A2A lead tester's thoughts on MSFS & flight simming in 2023

[jcomm 5,939]

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I guess I know nothing about flyiing or sims, because  I think that MSFS and some of the aircraft I fly like the Fenix, C 310, and Kodiak, fly very well, and make me feel like I am flying a real aircraft.  I have been simming for 3 decades, and a pilot in real life for about 4 and a half decades, and every home sim I have flown so far isn't even close to what MSFS is today. I owned all the A2A aircraft in P3D, and I prefer flying the C 310 in MSFS to any of them. 

Bob, I respect your opinion, and indeed we have at least in common the passion for aviation, the years flying as a pilot IRW (got my GPL in October 1980) and as simmers (30+ years).

I placed HUGE expectations in MFS, and indeed I got even better than what I was expecting when it comes to scenery and weather depiction as well as some of the aspects of it's blend with forecast and observation data - far better than in any other general purpose sim available I have tried. Also functionality, airport activity, ATC and even default AI are all above my initial expectations, I must admit, but when it comes to the "feel of flight", and unless I am flying the Fenix or the PMDG 737 using the A/P, pretty much all aircraft disappoint me. It's a mix of the native flight dynamics and the way some weather effects are exaggerated/overdone in the sim, making aircraft behave like paper aircraft in a windy day... 

It's not much different with it's main competitor for this or that reasons. They both fall far from my expectations and what I am able to experiment for instance in DCS World, IL-2 Great Battles, Condorsoaring ( specifically for gliders which are the only type I fly IRL ) and very niche sims like PSX which I ended up using again since there is now a great project that allows me to use it with MFS for the visuals, and in that respect, nothing beats MFS IMO.

But who knows? They said it's a 10 yr project, and they even have Petrovich working in the ASOBO FM Team, so... maybe the future can bring good surprises...

Edited January 16, 2023 by cagarini

[GSalden 4,673]

5 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Yup exactly my questions too! ... Slewing the aircraft and just using MSFS as a visual viewport is about the only way an aircraft can be completely independent of MSFS's flight dynamics platform I believe, but then yes as you say it loses the tight coupling to the weather/atmospheric-airflow/etc within MSFS. Maybe @GSalden can chime in here since I believe he has a system setup where P3D (or other) "backends" control the aircraft flight and MSFS is used essentially just as a visuals provider via simconnect/simvars? How does this setup work with MSFS weather etc?

I'm still inclined to believe A2A is not doing anything anything radically different than PMDG or Fenix, just that their accu-sim framework sits in the middle between all their aircraft implementations and the MSFS aerodynamics framework... so yes, there is still bound to be a flight_model.cfg but with a lot of heavy customizations and hooks into their accu-sim layer. Unless A2A provides a complete flightsim backend in their accu-sim where it's running externally as a separate program(s) outside of MSFS, I just don't see how else their flight model can be "external".
 

Here I am using MSFS only. A friend of mine had P3D on a pc without external view + MSFS on a view pc’s using WidevieW.

Myself I am using WidevieW too but every pc has a seperate copy of MSFS.

[lwt1971 7,420]

28 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Here I am using MSFS only. A friend of mine had P3D on a pc without external view + MSFS on a view pc’s using WidevieW.

Myself I am using WidevieW too but every pc has a seperate copy of MSFS.

Ok thanks Gerard, do you know then for your friend's setup if the weather and its interaction with the aircraft is all on the P3D side? Assuming it is just using MSFS as a viewport to slew the aircraft around?
 

[GSalden 4,673]

8 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Ok thanks Gerard, do you know then for your friend's setup if the weather and its interaction with the aircraft is all on the P3D side? Assuming it is just using MSFS as a viewport to slew the aircraft around?
 

He was using Live weather on the MSFS client. He also had ASP3D installed so had weather on the ND on his P3D server and weather influences on the plane…

Edited January 17, 2023 by GSalden

[abrams_tank 7,426]

A2A is in beta with the Comanche, right? If things go well in beta, it may be released within the next 3 months.

[lwt1971 7,420]

7 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

A2A is in beta with the Comanche, right? If things go well in beta, it may be released within the next 3 months.

They seem quite close to beta, with a candidate beta build in hand.. latest from https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=73656&start=225, seems unusual to get this amount of updates from a usually quiet developer like A2A, I'll gladly take it of course :)

- We are days from beta. There is a crazy amount of stuff for these guys to chew on. My hope is it doesn't get bogged down, which is always the risk load testing new tech (a lot of large new independent systems). Not just flight physics but the internal engine has been completely made new and at high resolution. The engine is infinite in what it can do, it's literally a collection of real parts twirling, rubbing, sparks, air, fuel, combustion, oil, pressures, etc. It's a miracle it all works like it does. Testing and breaking things over and over again is never comfortable, it always feels like I'm hurting something valuable (like a $45,000 engine).
The sound system is even more intertwined with the physical airplane. 975 sound recordings as of today inside the Comanche 250 library. I was at the hangar today recording the sound the oil door makes when operating it and talking to a friend saying "you have any idea how many sounds an aircraft can make?"
The team is hyper focused. I feel like I am working with the Avengers.
Scott

- Since day one we've always taken pride in not just doing proper 3d art, physics, features, etc., but doing them with the utmost efficiency. The new code is so streamlined, it is actually smaller in size to the old. We were able to remove so many Accu-Sim->FSX/P3D cooperative dependencies now that it's 100% independent. The older hybrid approach code was far more costly than just running it straight, and even that system had low overhead. In Accu-Sim v2.0, forces are instant, frame by frame. This can be seen in response and shakes. The flight modeling is fluid with consistent smooth output. It's amazing what can be accomplished when you are writing all the code, as you can see it all happening. It's only the code you don't have access to that creates hurdles that require sometimes funky, creative solutions to get around.

