2 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Thank you for confirming that the Edge 540 is unable to lift off in 83kts headwind on its own. 

 

 

 

Not wanting to hijack that thread. But didn't he just confimed it worked?

Edited February 23, 20251 yr by Franz007

20 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Not wanting to hijack that thread. But didn't he just confimed it worked?

Hello Franz, much welcome.

The key words: on it's own 

It is sitting there for good 20 seconds on idle engine.

Then he adds power, and that is the missing ingredient needed to get a measly 850kg plane airborne in a category 2 Hurricane? (Which are accompanied by widespread damage to infrastructure/properties according to the Beaufort scale)

14 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

 However - nobody knows, at least nobody here in the forum. As the cfg-files are encrypted (another 'improvement' in 2024, that not only I am ‘happy’ about) we can't even verify what was changed and how.

 

No, this was fixed back in December for all planes in the Standard Version of MSFS 2024.  You can access the CFG files just fine if you use Developer Mode --> Tools --> Virtual File System, and then you execute the Powershell command at the very bottom of the Virtual File System Windows:

 

I can access the CFG files for the Cessna 172 G1000 just fine:

The planes for the Standard Version of MSFS 2024 are no longer encrypted.

Ok, guys, this is getting too stupid for me, I've wasted enough time on this. The following observations are made: it started with ‘Why MSFS 2024 has the best ground physics for a flight sim’

1. A video was shown in which a Cub rumbles against a boulder so that it should have ripped the wheel off.
2. Then I showed that the braking distance is completely independent of whether the runway is dry, wet or snowy.
3. In MSFS 2020 - almost - all aircraft (except the C172) were completely unimpressed by (attention!!!) INCREASING crosswinds on the ground, up to hurricane speed. This has not changed in MSFS 2024.
4. The default Hawk Arrow is not only unimpressed by crosswinds, it even starts moving: forwards!!! However, physics doesn't work like that on Earth, perhaps on another planet. At least it turns slowly into the wind as it rolls forwards until the headwind component takes effect and it is tossed around. IIRC this was also the case in MSFS 2020 for one or two other planes (although I don't remember from top of my head which ones).
5. The default A300 (allegedly?) with the new ground physics is also unimpressed by crosswinds until it slowly turns into the wind at around 60 kts airspeed.

So, that's called 'the best ground physics for a flight sim'.

I will now turn my attention to other things.

 

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

No, this was fixed back in December for all planes in the Standard Version of MSFS 2024.  You can access the CFG files just fine if you use Developer Mode --> Tools --> Virtual File System, and then you execute the Powershell command at the very bottom of the Virtual File System Windows:

 

I can access the CFG files for the Cessna 172 G1000 just fine:

The planes for the Standard Version of MSFS 2024 are no longer encrypted.

Ok, so I learned something from this thread 😄, thanks for that ...

14 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

So, that's called 'the best ground physics for a flight sim

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing here but surely crosswind behaviour is air physics not ground physics? Obviously wind SHOULD affect an aircraft both in the air and on the ground. I BELIEVE there has been reported issues with the wind not taking effect until after takeoff in 2020 and have noticed weird behaviour close to touch down and near takeoff in that sim. Maybe it's speed not altitude related? 

But.. Ground physics is just to do with mass /inertia /thrust /tire modeling etc. Crash physics are not implemented so I wouldn't expect planes to move around like they would in a rally sim. 

Still on the fence here all I know is that in 2020 ground handling is NOWHERE near as good as in the other sims I use. Not qualified to talk 2024 as I don't own it. 

2 hours ago, sloppysmusic said:

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing here but surely crosswind behaviour is air physics not ground physics? Obviously wind SHOULD affect an aircraft both in the air and on the ground. I BELIEVE there has been reported issues with the wind not taking effect until after takeoff in 2020 and have noticed weird behaviour close to touch down and near takeoff in that sim. Maybe it's speed not altitude related? 

But.. Ground physics is just to do with mass /inertia /thrust /tire modeling etc. Crash physics are not implemented so I wouldn't expect planes to move around like they would in a rally sim. 

Still on the fence here all I know is that in 2020 ground handling is NOWHERE near as good as in the other sims I use. Not qualified to talk 2024 as I don't own it. 

So, I was one of the guys who demonstrated the shortcomings of MSFS 2020 (in regard to ground physics) with videos in fall 2023 and was insulted here heavily because it cannot be what must not be. Nowadays that knowledge is 'common sense'. Now, with demonstrating the same shortcomings in 2024 the reactions are the same. Insults.
But now I'm out on this topic as I wrote above, I will turn my attention to other things.

