9 hours ago, mSparks said:

The "somehow" is they have addons you can't buy or use.

e.g.

https://milviz.com/

vs

https://milvizusa.com/aircraft/military/

So glad you brought this up!
 (oh, and remember WHO shared those links with you...?) 😉

And let me ensure I understand your statement:

The addon in use is more important than the simulator in which it flies. Can I quote you on that? Never mind, I'm gonna...

So all this bickering over which simulator is "better" is actually moot, according to you?

We should just choose the most appropriate addon for our purposes and go from there?

 

Funny-but-true story:

I happen to be one of the lucky few civilians who own one of those addons: https://milvizusa.com/products/t-38c/

It's a BEAUTY - and so much deeper than the steam gauge A-model that's still on offer.

I got it just a week or so before the USAF compelled MilViz to pull it from their store. Phew...!

It's (obviously) a True Study Level addon, expressly designed for, approved by, and deployed with the USAF for training future combat pilots.

But here's the thing: there's nothing much to it in terms of secret squirrel stuff. It's quite similar to MV's old F-15E Strike Eagle, which anyone can download for free from their site (!).

That's right: nothing more than very cool nav systems and virtual ordnance delivery (because the IRL T-38 is completely unarmed. Heck, it doesn't even have a radar (not even WX!)).

Almost any High Fidelity airliner addon, or any similarly complex DCS Module like the A-10C, F-16 or F/A-18, is a far more challenging simulation to handle.

And even though the flight model is (by P3D standards) Excellent, it still doesn't hold a candle to DCSW or XP or even MSFS, particularly if you want to train in any appreciable weather.

So again, it seems like you're saying there's more to the selection of a simulator for "Seriouz Bidness" than a great flight model?

25 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

(oh, and remember WHO shared those links with you...?) 😉

The milviz developer stream.

25 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

The addon in use is more important than the simulator in which it flies.

The addons are at least as important as the rest of the simulator, absolutely.

25 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

So all this bickering over which simulator is "better" is actually moot, according to you?

opposite, the simulator determines the feasibility of creating an addon that meets specifications vs having to get the originator to do work. e.g. "realistic" flight requires support for either panoramic projection or VR at never less than 60fps (think Canada actually requires 100fps), addons can only reduce what the sim is capable of.

25 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

But here's the thing: there's nothing much to it in terms of secret squirrel stuff. It's quite similar to MV's old F-15E Strike Eagle, which anyone can download for free from their site (!).

I'm unclear, did it, or did it not include the Link16 and ECM stuff?

 

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by mSparks

8 hours ago, mSparks said:

Prior versions of XP were not suitable for training on planes with swept wings (using default XP physics as intended anyway),

Funny - I never saw that disclaimer on x-plane.com or any of LR's marketing or White Papers. Ever.

Nope - all we we're ever told, by Austin and you and everyone else, is how incredibly advanced, superior and from-the-future X-Plane's aero engine is that no other simulator past, present or future, could ever measure up.

And yet we find out that XP's been fundamentally "inaccurate" for everything with a swept wing? For TWENTY YEARS? I mean, swepts have been fashionable ever since the Me-262 brought them to the party 80 years ago...

So pretty much every modern-ish biz jet, airliner, military aircraft, and even the Space Shuttle & SR-71 so prominently featured in previous X-Plane editions has been "wrong"?

Incredibly ironic.

Quote

on the plus side that deficiency undoubtedly helped keep P3D alive.

Uh, no, not at all. Why is it you slavishly believe that the flight simulation world revolves around XP - with all evidence to the contrary?

The FSX/P3D super-fans obviously never really cared about "realistic" flight models. They beat all of us over the head with P3D's "superiority" because there were (at the time) no Big Iron equivalents to PMDG and other "Study Level" devs available in XP.

XP didn't even register to the P3D user base or commercial customers in terms of influence/affect.

What kept P3D nee FSX going was it's demonstrated ability for deep SYSTEMS simulation, extensibility, network-ability, etc., etc. There was simply no evidence (at the time) that XP could handle those sophisticated requirements.

Sorry, that X-Plane "accomplishment" is yet another of your incorrect conclusions.

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

And yet we find out that XP's been fundamentally "inaccurate" for everything with a swept wing? For TWENTY YEARS? 

not really anything new, its been under discussion for quite some time, the main issue is, despite what you may think

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

For TWENTY YEARS? I mean, swepts have been fashionable ever since the Me-262 brought them to the party 80 years ago...

Behaviour of super sonic aircraft beyond the sound barrier - as in actual real life testing - is still very very secret by all nations that field supersonics.

