1st video, using the XP12 demo:

Let's try X-PLANE 12 - A first impression | Real Airline Pilot - YouTube

He will record a comparison one later...

Ahh yes. Pulling the power over the numbers and the seat falls through the floor. None of that floaty float stuff. Doing that in VR tickles the stomach every time, as it does IRL.

2 hours ago, blingthinger said:

Pulling the power over the numbers and the seat falls through the floor. None of that floaty float stuff.

Well, our 172S usually settles a good 250meters down the runway if you cut power over the threshold at Vapp (so rather easy to hit the aiming point markers if set-up properly). So I'm expecting a sim to have some of that floaty float stuff, actually.
737NG pilot has virtually the same RPMs as I do on a real approach (around 1.500). But plane behaves very differently.
 

Edited July 14, 20232 yr by SAS443

29 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

So I'm expecting a sim to have some of that floaty float stuff, actually.

Very interesting. Does yours do that at any weight/balance config? With 2 full front seats at 60/65 kias, the one I've been in just drops. Doesn't need to be full fuel either. Is the 172 known to have a range of behaviors like this?

8 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

Very interesting. Does yours do that at any weight/balance config? With 2 full front seats at 60/65 kias, the one I've been in just drops. Doesn't need to be full fuel either. Is the 172 known to have a range of behaviors like this?

This is with both front seats occupied. Fuel at roughly 55%-60% capacity.

It does not sink like a brick as you retard power (pardon the portrait mode, my pax is of TikTok-generation. That's how they shoot)

https://youtube.com/shorts/tjPhc3eGsJw?feature=share3

C172S 180hp variant

16 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

This is with both front seats occupied. Fuel at roughly 55%-60% capacity.

It does not sink like a brick as you retard power (pardon the portrait mode, my pax is of TikTok-generation. That's how they shoot)

https://youtube.com/shorts/tjPhc3eGsJw?feature=share3

C172S 180hp variant

Curious that it's so different. Hp wouldn't change anything given it's a power-off situation. Landscape mode would have maybe opened up a view of your speed as well... bless their hearts.

Edited July 14, 20232 yr by blingthinger

5 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

Curious that it's so different

Are you speaking from experience as Pilot in command or passenger?

Because frankly, this is how the PA28 behaves as well (add slightly more float due to more pronounced ground effect)

16 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

Are you speaking from experience as Pilot in command or passenger?

Because frankly, this is how the PA28 behaves as well (add slightly more float due to more pronounced ground effect)

Ahh, the hot air of internet "street cred" ;) Both, on those flights.

PA28 is understandable given it's low wing, so hardly a fair detailed comparison. Are you sure you weren't coming in a handful of knots hotter than 60? I can also see the videographer loses the g-force battle and hand elevation wrt the dash drops a bit, implying there was a good yoke pull to arrest a descent. Not exactly floating, but agreed that it's not the drop like XP12 does at 60 knots in the OP YT video.

Edited July 14, 20232 yr by blingthinger

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

This is with both front seats occupied. Fuel at roughly 55%-60% capacity.

It does not sink like a brick as you retard power (pardon the portrait mode, my pax is of TikTok-generation. That's how they shoot)

https://youtube.com/shorts/tjPhc3eGsJw?feature=share3

C172S 180hp variant

Actually this clip (and every other RW C172 landing clip) highly reminds me of two addons: Airfoillabs C172NG and A2A C172. With both I felt this floating and had to be REALLY careful to bleed off the speed asap to avoid longer floating by any means. It's somewhat similar in MSFS, but as someone who struggle big time to like the actual physics and feel of flying in that sim, I can't say for sure that I thought "well, this was realistic".
As I'm not a real pilot and never flew C172 or any type of plane in RW, I can't really vouch which addon behaves in the most realistic way during the flare, throttle cut or full throttle. I only know that A2A C172 is still most difficult addon to land properly as it's super sensitive on elevator even at 60kts, so you must bleed of the speed quickly to avoid any ballooning. And yes, Saitek or Honeycomb yokes short elevator axis travel doesn't help, at all. 🙂

I would appreciate if any RW pilots can elaborate more on this topic - which addons do it the best flying wise. Although, control sensitivity will change things a lot. 

