29 minutes ago, turbomax said:

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.

You completely missed the point. You think missing basics like e.g. failure of taxi/landing/... lights, RPM/fuel flow/oil pressure/... instruments, airspeed indicator/altimeter/artificial horizon/..., OAT sensor/fuel quantity sensor/..., locked/jammed control surfaces, ... are like adequate tires, and a 4 stroke engine? No! If these BASICS are missing, you definitively have like a car with emergency tires, 2 stroke engine, ... And that is only about FAILURE basics, let alone others ...

44 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

You completely missed the point. You think missing basics like e.g. failure of taxi/landing/... lights, RPM/fuel flow/oil pressure/... instruments, airspeed indicator/altimeter/artificial horizon/..., OAT sensor/fuel quantity sensor/..., locked/jammed control surfaces, ... are like adequate tires, and a 4 stroke engine? No! If these BASICS are missing, you definitively have like a car with emergency tires, 2 stroke engine, ... And that is only about FAILURE basics, let alone others ...

OK so you are flying the RV10

Report back how the engine reacts when you turn the fuel selector to OFF. (question to you, have you done this in a real plane and have an idea what would unfold? Are you familiar with the general fuel system design in GA?)

Also shut off the Alternator and report the BAT discharge rate with all consumers ON, heck even dry crank the starter for 15 minutes just for the laughs. (Again are you familiar with the concept of Battery/ Alternator and its purpose, and why´it's generally a bad thing when ALT is not working?)

I mean for someone who allegedly likes all the basic boxes ticked, you seem very forgiving towards this arcadish behavior once you dig deeper than flicking switches in the RV10. It's a subpar plane with subpar avionics. XP12 has several more competent default planes than this one.
It's just odd tooting the horn of XP12 while at the same time using the RV10 as the poster boy. XP12 Failure mode - which is unmatched no doubt - is however lipstick on a pig in this case (the pig being RV10).

Edited December 7, 20223 yr by SAS443

I just now actually went back to watch the failure video that started this thread. Cool that XP allows for that specific scenario. Not the most convincing portrayal of that particular failure, but cool nonetheless. That scenario is more a failure on a preflight action. I flew a Skyhawk with a leaky fuel gasket that let in a quart or so of water in one tank after a few days of heavy rain. Even after careful sumping, there was still enough residual water left in the system to cause the engine to skip a few beats in flight. Not very comfortable, but thankfully not catastrophic either. I'm assuming that changing tanks has no impact on the outcome in XP? 

29 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

subpar plane with subpar avionics

Got any actual basis for that, filed any bugs you found? I had not looked at it before, seems a pretty solid plane with pretty solid avionics to me, 90+fps make should it sweet for VR as well (although, tbh, I much prefer steam guages).

  

22 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

I'm assuming that changing tanks has no impact on the outcome in XP? 

generally failures in XP12 would be fired by

during training.

Edited December 7, 20223 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Got any actual basis for that, filed any bugs you found?

Actual basis that a fuel selector is aft of the firewall and unable to immediately kill the engine? (wheras the mixture cuts the fuel instantly?)

Or that AFAIK there are no 12V infinite batteries on the market?

But you are correct in that this should be reported.

50 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

there are no 12V infinite batteries

there are no 12V infinite batteries in xplane either, they have a kWh rating and automatically go flat if you arent charging them (based on bus load), leading to e.g. the reports we've had on the 744 where all the displays and lights dimmed after a while (when they didnt switch on the engine gen switches).

I do hope you were paid well to fabricate that bit of nonsense. Although I did submit a bug there under threat of a beating with a wet fish just today where certain settings can make bus load climb into the megawatts.

50 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

is aft of the firewall

that is your big avionics complaint...wow... disaster, totally unflyable.

You know those personal attacks you were engaging in earlier... Im seeing signs of projecting...

Edited December 8, 20223 yr by mSparks

36 minutes ago, mSparks said:

I do hope you were paid well to fabricate that bit of nonsense.