And those governments get pretty angsty at leaks, e.g.

https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/15/18623545/eagle-dynamics-f-16-manual-conspiracy-smuggling-russia#:~:text=An employee of Eagle Dynamics,charges including conspiracy and smuggling.

before the sound barrier you can "fake" it fairly easily against the real numbers just by tuning the wing parameters.

9 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

"Study Level" devs

don't need to shout about it to people with XBOXs,  Despite what you may have heard, PMDG do not sell anything equivalent to

https://www.alsim.com/solutions/airline-operator/

On the other side of the technical discussions is the simplistic and practical use that I believe most folk choose MSFS over the rest...immersion.

How close does MSFS / XP represent the technical (FM, avionics etc.) is offset by the suspended belief one desires to achieve during a flight session (be it recreational or training).

During the COVID lockdown, I was researching online ground schools for the PPL exam. I was shocked to see how fast Sportys adopted MSFS into their VFR “training” scenarios. Sportys even went as far as developing the airport at their school as a free download.

https://www.sportys.com/digital-i69-msfs2020.html

Ironically, the criticisms of MSFS being a VFR sim aligned perfectly with Sportys “training”. So, any sim can be used for certain aspects of flight training (developing / expanding a knowledge base).

If World Title’s goal of creating an accurate representation of the Garmin avionics suite can somehow “train” recreational gamers, then MSFS, by proxy as recreational sim, may be more useful (and literally used more) than the very sims approved for training.

3 hours ago, blingthinger said:

Absolutely, depending on the simulation requirements. That's why ESP was marketed as 'beyond a flight sim' in the first place: battlefield situational awareness training, etc.

What's more is that you're probably talking about P3D. Not very often.

Oh, i'm definitely talking about P3D, which isn't anything more than a substantial FSX re-write, in any case (hence the broad addon compatibility between the two).

Quote

Has any government ever turned down an opportunity to pay Lockheed Martin money?

Irrelevant/Non Sequitur. FSX/P3D was the platform chosen to fulfill "Big Boy" training requirements, NOT X-Plane.

Quote

Doesn't say anything about the FM fidelity.

Right, which means that in many use cases, FM fidelity is largely irrelevant for IRL pilot training.

Quote

In fact, Asobo should have stuck with the FSX paradigm and done their best to extend it. Not take a dog leg turn into abstract art and try to call it advanced flight dynamics.

a. they did because they took FSX and baked it into Asobo's world simulation.

b. And now that they're off to a literally unprecedented lead over every single other flight simulation, EVER, they've rolled out CFD-Lite.

It is demonstrably capable of accurate flight simulation in the same ball park as X-Plane, despite having only been available to developers for a matter of months.

Does it have significant limitations? Oh, yeah, as you yourself have illustrated.

And isn't it ironic that the swept wing planform graphic you love to throw around when trash-talking the (legitimate) shortcomings of MSFS is ALSO one of X-Plane's latest/most glaring deficiencies?

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta

7 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

X-Plane's latest/most glaring deficiencies?

erm, think you are maybe taking there not being an FAA approved swept wing aircraft for XP yet a little far there? Especially since they are seemingly now being created (implied from Austin saying he's focused on what the commercial customers want).

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by mSparks

3 hours ago, blingthinger said:

And yet, they were still far more believable than Asobo's attempt at a F18.

And while we're at it, have you ever kicked the rudder in the Bonanza? It flops around like a fish out of water. It's absurd. That's the 'cfd' model at 'work': desperate attempts at patching the mess created by the Planform Model.

Red herring? Yup! Asobo's red herring for sticking with the baseline FSX model under the hood. fs2020 could/should...

Never said Asobo's FREE Hornet was highly accurate, did I? Especially considering it was developed by DC Designs, who aren't known for High Fidelity.

The also-Free X-Plane Default mil jets were also proven to be highly inaccurate by none other than Austin himself, re the F-4 aero tuning exercise for v12.

Fact is that only a couple of Mil addons in XP behave correctly at edge of envelope ACM type stuff. Which is still a couple more than in MSFS, but it doesn't change the fact that XP's been no good at it until the current F-14 and upgraded F-4.

Let's get this straight: the Bonanza, and all other Defaults except for one, do NOT use CFD-Lite. Try the C172 G1000 - it's the only one that has it up to now, and it's quite nice, esp when compared to the Default Laminar 172s.