My RL experience comes from gliders only. 

I never landed a powered aircraft, but I believe the technique, for typical GA, is pretty much the same, although I confess that after more than 42 yrs flying gliders, landing is still a "mystery" for me because it happens pretty much naturally, unless I arrive high to a short field and / or experience veering or backing winds or turbulence.

The only situation under which I "feel the ground effect" on the gliders I fly / flew is when I retract the spoilers to run over the runway to reach the opposite threshold (for ground operations optimization).

In X-Plane there are aircraft where the flare and touchdown happen smoothly, but not many. Starting XP11 a new effect fine tunned by Austin and explained by himself in a few of his videos results in the aircraft wanting to "smash" into the ground as you get closer to it already in ground effect. It's a strange feel I must say...

I am sure that in terms of detail the ground effect physics are richer in X-Plane compared to either FSX/P3D or MFS. It's also ttrue that in MFS most aircraft tend to float like mad, and although I never flew any of those I vly in a sim, it looks too pronounced... 

I'd say MFS and XP12 are each in opposite extremes of the landing physics modelling of ground effect. 

I don't recall exactly how it felt in Aerofly FS2, and surely got even better in v4, but I get the idea that it was more like it. And OFC the combat flightsims, DCS and IL2, did it even more plausibly, according to my beliefs...

Meanwhile 737NG released a flight dynamics comparison video in his channel, but it's only for paying subscribers 😕

Edited July 15, 20232 yr by jcomm

8 hours ago, blingthinger said:

Ahh, the hot air of internet "street cred" ;) Both, on those flights.

Which variant of C172 did you get checked out on? Are you aware that early C172 models and the latest C172S have different max flap settings, the latter is limited to F30, as opposed to F40 on the early models.

But again, the 172S model does not sink like a brick on a normal approach, it's quite a gentle nose drop, I have more videos (unpublished) if you don't believe it.

7 hours ago, Pe11e said:

I would appreciate if any RW pilots can elaborate more on this topic - which addons do it the best flying wise. Although, control sensitivity will change things a lot. 

ground effect, particularly in helicopters, but also generally aiui was broken from when they got the windspeed getting close to the ground correct up to fairly recently.

imho, it was caused by the ground effect being to weak to counter the wind speed being to high, then when the windspeed reduced closer to the ground the ground effect was not also increased to compensate.

last few flight tests Ive done over recent months have been bang on.

Seriously what I find the most concerning, is the amount of negative comments about XP. I am myself not 100% satisfied with XP yet but the extreme negative critics and even complete lies and mockery about XP in the YT-comments are something I would like to understand better. And we see the same 3-4 toxic trolls attacking everyone who like XP and spreading hate. tried to got they banned but wasn’t succesfull. I have no issue with persons prefering sim A over sim B but the toxicity is ruining the constructive exchanges. That’s extremely disappointing tbh 😞

Edited July 15, 20232 yr by Franz007

30 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Seriously what I find the most concerning, is the amount of negative comments about XP. I am myself not 100% satisfied with XP yet but the extreme negative critics and even complete lies and mockery about XP in the YT-comments are something I would like to understand better. And we see the same 3-4 toxic trolls attacking everyone who like XP and spreading hate. tried to got they banned but wasn’t succesfull. I have no issue with persons prefering sim A over sim B but the toxicity is ruining the constructive exchanges. That’s extremely disappointing tbh 😞

Rest assured, it's only a small minority who show insecurity.  There are a few of them in these forums.  

I'm surprised they would even take the time to keep posting anti XP comments in the first place.  If they were secure in their own decisions, they wouldn't even care what else is out there.

Obviously, they care.

Bottom line.  They simply want the competition to evaporate into nothingness.  Some even stoop so low, that they target Austin and his staff.

Follow-up video.

 

Edited July 15, 20232 yr by markk70