish list for the 744 is a nice selection of failure groups. e.g. fires/hydraulics/electricals. such that you can do a flight which will have some failure, but those failures have cause and effect.

e.g. electrical short causes fire which destroys a hydraulic system.

someday maybe.

 

[Murmur 3,978]

12 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

 

@Murmur, this community isn't really helping themselves with patronizing a whole userbase such as below. Wouldn't you agree? Nobody likes that kind of attitude, regardless walk of life.

I've seen wrong attitudes and patronizing in every flight sim forum.

I remember the constant "Another nail in the coffin!" type of jubilating posts in the other forum 3 years ago. But weirdly it's the whole X-Plane community that gets accused of being toxic instead.

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Murmur

[soaring_penguin 431]

There are 2 kinds of users, aviation fanatics and casual simmers. In the latter group, indeed a significant number wouldn’t understand what happened. 
The question being if they would be simming at all under such real world conditions 🫣

[Noel 4,576]

Just now, Murmur said:

Yes, using it rarely. It's a very good product and certainly deserves its success.

It's coming along nicely isn't it.  We wish both platforms maximum success as we all win with two amazingly robust platforms. 

Where in Italy?  I've been to Firenze, Milano, Lago de Como area & Cinque Terre.  I loves flying up the coast from Sarzana--this was from just few months post release:

 

[Krakin 5,995]

2 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

Now we're going (partly) into nitpicking. However, let's talk about major weather simulation: I posted the below video already once. Entering precipitation, temperature etc. manually and the result is ... falling from the sky (what would overwhelm the casual gamer/simmer and that's why it isn't implemented in ... guess where 😁). That's what I call - to remain on topic - "The X-Plane difference."

 

Who told you icing does not cause crashes in the other sim? You know that for a fact or are you making another silly assumption like the OP did? There are plenty of videos showing crashes caused by icing in MSFS. At least the "casual sim" gives realistic visual cues to let you know icing is happening so you can do something about it before it gets too bad. In XP12 it's like an on-off switch with a pathetic looking visual effect. The "X-Plane difference" indeed. What a joke lol.

[Murmur 3,978]

5 minutes ago, Noel said:

It's coming along nicely isn't it.  We wish both platforms maximum success as we all win with two amazingly robust platforms. 

Where in Italy?  I've been to Firenze, Milano, Lago de Como area & Cinque Terre.  I loves flying up the coast from Sarzana--this was from just few months post release:

Cinque Terre, certainly one of the best places to fly over in the sim! I lived in Pisa, now I'm back in Central-Southern Italy, 

[Murmur 3,978]

22 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

 

@Murmur, this community isn't really helping themselves with patronizing a whole userbase such as below. Wouldn't you agree? Nobody likes that kind of attitude, regardless walk of life.

Dear @SAS443

I might agree with you, but do you like the attitude of this guy?

7 minutes ago, Krakin said:

pathetic looking visual effect. The "X-Plane difference" indeed. What a joke lol.

 

[MrBitstFlyer 3,923]

6 minutes ago, Krakin said:

The "X-Plane difference" indeed. What a joke lol.

Please take your sarcasm somewhere else please.  Both MSFS and X-Plane have good and bad points, but they are both excellent flight sims.

[Murmur 3,978]

9 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Who told you icing does not cause crashes in the other sim? You know that for a fact or are you making another silly assumption like the OP did? There are plenty of videos showing crashes caused by icing in MSFS. 

In the sim you refer, I flew 30+ minutes at max icing conditions in the C172 and it would still continue flying. I have a _very slight_ suspect that would not be the case in real life. So maybe it's you who's making silly assumptions?

Edited November 3, 2022 by Murmur