I've been cranking the engine for 10min straight in the RV10. Quite impressive for the starter motor and a GA lead battery 😉 (I really hope your 744 is not simulating lead batteries though) G1000 show NO discharge whatsoever during my chaos monkeying of the electrical system. Zero amps draw from the BAT.

36 minutes ago, mSparks said:

that is your big avionics complaint...wow... disaster, totally unflyable

No AHRS modelled , no AUX page (no sys status page, no system info, impossible to conduct GPS RAIM checks or see Waas/GBAS/EGNOS status), no Engine page

As a user of the real G1000 boatloads of features are not there in the RV10. 

And I said it was subpar. Disaster is your words.

Cool that you really think critical voices of XP are paid for. 🙂

 

Edited December 8, 20223 yr by SAS443

Btw starter for the IO-540 engine un the RV10 can draw anywhere from 250-300+ amps. And I engaged it for 10min straight + avionics, pitot heat, lights etc.

Find me a GA battery that survives that (you won't). 

Edited December 8, 20223 yr by SAS443

4 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

Btw starter for the IO-540 engine un the RV10 can draw anywhere from 250-300+ amps. And I engaged it for 10min straight + avionics, pitot heat, lights etc.

stick these few lines at the start of plugins/xlua/scripts/RV10.systems.lua (can use notepad)

plugin_amps  = find_dataref("sim/cockpit2/electrical/plugin_bus_load_amps")
function engage_starters_beforeCMDhandler(phase, duration)
	if phase == 0 or phase == 1 then
		plugin_amps[0]=12000
	elseif phase==2 then
		plugin_amps[0]=0
	end
end
function engage_starters_afterCMDhandler(phase, duration)
end
engage_starters_wrapper          = wrap_command("sim/starters/engage_starter_1", engage_starters_beforeCMDhandler, engage_starters_afterCMDhandler)

and you'll be flat after a few cranks.

It's battery is set to 300Wh, I don't think it will be to much of a challenge for you to fix my code so it draws the correct 250-300+ amps.

Now, care to share what would be involved in that kind of X-Perimenting in any other sim?

[It doesn't have any power draw set in planemaker either, disaster].

3 hours ago, SAS443 said:

OK so you are flying the RV10

(the pig being RV10).

Just playing with you here 😉I fly an RV9A and she is no pig! Sips gas at 7-8 gal/hr depending on RPM setting. Cruise is usually 135kts. In 6 years of ownership, there have been no failures in the air. Replaced the battery, starter and voltage regulator since owning it. It was built in 2006. I put between 25-40 hrs/year into the logbook.

I tell you, with the new starter, it cranks like magic now. Didn’t realize how bad the old one was. Lucky I didn’t get stranded at a visiting airport!

45 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

As a user of the real G1000

Then might I recommend you replace the X-1000 in xplane with

https://realsimgear.com/products/realsimgear-g1000-suite-for-x-plane-p3d-and-fsx

 

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

I've been cranking the engine for 10min straight in the RV10. Quite impressive for the starter motor and a GA lead battery 😉 (I really hope your 744 is not simulating lead batteries though) G1000 show NO discharge whatsoever during my chaos monkeying of the electrical system. Zero amps draw from the BAT.

No AHRS modelled , no AUX page (no sys status page, no system info, impossible to conduct GPS RAIM checks or see Waas/GBAS/EGNOS status), no Engine page

As a user of the real G1000 boatloads of features are not there in the RV10. 

And I said it was subpar. Disaster is your words.

Cool that you really think critical voices of XP are paid for. 🙂

 

I don’t have XP11 installed at the moment nor jumped in on 12 yet. I can’t remember, does the XP G1000 have along track offset implemented? IRL it’s becoming increasingly common to get an altitude restriction x number of miles from a fix. 

On 12/5/2022 at 9:47 AM, mSparks said:

The only ones complaining at the moment are those in total denial that MSFS is an XBOX game for people to enjoy, like that wasn't made clear from the first day it was announced.