(Hopefully 😉) last edit: in regards of 'listen and read what RW pilots have to say and write' -> see the following thread.

 

Edited February 24, 20251 yr by flying_carpet

3 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

this is getting too stupid for me, I've wasted enough time on this.

Oh the irony with the first part of that sentence :) ... you keep "wasting" time in your desperate attempts to keep attempting (and falling flat on your face) to denigrate a sim you think is inferior to your pet sim, yet it somehow continues to live rent-free in yours and your cohorts' heads 🤣
 

Quote

The default A300 (allegedly?) with the new ground physics is also unimpressed by crosswinds  ...

There is no default A300, incorrect as usual. The payware iniBuilds A300 (2024 version) was being spoken about earlier, which has been confirmed by iniBuilds to have the new ground handlingg capabilities added to its FM.

And as usual per your and your cohorts' MO, when actual evidence and logic is presented that counters your narratives, you sidestep the discussion and are unable to answer (i.e. SAS443's posts above showing XP behaviour in similar conditions).

Nobody here takes you seriously but here you still are, trying your darndest, perhaps due to your usual haunts being quiet and void of activity per usual. It's both comical and cringe at the same time 🙂 
 

1 hour ago, flying_carpet said:

So, I was one of the guys who demonstrated the shortcomings of MSFS 2020 (in regard to ground physics) with videos in fall 2023 and was insulted here heavily

Here, so everyone else who cares enough to read

Don't attempt to gaslight people here into thinking you actually try to do any of this stuff in good faith or reproducible tests this time or the previous time you tried to do so. Hell even in your last thread, people weren't able to recreate your videos 🤔.

I can also see a repeated pattern in the last thread where you conveniently ignore anyone who is critical of you.

We were then told we shouldn't call obvious trolls, trolls, under the guise of "different opinion" despite multiple times you've demonstrated you have no intention of critically assessing the product. I'd even argue you're purposely altering the flight_model.cfg as your tests aren't reproducible

 

1 hour ago, flying_carpet said:

But now I'm out on this topic as I wrote above,

Is it because you've ran out of people to ignore? 

As if several pilots, developers, excerpts, SDKs etc. wasn't enough to counter your points, you'll just ignore that too. I guess I'll wait another 3 months for another one of your grandiose tests

 

42 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

There is no default A300, incorrect as usual.

Typo. I meant the default A330.

2 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

So, I was one of the guys who demonstrated the shortcomings of MSFS 2020 (in regard to ground physics) with videos in fall 2023 and was insulted here heavily because it cannot be what must not be. Nowadays that knowledge is 'common sense'. Now, with demonstrating the same shortcomings in 2024 the reactions are the same. Insults.
But now I'm out on this topic as I wrote above, I will turn my attention to other things.

LOL, are you trying to make yourself the victim here? 🤣

You got so triggered by this thread that a few days later, you had to make another thread here in the MSFS forum that repeated the title of this thread but changed "has" to "hasn't" (and then Matt Nischan from Working Title had to correct you and tell you that MSFS 2024 is capable of simulating what you were attempting to do in that thread with the iniBuilds A320, but that developers need to add and tune the parameters in their planes before MSFS 2024 will simulate it).

If that weren't enough, a few days later, you had to make a similar thread on the XP forum with a similar title: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/664529-why-xp12-has-the-best-ground-physics-for-a-flight-sim/

I don't think you are a victim here 🤣.

Edited February 24, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

17 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Hello Franz, much welcome.

The key words: on it's own 

It is sitting there for good 20 seconds on idle engine.

Then he adds power, and that is the missing ingredient needed to get a measly 850kg plane airborne in a category 2 Hurricane? (Which are accompanied by widespread damage to infrastructure/properties according to the Beaufort scale)

Thanks. Got it. That's an interesting case. I think this is pretty much the behaviour we would see in real.  While the stall speed tells us when lift becomes insufficient, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the aircraft can take off just because it’s achieving speeds above this in relation to the air around it. Thrust is needed to not just achieve but sustain motion and counteract drag forces. Without engine power, the aircraft won't have the thrust necessary to reach and maintain the speed for takeoff.

My guess is that with slightly higher winds it will work even without propellers running. Have you tested?

4 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

the reactions are the same. Insults.

Please stop! No one insulted you. There were only people strongly disagreeing with you, with very valid arguments, which you chose to ignore every single time because it doesn't suit your agenda.

4 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

But now I'm out on this topic

Great! Don't come back now.

@flying_carpet,

my beloved father, born in 1928, was during his life a "good dish" as we say in Porta Land (direct translation, denoting someone who likes to eat, specially good food).