- Actually it's never really "done" with us. Accusim v2.0 is a living breathing program. It's improved every day we discover something that needs tweaking or adding to it.
So when someone buys the Comanche, they are purchasing much more than just the aircraft. They are in effect "joining the Accusim train". They will see constant improvement in Accusim for as long as they remain an A2A customer. The members of our "Accusim Family" are not even restricted to a single aircraft when it comes to the benefit of Accusim. As Accusim improves, is corrected, and added to, and people add A2A airplanes to their fleet, these planes as well will see Accusim as it is improved, corrected, and added to.
Our A2A community should view the Comanche as the "door" through which they enter to get on the "Accusim Train".
As long as an A2A pilot chooses to remain in our family they will see every improvement we make within Accusim regardless of whether they own one A2A aircraft or a dozen A2A aircraft.
And THAT my friends is the beauty of Accusim !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dudley Henriques

- BTW, as of today the Comanche 250 sound library is up to 1021 sounds.
Scott.

- One of the primary reasons for taking so much time to develop Accu-Sim 2.0 was to be rid of as much of the mindless, many times insanely repetitive laborious tasks in developing an aircraft for flight simulation. We see promising things on that front for sure but won't know until the next aircraft is developed and we see the results. When we evolve and things get easier, it's human nature to find other things to work on. So projects have a tendency to become the same length in the end. But we will see.
Regardless, the quality of life developing, for flight physics anyway, is significantly improved with the new tech.
BTW we've been testing a beta candidate all day and so far, so good. Just a bunch of small easy bugs to fix. This will change once beta starts however as our internal testers are professional attack dogs. Up to 1040 sounds and still rising.
Scott

 

[lwt1971 7,420]

Latest from A2A and how beta testing is going, from this thread: https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=74087&start=75

Lewis: "Yup Scott's been getting ready for his introduction on video to the new MSFS crowd who have never heard the words "Hi, I'm Scott Gentile from A2A Simulations "

Dudley:
"Relax folks, it's all there........and much MUCH more. I can't speak to the center windshield strut except to say that I haven't seen that mod as yet. There are a LOT of new innovative things available on the tablet.
Right now the team is hard at work dealing with getting the flight model just right in all ranges of the envelope.
We have new builds emerging each week. Because the Comanche will be our breakout product into Microsoft Flight Simulator we want it to be as accurate as possible. This is a time consuming process I admit but it's coming along with each build just a bit closer to what we want.
My personal opinion is that when the Comanche is released it will set a totally new standard for the entire industry.
D Henriques"

"As I deal mainly with the flight model, much of what I relate to all of you when I post here on the forum is based on my personal observance on how hard the team is working and on my almost daily phone conservations with Scott. I have seen first hand how difficult some things have been for the team to integrate into the Comanche as much of what they are doing (and accomplishing if I might add) is new and ground breaking as I have said.
What I see is a team effort dedicated to "getting it right" as opposed to "getting it out".
You can rest assured that whatever I post here for you in the way of an update is not in any way
"a whisker off the standard marketing line" )))))))))))
DH"
 

[jarmstro 2,404]

An odd choice of plane. I can't say that I'm much interested in an old relic from the 1950's.

[sd_flyer 6,049]

16 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

An odd choice of plane. I can't say that I'm much interested in an old relic from the 1950's.

You should look from different perspective! it's not a question "what" but "how"! There are plenty puppy mill airplane factories that do all kind of  airplanes with no character - plane mediocre facelift . They can be mistreated without consequences, flown in reckless manner without tear and wear and etc. I mean what fun in that? 

A2A is different beast. Even if I don't necessarily crave for that particular airplane, the whole mechanic underneath  makes it feel alive, so there is a  magic!

P.S. I was fortunate enough logged some hours in Comanche back in days. So I'm looking forward to relive the feeling!

[Mace 1,929]

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

An odd choice of plane. I can't say that I'm much interested in an old relic from the 1950's.

Not odd for them.  Scott Gentile owns a Comanche 250. 

I don't really like the Comanche either, but A2A is the best of the best, and if they modelled some junky old 1930's Pou-du-Ciel (aka flying flea) -- if A2A did it, I would still want to fly it.

[lwt1971 7,420]

Proof will be in the pudding of course, but from all what it looks like, and given A2A's reputation, this might be the standard-bearing highest fidelity GA bird in MSFS. And they will be able to churn out future aircraft even faster now that they have their accu-sim platform rebuilt from ground-up for MSFS.
 

[Matchstick 1,886]

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

An odd choice of plane. I can't say that I'm much interested in an old relic from the 1950's.

It's a plane A2A know very well and one that's been extremely popular in previous generations of Accusim.

Sounds to me like a very sensible place for A2A to start in MSFS,

[Ricardo41 5,955]

Dudley, who?

[yankeegolf3 51]

1 hour ago, Ricardo41 said:

Dudley, who?

http://www.migman.com/article/henriques-dudley/bio.php

He must know something in aviation...

[lwt1971 7,420]

16 minutes ago, yankeegolf3 said:

http://www.migman.com/article/henriques-dudley/bio.php

He must know something in aviation...

Yup, here's A2A announcement from 2013 when he joined their team: https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35599