I mean, OK, its not a very good game. Its been a long time since I've seen ratings this low and it is truly terrible if awesome developers like PMDG do get left out in the cold (although X-Plane 12 is waiting...)

But those expecting more/different from a games developer who put some staff through basic flight training and a game publisher that hasn't released a blockbuster title for 20 years were only ever fooling themselves, everyone else just got on with business.

Are you intentionally lying or are you simply incapable of even the most basic research & analysis?

Here's the actual rating from 1358 PC users, from the same site, that you "some how" missed:

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/microsoft-flight-simulator

Another from the same site from 587 Xbox X users:

https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-series-x/microsoft-flight-simulator

Here's how 42,000 Steam users rate it:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1250410/Microsoft_Flight_Simulator_40th_Anniversary_Edition/

And yet YOU "somehow" blew completely past 76% positive out of 44,000 ratings and landed on the 8 (yes, EIGHT) users of xbox S that don't like it...

 

Quote

The only ones complaining at the moment are those in total denial that MSFS is an XBOX game for people to enjoy, like that wasn't made clear from the first day it was announced.

Source, please. (I won't hold my breath because it doesn't exist)

Again: are you lying or blissfully unaware? Because here's what the head of MSFS actually said, "...the right tools, technology, partners and hardware to release the most realistic and authentic flight simulator to date..."

It's always open to debate on how successful they've been at taking the crown for "most realistic", but there is simply no conceivable doubt that MSFS is indeed a flight simulator.

Here's a question: Do you consider Prepar3D to be a flight simulator or a flight game? 

I ask because MSFS is head and shoulders above P3D in every single aspect of flight simulation. 

Every. Single. One.

So if an Xbox "game" is undeniably better at re-creating the world and flying around it than one of the most successful commercial/military flight simulators ever created, doesn't that make you wonder if it might actually be, y'know... a simulator?

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta
oopsie word

41 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Here's the actual rating from 1358 PC users, from the same site, that you "some how" missed:

So you don't question the source then? what are you disagreeing with exactly? Have you seen ratings that low anywhere else?

41 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Again: are you lying or blissfully unaware? Because here's what the head of MSFS actually said, "...the right tools, technology, partners and hardware to release the most realistic and authentic flight simulator to date..."

And Textron even said

Its called over promising and under delivering.

If you believed all that, you should have listened to what the developers actually said instead of the marketeers promising things that were not planned and will never be delivered.

41 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Here's a question: Do you consider Prepar3D to be a flight simulator or a flight game? 

Well, lets first make sure we are in agreement on the actual question. What do you think makes something a simulator vs a game? can software be both? You seem by your question to imply its an either or thing, which is not the case imho.

Here's a more important question - do you consider using software contrary to its EULA acceptable? Because I'm reasonably sure the MSFS EULA forbids getting paid to use MSFS for training, but for some inexplicable reason I can't find it anywhere online to actually check, but please, feel free to quote me the part where using it in situations with life and death consequences is something they endorse (which is what I consider to be "simulation").

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by mSparks

On 12/5/2022 at 11:08 AM, mSparks said:

Yeah, 10 more years of that and they may improve everything else enough to be an equal match for X-Plane 10 or FSX .

Mind elaborating on which aspects of v10 or FSX remain out of reach for MSFS?

Only thing I can think of is the remaining bits and pieces of the legacy ESP flight model - which ain't great, for sure.

But with CFD-Lite coming on strong, even that lead is narrowing now. Sure, it'll take the addon devs awhile to mainstream it, but as the C172 G1000 and Cabri show, it's already quite capable of delivering a highly representative flight experience

p.s.: wasn't it just announced that the correction of 20 year old error in XP's flight model is causing a huge amount of heartache for virtually all swept wing addons in v12 RC3? E.g., Rotate stating their MD-11 is practically unflyable at the moment, et al?