As a small child he loved bread with (lots) of butter, and didn't loose any chance to ask for more, even after having eaten already a few slices... My grandfather once told him - Hey! José ! That thing you're putting in your bread s  h itt !!!!

In a blink of the eyes my father turned to him and said: "please, then give me some more bread with s h itt!..."

Let us enjoy our s h itt,  c'mon, I know you're worried about it's effects in our health because you care for us, but in as far as I'm concerned I LOVE this s h itt tittled FS 2024, as much as that Xp12 s h itt ... I love bread with both !!! Please don't ruin my pleasure!

Edited February 24, 20251 yr by jcomm

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

@flying_carpet,

my beloved father, born in 1928, was during his life a "good dish" as we say in Porta Land (direct translation, denoting someone who likes to eat, specially good food).

As a small child he loved bread with (lots) of butter, and didn't loose any chance to ask for more, even after having eaten already a few slices... My grandfather once told him - Hey! José ! That thing you're putting in your bread s  h itt !!!!

In a blink of the eyes my father turned to him and said: "please, then give me some more bread with s h itt!..."

Let us enjoy our s h itt,  c'mon, I know you're worried about it's effects in our health because you care for us, but in as far as I'm concerned I LOVE this s h itt tittled FS 2024, as much as that Xp12 s h itt ... I love bread with both !!! Please don't ruin my pleasure!

Great story - sounds like your dad had a quick wit 🙂

And speaking of "Butter" and this long string of posts...it brings to mind Yooks and Zooks from one of the books by Dr Seuss:

"The primary dispute between the two cultures is that the Yooks eat their bread with the butter-side up, while the Zooks eat their bread with the butter-side down."

The story is a parable on the (old) Cold War, of which we seem to have a mini-version in the Land of Flight Simulators. 😆

12 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

Ok, guys, this is getting too stupid for me, I've wasted enough time on this. The following observations are made: it started with ‘Why MSFS 2024 has the best ground physics for a flight sim’

1. A video was shown in which a Cub rumbles against a boulder so that it should have ripped the wheel off

No comment on that one other than I don't think MSFS 2024 allows for that type of damage.

12 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

2. Then I showed that the braking distance is completely independent of whether the runway is dry, wet or snowy.

There are several issues here:

1) MSFS does not have the correct braking coefficients (at least not what is used for transport category airplanes) for these surface conditions.

2) What you see visually in the sim for the surface condition may not be the same as what is used for the flight physics (that is, you may see a snowy surface, but a dry surface may be what is being used for the physics model. You need to look at the surface condition simvar to see what is being used for physics.

3) It can be difficult to get other than a dry surface condition for the physics model even with custom weather and even much more difficult when using real weather.

12 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

3.  In MSFS 2020 - almost - all aircraft (except the C172) were completely unimpressed by (attention!!!) INCREASING crosswinds on the ground, up to hurricane speed. This has not changed in MSFS 2024.

This has been discussed pretty extensively. As with FSX, crosswinds were completely zeroed out up to a certain airplane speed on the ground in the original version of MSFS 2020. This was changed in SU10 to allow the developer to specify the speeds at which the crosswind starts to phase in and the speed at which 100% of the crosswind is applied. The developer could also tune the lateral motion of the airplane on the runway at higher speeds during takeoff. With SU15, a new ground contact model was introduced with further inputs available to the developer for tuning both longitudinal and lateral friction. With both SU10 and SU15, these new capabilities are not applied at all unless the developer sets these parameters. For MSFS 2024, both of these changes from the original version of MSFS 2020 remain in place along with some additional physics changes "under the hood" that are not yet well understood/explained.

13 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

4.  The default Hawk Arrow is not only unimpressed by crosswinds, it even starts moving: forwards!!! However, physics doesn't work like that on Earth, perhaps on another planet. At least it turns slowly into the wind as it rolls forwards until the headwind component takes effect and it is tossed around. IIRC this was also the case in MSFS 2020 for one or two other planes (although I don't remember from top of my head which ones).

See above. I don't know what was used in the flight model of this airplane for that behavior.

13 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

5. The default A300 (allegedly?) with the new ground physics is also unimpressed by crosswinds until it slowly turns into the wind at around 60 kts airspeed.

For the standard A330 (accepting your typo in reference to the airplane you were talking about), although it ostensibly uses the new parameters available since MSFS SU10 and also includes activation of some portions of the new ground contact model of MSFS SU 15, they have chosen to phase in the crosswinds very slowly from 0 crosswind at 0 knots airplane IAS to all of the crosswind at 207 knots airplane IAS. The new ground contact model for longitudinal and lateral friction are basically disabled as well.