1 minute ago, jcomm said:

Raul,

and for me it's already good enough as it is... My observation was a picky one, not really impacting what is more important - the plausibility of the flight characteristics and details being simulated!

no issues, just explaining things further.. in passing careful if you open the canopy during flight you might find the Bernoulli effect too strong to let you close it back :P check also the tablet realism settings some people forget engines failures are a thing.. lucky enough they have the parachute lever! hahaha

S.

23 minutes ago, simbol said:

no issues, just explaining things further.. in passing careful if you open the canopy during flight you might find the Bernoulli effect too strong to let you close it back 😛 check also the tablet realism settings some people forget engines failures are a thing.. lucky enough they have the parachute lever! hahaha

S.

My PHOEBUS C ( irl and in my avatar photo ) has a parachute too, plus the one I carry 🙂 but the one in the Phoebus is meant to be used as an emergency braking device, when we land out and there's not many space available... 

Would love to see good classic gliders available for MFS.

In times of FSX there were a few nice ones by AEROSOFT...

Edited November 10, 20223 yr by jcomm

11 hours ago, Krakin said:

This is why the cult term gets brought up sometimes 

We're more of a family than a cult. 😄

16 hours ago, simbol said:

I would be typing all night honestly if you want a full explanation.

🙂 Oh, I do want the full explanation....but given how much work this all is, I'm sure you'd rather be sleeping!

Thank you again for the details that you did provide.

16 hours ago, mrueedi said:

Defining A Flight Model (flightsimulator.com)

And here you also find e.g. the evidence that the forces are calculated per surface.

So you still don't have anything to contribute on this discussion... Same as last time when your plot very clearly showed how the FM dynamics get scaled in unrealistic ways.

No...I don't see anything in that link that is different than what is being shown in the various YT videos you've linked previously.

Yes, I do see colorful lines extending outwards from the airframes (identically to how XP has done for many many years), but these can't be the forces, can they? Are there not 600+ elements? The airframe should look like a furry cactus if those were actually the forces coming from the model. 

Regardless though, you continue to avoid my question about what is in the "essay" regarding forces and moments vs. their coefficients. I've recopied the paragraph below in case you are able to think of a way to explain it to us all.

You see, it may be true that I'm an word not allowed (and I'm paraphrasing all the personal attacks thus far in this thread), but there are others reading as well. And the essay/SDK text is very clear that they are coefficients, not forces and moments. Maybe you struggle with these concepts, but those are two very different things. Especially when it comes to moments.

"We then initialize the algorithm by attributing - to each surface element - local lift, drag and moments coefficients, simply by uniformly distributing aerodynamics coefficients and tables provided by the user over all surface elements with a basic surface-area-based weighting. We then iteratively compute the same 8 global coefficients we have retrieved from FSX as explained above, but using the new surface elements model."

Also, for those of you still denying that the foundation of the model remains FSX:

"At the end of each iteration, we correct the surface elements local aerodynamics coefficients - uniformly multiplying surface elements lift, drag, side, and moments coefficients by a ratio comparing FSX legacy models with the new model. With this we can a-posteriori reach the FSX global target. This evaluation/correction is performed until no correction is needed, i.e: the correction ratio stagnates to 1. At the end of this iterative loop, we have attributed lift/drag/side and moments coefficients to each surface element and we can guarantee that the contributions of all surface elements, when summed up, lead to the same "zero order" solution as the one previously obtained in FSX."

Asobo is very clear: FSX table model is the "global target".

https://docs.flightsimulator.com/html/Samples_And_Tutorials/Primers/Flight_Model_Physics.htm

Edited November 11, 20223 yr by blingthinger

Yawn...

To be less flippant... We would all love to know more about how Asobo go about getting a working model out of a limited-power CFD simulation. Lots of hints in their open discussion. But of course, the real artistry is how they combine the micro- and macro-components to work together to produce a useful representation of reality. The aerodynamicists here will know all this and must be shaking their heads.

I suppose that some of this thread’s participants may be getting some pleasure from the playful verbal jousting. Fine.

My own personal preference would be to reset the discussion so that knowledgeable professionals would be willing to offer the rest of us a better appreciation for the work that the Asobo team is getting done.

 

14 minutes ago, MM said:

My own personal preference would be to reset the discussion so that knowledgeable professionals would be willing to offer the rest of us a better appreciation for the work that the Asobo team is getting done.

From simbol of FSReborn, developer of the Sting S4:

From iniBuilds, they need no introduction :)

 

1 hour ago, MM said:

My own personal preference would be to reset the discussion so that knowledgeable professionals would be willing to offer the rest of us a better appreciation for the work that the Asobo team is getting done.

Here, here.

I had hoped Mrueedi would provide that perspective to some degree, but alas.

Thus far, Simbol has been our only hope.

7 hours ago, blingthinger said:

Regardless though, you continue to avoid my question about what is in the "essay" regarding forces and moments vs. their coefficients.

I will try to help you finding the answer by yourself. Bascially taking your hand and guide you through the thought process of connecting the dots and finding information, which is obvious but which you refuse to accept because it is just written and spoken in many different places but not in the essay.

I ask questions, I will answer the first one, you answer the second. The answers should be one line of text at max. You are encouraged to consult other sources if the essay is not helping you further.

First question: what is a coefficient?

My answer (on Wikipedia level) : In mathematics, a coefficient is a multiplicative factor in some term of a polynomial, a series, or any expression. 

Second question: in the MSFS flight model, as coefficients are factors, what is multiplied with these coefficients you are talking about?

Blingthingers answer: ?

 

Edited November 11, 20223 yr by mrueedi

7 hours ago, mrueedi said:

First question: what is a coefficient?

First of all, thank you for answering without calling names or insults. I realize that's a difficult concept for many of the adults in this forum. But thank you for making the effort. Baby steps!

Second. Let's use what's in the SDK, since that's what Asobo is using.

https://docs.flightsimulator.com/html/Samples_And_Tutorials/Primers/Flight_Model_Physics.htm

Coefficients are defined as:

 

'S' in this case is the wing planform (top down) surface area. Good?

 

7 hours ago, mrueedi said:

what is multiplied with these coefficients you are talking about?

Are you referring to this text?

"We then initialize the algorithm by attributing - to each surface element - local lift, drag and moments coefficients, simply by uniformly distributing aerodynamics coefficients and tables provided by the user over all surface elements with a basic surface-area-based weighting."

 

 

Edited November 11, 20223 yr by blingthinger

I've found the CFD toggle for around the plane, but can't find it for over the land/clouds like in the first posts screenshots (looked through Dev mode as well), anyone got a clue? thanks

Edit: nevermind found it in the Weather Settings toolbar, "Show 3D Thermal"

Edited November 11, 20223 yr by MarcG

12 minutes ago, MarcG said:

I've found the CFD toggle for around the plane, but can't find it for over the land/clouds like in the first posts screenshots (looked through Dev mode as well), anyone got a clue? thanks

Edit: nevermind found it in the Weather Settings toolbar, "Show 3D Thermal"

That "Show 3D Thermal" in the regular UI only shows thermals... if you want to see the full atmospheric airflow visualizations as well as tweak CFD settings, and also get all the details/numbers related to atmospherics/thermals/weather/etc, need to open up the weather debug window in dev mode I believe. Of course that'll impact frame rates but that's to be expected.
 

aahh nice one thanks

1 minute ago, MarcG said:

aahh nice one thanks

Any time, see this thread for tonnes of details: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/testing-the-new-airflow-simulation/549454