7 hours ago, jcomm said:

Murmur is in the very first place what I would call a REFERENCE in terms of flight simulation. He's posts are usually very precise, unbiased, and as well documented as possible.

Well I have to disagree there. I think each of us is in some way "biased", and I am too. After all, each of us has his subjective preferences, and we're "biased" toward the product that best meets our preferences. And I have made misjudgements and errors too.

Anyway, I think both are good products. MSFS, with vastly more resources at disposal, is the vastly more popular product and will remain so.

I still can't enjoy it as much as enjoy X-Plane though, for a variety of reasons. I think X-Plane nailed its lighting for example, and also I find the feeling of flight in XP unparalleled compared to the other sim.

Hopefully we will continue to have at least 2 competing sims, and not a monopoly.

On 10/31/2022 at 2:48 PM, Daube said:

I suppose that with the new clouds, LR invested quite some time in the weather simulation and the effects on the aircraft and its systems.

I'm surprised the "other sim" didn't simulate the pitot icing though... What were the exact weather settings you used ?

Don't be surprised the other sim is really only 2.2y out of initial release, whereas XP is some 25 post initial release hence they have had a very long time to bring these types of features.

54 minutes ago, Noel said:

Don't be surprised the other sim is really only 2.2y out of initial release, whereas XP is some 25 post initial release hence they have had a very long time to bring these types of features.

Was that "other sim" 😉 developed from scratch or is it based on FSX and its predecessors (which are on the market since around 40 years from what I read)?

6 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

Was that "other sim" 😉 developed from scratch or is it based on FSX and its predecessors (which are on the market since around 40 years from what I read)?

XP was under the same roof for the duration therein lies the giant difference.  The other sim absolutely was not, some code was borrowed, a giant amount of new code brought us to where we are today, 2.2y out from initial release, with a slew of worldwide scenery at no cost to the user, and these don't just happen they take a huge amount of work.  The 'little things', like puddles on the tarmac, or freezing pitot tubes, are the icing to be put on the cake in due time, and they most certainly will.  

22 minutes ago, Noel said:

and these don't just happen they take a huge amount of work.

And more importantly, a huge amount of resources!

 

22 minutes ago, Noel said:

The 'little things', like puddles on the tarmac, or freezing pitot tubes, are the icing to be put on the cake in due time, and they most certainly will.  

Well, we're back at what is subjectively important for each of us. Those "little things" for you (and for 90% of simmers) might be instead more important than "big things" for others.

Despite the "slew of worldwide scenery at no cost for the user", I still can't enjoy the other sim as much as I find immersion in X-Plane... But 90% of simmers can instead, and that's good for them!

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by Murmur

5 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Well, we're back at what is subjectively important for each of us. Those "little things" for you (and for 90% of simmers) might be instead more important than "big things" for others.

They're not 'little' for me Murmur--it's 'little' to implement was my point, the finishing touches, the icing on the cake, compared to the ginormous tasks that the other sim has taken on.

1 minute ago, Noel said:

They're not 'little' for me Murmur--it's 'little' to implement was my point, the finishing touches, the icing on the cake, compared to the ginormous tasks that the other sim has taken on.

Actually, they've always been "little" to implement. They could have already been implemented in FSX, or FS9, etc. But they were not.

Different products may have different priorities.

 

Ummmmm

37 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Actually, they've always been "little" to implement

I think we're in agreement.

10 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Ummmmm

If pitot is clogged so that airspeed is stuck (which means static port is also clogged), also altitude and vertical speed should be stuck, and not working like in the video.

 

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by Murmur

yum XP12 ... hopefully the flickering bug can be resolved soon 👍

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

If pitot is clogged so that airspeed is stuck (which means static port is also clogged), also altitude and vertical speed should be stuck, and not working like in the video.

 

Why don't we deal with what you pointed out in the OP first? Clearly the "other sim" is capable of simulating the specific failure you pointed out in your post. Let us acknowledge that before we move on.

2 hours ago, Murmur said:

If pitot is clogged so that airspeed is stuck (which means static port is also clogged), also altitude and vertical speed should be stuck, and not working like in the video.

 

Stuck, but down to zero as far as I could telll... It was arounnd 150+ knot and all of a sudden came back to the beginning of the scale, which is correct for Ram clogged but static port unclogged.

Would be wrong IF the static port was also clogged as well as the drain, and then the speed would be stuck at the last valid read - around 150 knot in this case.

Apparently both MFS and XP assume that clogging due to ice never affects the static ports.

In XP12 though it is possible to force - through the Malfunctions menu, a non-working static port, and I will have to test what happens to the airspeed indicator under such circumstances BUT I believe MFS and XP do not model separate drain clogging in the pitot.

The airspeed will be stuck at the last good ASI read IF all of the three - Static, Ram and Drain - ports get clogged.

EDIT: We are going to assume the following possible scenarios:

A) XP12 assumes pitot blocked / unblocked affects both the Ram and Drain ports in the pitot tube;

B) XP12 assumes Drain port is always unblocked in the pitot tube.

->> under Scenario A) we will have:

A1) IF pitot blocked AND static unblocked THEN ASI behaves like an altimeter, over-increasing as we climb and over-decreasing as we descend;

A2) IF pitot blocked AND static blocked THEN ASI frozen at last valid read;

->> under scenario B) we will have:

B1) IF pitot blocked AND static unblocked THEN ASI will start reading towards ZERO;

B2) IF pitot blocked AND static blocked THEN ASI will read opposite altimeter, decreasing as we climb, increasing as we descend

In XP12, using the Malfunctions Menu / Instruments / Sensor / Pitot-Tube #1, Static-Port #1, I have set :

-- Both blocked ==> The ASI got frozen at the last valid read which is consistent with A2;

-- Pitot blocked & static unblocked ==> ASI increase with climb / decrease with descent which is consistent with B2;

-- Pitot unblocked & static blocked ==> ASI increase acts opposite altimeter which is consistent with B2;

The ASI never reads towards Zero knot.

So I think XP12 models a mix of A2 and B2...

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by jcomm

Isn't the point of the drain to remove water condensation in the tube?

In which case in icing wouldn't the drain block first and then the rest of the pitot tube?

Why wouldn't that mostly lock in the last speed, give or take altitude changes?

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by mSparks

It's all simulated in here:

luizmonteiro - Online Simulators - Pitot Static System Simulator

 

Edited November 2, 20223 yr by jcomm