But take heart, you and all the MSFS kool-aid drinkers at least have that misconception in common 🙂

7 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

compared to the Default Laminar 172s

Meanwhile, in the real world

https://www.gleimaviation.com/shop/cockpitbatd/

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by mSparks

Quote

I'll just point out that P3D is still a big chunk of say Milviz's income,

P3D is ALL of MilViz's income now (perhaps they'll get in on the ground floor of the new Unreal Engine sim, too). BlackBird is their new MSFS-only sim of choice for High Fidelity addons.

Somehow, a company known for "Study Level" addons, with big commercial/gov't contracts, and a new & substantial & growing consumer base, is still ignoring X-Plane. Why might that be?

Quote

areas that up until very recently XP was deficient in, are being fixed as we speak,

What are these mysterious "areas"? And if XP is from-the-future, why aren't they already features? And are these on the "new clouds sometime this decade" timeline, or the Vulkan "this year" timeline?

XP, much as I love & prefer it, is indisputably coming from behind. But thankfully, v12 is an excellent example of what LR is capable of pulling off when there's real competition eating into their business.

The good news is that Austin has finally accepted that and is investing in overt moves to bolster XP's market position by adding the features his customer base wants vs the competition.

 

Quote

...MSFS will likely never be proficient in, especially not without [Sim Updates]

Please give examples of these "...will never be proficient in..." features?

I could be wrong, but now that MSFS has good helo & glider FMs, along with the atmospherics upgrades, MSFS is already pretty much at Feature Parity. And yes, it's behind in some of those areas. But OTOH, it's ahead in others. 

 

Quote

[Sim Updates] which, despite widespread denial, are not planned any time soon (2024 the earliest for the next one after SU12 in March?)

There are 7 Sim Updates planned for 2023, or has the fact that they've focused the activity to Aircraft & Avionics Updates confused you (not to mention whatever the various quote, "Surprise" Updates happen to be?

It's all there in the Sim Update section of their - ahem - PUBLIC roadmap, which they've been pretty good about keeping to over the last couple years.

In fact, the AAU updates focus on some of the most frequent (and justified) criticisms of the sim. Namely, systems, avionics and...TAH DAH: Flight Models!

E.g., aside from the substantial work that has already raised the G1000 to a High Fidelity standard, we'll (finally) see the Longitude become a Payware Grade High Fidelity addon, in all aspects.

The CJ4 is also getting substantial systems upgrades that will launch it past "Default" grade.

And so on for other aircraft and key navigation systems.

and that's just in January!

Also not to mention the SEVEN World & City updates, plus the heavily subsidized Local Legends & Famous Flyers.

What sort of similar major content and sim updates do you think XP is going to offer? I mean, after the 40th Anniversary gift cornucopia, LR already have a LOT of catching up to do, no?

Historically speaking, it'll be a big fat Zero. But hopefully Austin's bolstered team will bust out some of the upgrades to which they've just recently been alluding.

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by UrgentSiesta
another fact

31 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

There are 7 Sim Updates planned for 2023

Source?

I'm going by 

https://fselite.net/content/world-update-12-announcement/

Which lists SU12 in March then nada except scenery and planes.

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, mSparks said:

 

 

 

Quote

The milviz developer stream.

Nah - they only talked about their new BlackBird Sims consumer brand there.

Quote

did it, or did it not include the Link16 and ECM stuff?

You should be proud - you're so good at Moving Goal Posts!

As a civilian IRL pilot, Link 16 and ECM are immaterial to my simulation needs, and have zero effect on the suitability of the addon for flight training (i.e., Pilot "Stuff").

The point is there's NO "special bonus features" included in their .mil addons that make P3D > MSFS for flight training.

And again, where, exactly, is X-Plane in his Professional Simulation space? So far, "nowhere" seems to be the answer...

 

A very interesting thread because although it may look as a derailed one is actually capable of expressing in a very good way my exact feel about the state of the art in terms of general purpose civil flight simulators, only lacking AEFS in the set, for completeness...

I love MFS for it's scenery, overall graphics including weather depiction, functionality like the excellent integration with components that in older and derived versions of MS FS had to be bought, and even a rather acceptable online real traffic and ATC. Then when it comes to the "feel of flight" in lighter aircraft, ww2 props, even the helicopters, it still needs fine tunning, but! it hasn't stopped here....

Then I look at XP12 and feel it is probably one of the best releases of XP if not the Best ever!. Lot's of features and details, lot's of potential in some aspects like that of the new built-in ATC even if still limited and buggy in many aspects, but promising... I pick a Spitfire from the .Org, freeware XP12 version, take it for a ride, and feel that it is the closest to the DCS Spitfire I have been able to use so far, and that includes a comparison to the Flying Iron Slpitfire for MFS which is certainly the best they could do but leaves a lot to be desired... Even the default C172 G1000, CFD-enabled, behaves strangely regarding prop effects, stalls and spins unrealistically, compared to the XP12 default C172.

