I am not sure what kind of magic Asobo has done to their CFD. But those tweaks along with the new ground physics (tire friction, contact points etc) are brilliant in some of the GA I am flying.

Minor adjustment to the sensitivity in pitch axis ( -10 here) and the behavior in normal flight envelope is very believeable. That coupled with the insane details on land/terrain is essentially delivering the pinnacle for low n slow GA flying, especially outfield operations.

The Turbulence is still too aggressive for GA, so IMHO that needs to be dialled back from "realistic " to "low".

Warts and all, I enjoy 2024 very much.

8 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

I am not sure what kind of magic Asobo has done to their CFD. But those tweaks along with the new ground physics (tire friction, contact points etc) are brilliant in some of the GA I am flying.

Minor adjustment to the sensitivity in pitch axis ( -10 here) and the behavior in normal flight envelope is very believeable. That coupled with the insane details on land/terrain is essentially delivering the pinnacle for low n slow GA flying, especially outfield operations.

The Turbulence is still too aggressive for GA, so IMHO that needs to be dialled back from "realistic " to "low".

Warts and all, I enjoy 2024 very much.

Great writeup! I remember you are a real life pilot.  If you don't mind me asking, which plane(s) do you fly in real life?

Edited December 1, 20241 yr by abrams_tank

47 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

If you don't mind me asking, which plane(s) do you fly in real life?

Right now DA40 for instrument rating and various Piper/cessna for VFR trips.

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

Right now DA40 for instrument rating and various Piper/cessna for VFR trips.

Thank you very much for your answer!

5 hours ago, SAS443 said:

I am not sure what kind of magic Asobo has done to their CFD. But those tweaks along with the new ground physics (tire friction, contact points etc) are brilliant in some of the GA I am flying.

Minor adjustment to the sensitivity in pitch axis ( -10 here) and the behavior in normal flight envelope is very believeable. That coupled with the insane details on land/terrain is essentially delivering the pinnacle for low n slow GA flying, especially outfield operations.

The Turbulence is still too aggressive for GA, so IMHO that needs to be dialled back from "realistic " to "low".

Warts and all, I enjoy 2024 very much.

Good to know and thanks.. interesting how for GA turbulence is there and maybe overdone, but for airliners most reports appear to be that turbulence is not enough, at least in dangerous weather/clouds. Hopefully they keep tweaking all the atmospheric CFD airflow systems to get it right over the course of 2024 updates to come.
 

From a real life pilot that flies Cessnas, Caravans, TBM, Cirrus, and Beechcraft:

Quote

Commercial pilot here. This isn’t the case anymore with FS 2024 in my opinion. FS2024 physics are finally better than X-Plane 12. Feels like an actual sim now. X-Plane 12 was good but there were some things slacking…try doing a soft field takeoff in X12 it just doesn’t work well. Stalling characteristics in X12 are just SO bad, but in FS2024 they’re so much better and are just like IRL.

I fly Cessnas, Caravans, TBM, Cirrus, Beechcraft all in real life and they’re pretty spot on.

 

In V1's stream today, like last time, some fans of a certain sim were trying to suggest that Asobo cheats crosswind landings by eliminating winds 20ft above the runway in 2024. He was able to prove categorically that this isn't the case in hilarious fashion lol.

 

A real life pilot who seems to have flown the Robin, 152, and 172 in real life:

Quote

I would absolutely have agreed with you in the first 6 months or so of FS2020 and for FSX or anything before that, but honestly now FS2024 has a really good flight model, it's probably the single aspect of the sim I've been most impressed with and I really do think it's now superior to XP in the majority of aspects.

I have flown quite a few of the aircraft included in the sim in real life, some very extensively, and the only one I've flown so far which I'd say is not very well modeled in the sim is the Extra, and admittedly the one I flew IRL was a slightly different variant to the 330 thats in the sim and it was a long time ago so its possible the one in the sim is better than I give it credit for. But that was the only one I thought just didn't quite feel right. Tailwheel dynamics in sims tend to be a weak area in general mind you and I think its hard to accurately model the control forces in a high performance aerobatic aeroplane because the stick is typically balanced so it doesn't self-centre like in most aeroplanes, which is something you can't really model without having a force feedback stick.

