40 minutes ago, Shug said:

Disappointing to see no new cities in 4 of the 5 biggest countries in the world (by population).

Population really has little to do with the existence of data, or with the availability of aircraft capable (with the right equipment) of gathering that data in that country. That without counting political challenges (China) and all that word not allowed. 

1 hour ago, Abriael said:

All the cities are new cities, green from bing and red from Vexcel. 

Which is great. Only sad part is that none of them seems to be Tokyo, which we really need. 

Yeah, I'd say it's confusing to say the least. I really wish Jörg had talked more about those maps (Dem and Sat Imagery included). But yeah, the map says new cities, I just thought there are too many dots, and if they are really all new, that's amazing.

30 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

Yeah, I'd say it's confusing to say the least. I really wish Jörg had talked more about those maps (Dem and Sat Imagery included). But yeah, the map says new cities, I just thought there are too many dots, and if they are really all new, that's amazing.

He really didn't. It was so fast that I actually missed it and now I'm kicking myself for not checking out Kyoto

 

2 hours ago, Lotharen said:

Do they cover everywhere or just Europe?

It covers any airport that airlines need, but in general coverage should be expected to be worse than Navigraph.

If no carrier has requested/requires that Podunk Regional Airport needs to be included, then it wont be available in Lido.

Hence, many smaller airports are absent in Lido (despite being capable of accommodating larger jets and has published IAP:s).

Also, since it is geared towards air carriers,  CAT A/B approach minimas are completely omitted.

 

Only a month to go right?

I'm getting excited for this release. I really like their enthusiasm for technical details hope they will have these follow up streams where Seb can go in way more depth into the physics and such.  

Finally got around to watching (most) of the presentation, lots of stand out subjects and trinkets of info missed by YouTube folk. Particularly interested in the VEXCEL data that they've acquired. Jorg mentions USA/Europe/Australia/Japan will get all this and then eventually much more of the World as that's how he envisages the Sim moving forward, herding sheep by aircraft as well not seen much mention of that!

Even though I still feel this is an evolution of MSFS2020, it's certainly jumped up leaps & bounds in certain areas, so much so I don't think we'll get a "MSFS28" as this isn't a Franchise like other Sports game franchises. If anything the base of what's here with MSFS24 can easily last into and beyond 2030 should they continue pumping out Updates (all areas) for the next few years, but anyway that's something not worth thinking about right now.

Excitement levels have been raised further, still with a degree of caution though as because it's such a massive undertaking with many new areas they're bound to screw something up and they still need to improve in certain areas, some much more so than others (discussed elsewhere).

Anyway release day can't come quick enough, so much to look forward too 🙂

I'm kind of disappointed by the wake turbulence demo. It's a little bit offset from what all my readings and CFi's taught me. "The wake starts when wings produce lift and ends at touchdown".

In the demo video started at :

https://youtu.be/fp4a3hPwP4s?si=H8GLjlYOd1VrgHK3&t=1159

... the wake turbulence visualisation (same wording as Sebastian) doesn't seems much different before and after the aircraft rotation.

 

 

Edited October 19, 20241 yr by vbazillio

@vbazillio Could that be down to "lost in translation" perhaps? There of course will be some sort of air turbulence generated by the engines at initial power up and then the plane running down the runway, then more so as the "wake starts" at lift. It seems Seb was referring to the whole sequence and just called it what he did, perhaps it's regarded differently in some countries? Just a thought.

The main thing for me is that it's there from engine power up, whether it's named correctly by Seb is semi-irrelevant but yes perhaps there should be more at rotation as you suggest. I love seeing it in action, something I wish car racing simulators did!

2 hours ago, vbazillio said:

... the wake turbulence visualisation (same wording as Sebastian) doesn't seems much different before and after the aircraft rotation.

 

He mentioned it actually; "first because of the engines and the faster we go it's because of the wing lift build up..."

5 minutes ago, bigifooti said:

He mentioned it actually; "first because of the engines and the faster we go it's because of the wing lift build up..."

Yes, and the size of the visualisation doesn't change much "when the lift build up"

2 hours ago, vbazillio said:

Yes, and the size of the visualisation doesn't change much "when the lift build up"

That's not what I saw. It clearly turns yellow/red the moment the aircraft lifts. It was green before.

1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

That's not what I saw. It clearly turns yellow/red the moment the aircraft lifts. It was green before.

That is a good point. I watched it again and saw that also.

8 hours ago, vbazillio said:

the wake turbulence visualisation

I would have thought wake turbulence would have been modelled a bit more like this:

 

Genuine question: how much effect does jet engine exhaust affect wake turbulence? I'm aware the vortices coming off of the wings are the big thing to worry about, but the Seb mentioned the early portion of turbulence being due to the engine thrust. I guess I'm just not sure how these two elements relate to each other when thinking about wake turbulence. 

12 hours ago, vbazillio said:

I'm kind of disappointed by the wake turbulence demo. It's a little bit offset from what all my readings and CFi's taught me. "The wake starts when wings produce lift and ends at touchdown".

In the demo video started at :

https://youtu.be/fp4a3hPwP4s?si=H8GLjlYOd1VrgHK3&t=1159

... the wake turbulence visualisation (same wording as Sebastian) doesn't seems much different before and after the aircraft rotation.

 

 

You’re right, they are wrong. Their modeling of wake turbulence completely makes void the reasons for separation on take off behind heavies.

 

nevertheless, I wonder how their way of modeling wake turbulence will really affect an airplane during takeoff roll.