22 minutes ago, OverTheEDJ said:

Hey, if you are happier with XP FM over MSFS, I would not try to change your mind. To each his own.

why not just come play?

this code block really needs some work to get it ready for XP12

https://github.com/mSparks43/747-400/tree/master/plugins/xtlua/scripts/B747.42.xt.EEC

Specifically it needs the throttle input isolating from the ecc throttle output so the throttle handle doesnt animate while the ecc is hunting a thrust ref.

Im quite short on time curing cancer, MIs and strokes at the moment so dont get anywhere near the time I would like for meaningful xplane dev.

Its so easy even seniors in high school can contribute - in fact many have already.

I began with FS2002, the sim, whose release was delayed because of 9/11. After about a decade, I ended up with FSX. Somewhere along the line, in about 2013 or 2014, I gave XP10 a 'go'. On a very old PC. Simply, it wasn't much good on my old (by then 10+ year old) PC.

In about 2018, I had the financial option for either XP11 or Prepared. I'm honest, so would not have pretended to be a student.

Anyway, I bought XP11 in 2018 and, in the last few years, have updated, with Orbx scenery, bits of Honeycomb and Logitech hardware - and that sort of stuff.

In 2021, I bought FS2020 but didn't much use it, 'cos it's a God awful pain in the word not allowed. In my view, setting stuff up is hard. Harder than XP11.

Personally, I do get pi**ed off with those whom I consider think it's an A versus B competition.

I want the best flight sim.. Yup, I want the best flight model and liking a correct view out of the window  isn't 'pussy'

Erm, my post might very well be in the  wrong place.

4 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

Can the Fenix etc. simulate failed ILS/localizer/navaid transmitters, downdrafts, wake turbulences, melting snow/ice, snow free roads in winter, etc.?

maybe, may be not. there is a limit somewhere to every "general purpose" flight simulator feature set,  ultimately it boils down to priorities. the things you mentioned might be crucial to you and a select few experts, but definitely not the majority of users, who need lots and lots of other things implemented first. if it is crucial for you, then you chose exactly the right simulator for yourself with x-plane over a "general purpose" x-box game. 😀

Just now, turbomax said:

the things you mentioned might be crucial to you and a select few experts

its not so much that, its the sheer, insane volume of these things that are the absolute fundamentals of "realistic" flight simulation, that makes building a flight simulator so very very hard and time consuming.

The fact X-Plane authors get all that and more by default, means they can spend more of the time they have available on things absolutely specific to the aircraft they are working with or pushing the boundaries of what is possible rather than wasting significant portions of time reinventing the proverbial wheel.

Further, X-Plane goes to extraordinary lengths to make otherwise insanely difficult unsolved problems easy to manage and a pleasure to work with. 

About the only disadvantage is that Laminars rate of development is so absolutely rapid, the biggest problem they have had to balance over recent years imho is giving developers a stable platform to release on, vs breaking everything because they just did key things a bit better.

 

3 hours ago, Dermot McClusky said:

I'd like to submit a motion to change the Xplane forum to the "Pilotwings 64" forum. We'd get more enjoyable content and there would be fewer children bickering back and forth about something as stupid as their favorite type of software.

The ayes should upvote, the nays should like. Voting closes 12 hours from the timestamp of this post. 

Thanks Dermot for the memories. I loved playing Pilotwings with the kids! So much fun flying a powered hand glider on a VNav approach through the boxes! I guess you know my vote!

On 12/5/2022 at 4:18 PM, 2reds2whites said:

Perhaps you should give this a read;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

 

Coincidence or not, this video just came across my path. Some very interesting content with aspects related to many discussions on AVSim as well as this post!

 

29 minutes ago, Doering said:

Some very interesting content with aspects related to many discussions on AVSim as well as this post!

That crossed my YT feed as well a few days ago. He did much better than I thought he would. Also makes me wonder how motion changes things for neophytes. That sim is fixed base.

Bet you I could land a 744 😛 (cos Autoland/Land 3 🤣)

Edited December 6, 20223 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, blingthinger said:

Also makes me wonder how motion changes things for neophytes. That sim is fixed base.

flying a real 737 sim was not that different  from a GA (I also had flown 737 15+ yrs in FS 🤡). I just sucked more than usual.

Biggest sensation was the pitch-couple behavior of the wing mounted engines. The nose became very heavy at thrust reductions and in the flare obviously. In the C172 you can afford to act little late (even add power and RoD is immediately arrested), but the 737 was much more unforgiving of late reactions.

Speaking of the flare, it is rather subtle in a Boeing. just a couple of degress in pitch will suffice, the delicate part I thought, was more when to retard the thrustlevers.

Anyhow Compare that flare to a C172S, differential between pitch angle in approach vs during flare is easily >10 degrees, as evidenced from few shots I have from my own rw flights (and this is why many students have a really hard time to not balloon when transitioning from appr to landing attitude)

Typical Approach pitch

Just moment before touchdown 

 

Edited December 6, 20223 yr by SAS443

13 hours ago, SAS443 said:

flying a real 737 sim was not that different  from a GA (I also had flown 737 15+ yrs in FS 🤡). I just sucked more than usual.

Ya but that's cheating! I'm talking about the true rookie. Like the PBS guy. Someone whose internal mental accelerometers aren't calibrated for moving in all 3 axes and at much higher speeds. Someone who isn't used to turbine spool-up lag. All it would take is a small wind gust on final to throw them off (if hand flying, obviously). Certainly an experience simmer would have better chance at the automation, but if the inflatable autopilot in the copilot's seat suddenly sprung a leak....I think there'd be trouble. Or maybe the desktop sim is a better tool for getting the hand-eye coordination trained well enough? The real problem is the margin for error is so tight. Like PBS said, those landings did put him on the runway, but technically speaking they were probably crashes.

Edited December 7, 20223 yr by blingthinger

19 hours ago, Doering said:

 

 

Is that an actual Level-D sim?

The super low FPS and the mega stutter @9:37 is very suspect.

 

24 minutes ago, Murmur said:

The super low FPS and the mega stutter @9:37 is very suspect.

https://youtu.be/2A7mblg5UKc?t=869

This too. Pretty sure it's not.

On 12/5/2022 at 10:26 PM, Krakin said:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/release-notes-1-30-5-0-aau-i-dec-5th-2022/562540

Putting your foot in your mouth again

Well, well, well! "3 people in a shed"^TM (not my words) accomplished that from the beginning and the "big studio with hundreds of developers" had a hard time keeping up.

 

On 12/6/2022 at 2:08 AM, turbomax said:

maybe, may be not. there is a limit somewhere to every "general purpose" flight simulator feature set,  ultimately it boils down to priorities. the things you mentioned might be crucial to you and a select few experts, but definitely not the majority of users, who need lots and lots of other things implemented first. if it is crucial for you, then you chose exactly the right simulator for yourself with x-plane over a "general purpose" x-box game. 😀

Sure, it depends on priorities. I rather prefer (analogy) a car with e.g. adequate tires, a four stroke engine, etc. but not top a notch GPS, over a car with emergency tires, 2 stroke engine, but the latest GPS. I.e., first the basics should be correct, then comes the bling bling - not the other way round.

 

1 hour ago, flying_carpet said:

I rather prefer (analogy) a car with e.g. adequate tires, a four stroke engine, etc. but not top a notch GPS

and I prefer if a car that already has both, adequate tires, plus a 4 stroke engine AND top notch GPS. again it all depends on personal priorities.