The Robin, 152 and 172 which are all likely what people would be training in have very good flight models in my opinion, even down to little details like how pronounced the yaw/roll coupling is if you roll to an angle of bank and let the stick go. I do think the default values for elevator and rudder sensitivity are still too much but it doesn't need turning down very much to feel very good.

Anyway I rambled on a bit there but basically FS2024 obviously currently has a large number of flaws, but the flight model isn't one of them.

 

The water physics are… okay.  I took the Caravan for a quick spin the other day, and despite there being a LOT wrong with the airplane itself, it handled on the water pretty decently.  It steers okay, idles along at about 5-6 knots which it should.  It jumps to the “step” but having it actually flow onto the step would probably be extremely difficult.   
 

I tried all this on calm water, so I didn’t try sailing it or rolling a float or anything like that.   I didn’t try step taxiing.  Landing is hard simply because the water is hard to see, so it’s like glassy water IRL.  
 

I haven’t tried docking it, but I did shut it down in reverse and the prop stayed on the pitch locks properly, which was nice to see.  Interesting they got that right when so much of the Caravan/PT6 is wrong.  
 

It’s not amazing, but it’s the best seaplane sim I’ve ever seen so far. 
 

2000 hours on floats IRL here. 

1 hour ago, ATRguy said:

......It jumps to the “step” but having it actually flow onto the step would probably be extremely difficult....

What exactly do you mean by "step"?

Edited December 3, 20241 yr by Christopher Low

Basically a takeoff run without taking off.

6 hours ago, ATRguy said:

The water physics are… okay.  I took the Caravan for a quick spin the other day, and despite there being a LOT wrong with the airplane itself, it handled on the water pretty decently.  It steers okay, idles along at about 5-6 knots which it should.  It jumps to the “step” but having it actually flow onto the step would probably be extremely difficult.   
.....
It’s not amazing, but it’s the best seaplane sim I’ve ever seen so far. 

2000 hours on floats IRL here. 

Thanks, good to hear more reports from the water physics front. As for better modelled default floatplane itself I wonder if the C172 with floats would do, are there payware floatplanes you recommend? Wanting to definitely try more float planes and bush flying with MSFS 2024.
 

5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

What exactly do you mean by "step"?

The step is the same as getting a boat on plane.  It’s when the float comes out of the water enough and is up on plane like a boat hull 

1 minute ago, lwt1971 said:

Thanks, good to hear more reports from the water physics front. As for better modelled default floatplane itself I wonder if the C172 with floats would do, are there payware floatplanes you recommend? Wanting to definitely try more float planes and bush flying with MSFS 2024.
 

Honestly? The Black Square Caravan will hopefully right a lot of the wrong with the Van.  
 

But right now, I got nothing.  The default Beaver might be good, but I haven’t flown it yet and I’m away for work for two weeks here. 

A real world pilot who flies the 152, PC-12, and more planes:

Quote

I can't speak for the guy above's experience but I do agree with him - have real world experience with many of the GA aircraft included in the sim (thousand hours+ in some cases) ranging from the 152 to the PC-12 and I do think the 2024 flight model is very good, maybe not better than XP12 in every single aspect, but better in the majority of aspects. Obviously the sim has a ton of other problems currently, but the flight model isn't one of them.

Can't speak for the airliners or modern military aircraft, but for GA for sure. My biggest problem with the actual flying is the turbulence which is not realistic, but the notes above suggest they may be working on that. In the meantime I just set it to low.

I believe this person is also a real life pilot. He/she was responding to cLHalfRhoVSquaredS above:

 

Quote

Didn't fly as many types as you did but i agree, the ones i flew feel really similar in 2024.

and this person also said:

Quote

I do. On the 172 and the DR400 2024 is spot on. Only thing missing is FFB but that's too expensive for me lol.

 

Edited December 5, 20241 yr by abrams_tank