But then XP12 looks so behind MFS in terms of scenery, weather rendering even if some aspects like some cloud shapes and the light look great... And the limited weather model regarding an uncomplete Troposphere... Then I can't use AI as I do so easily in MFS, and even less can I have the default ATC interacting with them...

Yes Austin made a joke of the marshallers walking in the parking areas with the mobile on their hand, but the life at airports, the ground services and the way they work are more functional than in XP12, so...

And then there's Aerofly FS whose FDM is probably better than that of either XP or MFS in some regards, and has World coverage, but then very poor weather and no ATC... and the scenery looks great at some selected cities and airports but apart from that.... Well, I don't know how the feel of flight is in the last version because I didn't buy it, but I believe it should be at least as good as in AEFS2.

 

Edited December 12, 20223 yr by jcomm

Just now, UrgentSiesta said:

Nah - they only talked about their new BlackBird Sims consumer brand there.

I watched their streams since well before the were Blackbird, ever since they broke the NDA iirc.

4 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

You should be proud - you're so good at Moving Goal Posts!

You talking about buying a 

3 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

It's (obviously) a True Study Level addon,

Military jet, Link16 and ECM systems would be included in that. I was just asking if your "true study level military trainer" pulled by the USAF included Link16 & ECM simulation, or if it was more "goes up and down when you move your joystick and has some buttons that do stuff" type of study level.

12 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

The point is there's NO "special bonus features"

The point is a C172 like

https://www.gleimaviation.com/shop/cockpitbatd/

is never coming to an XBOX near you, so stop kidding yourself and enjoy the sims for what they are, rather than what you wish they would be having been spoon fed typical microsoft marketing nonsense.

Quote

the main issue is, despite what you may think

Behaviour of super sonic aircraft beyond the sound barrier - as in actual real life testing - is still very very secret by all nations that field supersonics.

Here we go again with the Secret Squirrel smoke and mirrors!

From what I can tell, the MD-11 and Citation X aren't supersonic aircraft (well, not if their pilots want to live...). And the "Main Issue" seems to have severely affected their ability to operate in the sim now that the twenty-year old typo has been corrected.

That decision was a complete knee-jerk over-reaction by Austin. Instead of making it a priority but planned fix, he's set his sim back (by setting his 3PD's back) substantially, and cast doubt on the entire thing.

He's brilliant, and he'll get it fixed, but this is probably the worst way to go about it (Asobo makes the exact same mistakes with their 3PD's...).

Sustained supersonic (and hypersonic) flight has been a public reality for the last 70 years (not to mention Concorde's very public development). Governments don't really give a hoot about it any longer because it's not nearly as critical a differentiator as it was in the early days.

So much so that the USAF's last 2 intercontinental bombers (and MANY of their UAVs) are decidedly subsonic.

No, what the gov'ts get all sensitive about is SENSORS, systems, detection ranges, low observables, weapon kinematics, etc., etc.

"Supersonics" are, quite frankly, passe, simply because they can be reverse engineered with nothing more than a few photographs and a decent CFD system.

 

Quote

And those governments get pretty angsty at leaks, e.g.https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/15/18623545/eagle-dynamics-f-16-manual-conspiracy-smuggling-russia#:~:text=An employee of Eagle Dynamics,charges including conspiracy and smuggling.

The kerfuffle over Eagle Dynamics and the fighter manuals had nothing to do with "supersonics" and everything to do with ITAR. There are PLENTY of items that are 100% legal to buy, own and operate by any civilian that will turn into a jail sentence if you cross a country's border with it.

The manuals in question are available online for the taking, in addition to anyone being able to buy them from eBay/Amazon and a number of other book sellers.

Quote

don't need to shout about it to people with XBOXs,  Despite what you may have heard, PMDG do not sell anything equivalent to

https://www.alsim.com/solutions/airline-operator/

What does this have to do with...anything?

We know that X-Plane is an excellent simulator that can be FAA approved for commercial training.

So is Prepar3D.

And we've already established the fact that MSFS is undeniably more advanced than P3D. And LM themselves appear ready to deprecate P3D with the Unreal Engine announcement.

So it's only a matter of time before MSFS goes commercial/military in one form or another. And given my past experience, I'd be utterly flabbergasted if it isn't already being used for actual clandestine activities.

The point you keep trying (and failing) to make isn't that X-Plane is Top Shelf (no sensible person is debating that). No, it's the silly notion that everything else is garbage, despite all that Reality surrounding you.