2 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

maybe the improved ground physics are irrelevant to you because you spend more time at 35,000ft?

What goes up....

4 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

Not if you only fly airliners. 

That is just as silly as suggesting cat turbulence is not valid if you only fly bush planes.

Edited February 10, 20251 yr by MrBitstFlyer

59 minutes ago, kiek said:

No not for airliners, please read my post carefully.

We did, but MSFS2024 is not marketed as an airliner simulator.

4 hours ago, CFIJose said:

GA counts just as much as Airliners.

Common :

- they can’t fly at the sane speed

- they can’t fly at the cruising altitude 

- they rock around with much turbulence

- most don’t have a toilet 

- most make sounds like buzzing flies

- if you have to sit next to your chatting wife you can’t go for a walk in the cabin

😎

21 minutes ago, GSalden said:

- they can’t fly at the sane speed

When GA can't fly as fast as airliner, this must be an airliner:

Oh, no, it does not even fly at the sane speed, it even flies at insane speed! 🙂 So maybe it is GA nevertheless (thruth is, it is GA).

52 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Common :

- they can’t fly at the sane speed

- they can’t fly at the cruising altitude 

- they rock around with much turbulence

- most don’t have a toilet 

- most make sounds like buzzing flies

- if you have to sit next to your chatting wife you can’t go for a walk in the cabin

😎

I know of no one who has ever got their private pilot certificate in an airliner. 😀

2 hours ago, fsiscool said:

When GA can't fly as fast as airliner, this must be an airliner:

Oh, no, it does not even fly at the sane speed, it even flies at insane speed! 🙂 So maybe it is GA nevertheless (thruth is, it is GA).

Yea that one makes me smile sometimes too, I mean there are 747s flying as GA

but the one that actually irritates me is when people say "the Fenix" or "the PMDG"

I have a Fenix Torch (flashlight) it looks nothing like an A320😁

4 hours ago, fsiscool said:

When GA can't fly as fast as airliner, this must be an airliner:

Oh, no, it does not even fly at the sane speed, it even flies at insane speed! 🙂 So maybe it is GA nevertheless (thruth is, it is GA).

Completely untrue it is nowhere close to a G.A. airplane. Not saying G.A. planes are not fun in any way or maybe I did not get your joke.

Edited February 10, 20251 yr by JBDB-MD80

1 hour ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Completely untrue it is nowhere close to a G.A. airplane. Not saying G.A. planes are not fun in any way or maybe I did not get your joke.

I think the point was that since this Phantom is not operated by the military (it is owned by the Collings Foundation), it is operated under Part 91 and hence a general aviation operation (it's clearly not Part 121 oder Part 135).

Of course, this isn't what you typically think of as "GA", but technically, yes, it is GA.

Edited February 10, 20251 yr by martinboehme

13 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Completely untrue ................. joke.

Jokes are always untrue to some extent. As they are true to some extent.

Regarding this GA, we can say that airliners fly slow and low in comparison.

17 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Completely untrue it is nowhere close to a G.A. airplane. Not saying G.A. planes are not fun in any way or maybe I did not get your joke.

Nah, its not a joke, you just don't understand what GA means

On 2/10/2025 at 4:52 AM, kiek said:

Indeed, but totally irrelevant if you fly airliners ...  I had hoped MS to pay more attention to things that really matter for a Flight Sim.

Absolutely agree.

On a side note I don't get it with all these threads started putting forth one persons opinion that it is the worst or best at this or that! The YouTubers just want clicks to generate revenue so most are pointless. Almost everyone of the posts that start out like this are highly suspect as the people telling us something is the worst or the best are only putting forth there opinions which don't assist anyone coming to Avsim to learn and discuss relevant concerns about the game.

 

On 2/10/2025 at 11:40 AM, abrams_tank said:

So I am very impressed with the new ground physics in MSFS 2024. 

[snip]

But if the rock meets a certain minimum size, it will impact the plane's tires as the plane rolls over the rock:

Now MSFS 2024 also handles the events of slopes, and it also handles iced/slippery terrain as well.  But I am extremely impresses at how all the procedurally generated rocks across the world can affect the plane's balance if it rolls over it.

I would rather call it 'I am extremely impressed how resistent the planes in MSFS 2024 are'. If you slow down the video to 0.25x (possible in youtube) and look close enough, the tire is 'cutting' through the rock like a hot knife through butter, as we say in German. From my perspective, the plane or the suspension should break - or at least the tire should be blown when touching an obstacle this hard.

Edited February 11, 20251 yr by flying_carpet

On 2/10/2025 at 9:35 PM, lwt1971 said:

The new ground handling physics obviously also benefits heavy aircraft (as seen in the 2024 versions of the ini A300, the default 330, Fenix, etc). The biggest change is that wheels are no longer modelled as single points but actual 3D objects with 3D tire characteristics, tire flex, and other factors.

While the actual effects of 3D rocks/objects on the surface won't impact a big aircraft like they would a small aircraft (and not of real use to airliner simmers since they're almost always landing on normal runways 🙂), the core ground handling physics goes hand in hand with Asobo's visual/3D detail increase of the terrain. Not only does the ground look good/detailed, but it's an integral part of the ground handling physics for aircraft where the finely modelled 3D ground mesh and 3D objects on them interact with the 3D tires of the aircraft in natural ways, and all the frictions/collisions/skidding/wheel-slowdown/etc happen as a natural occurrence of modelling everything at the 4000x detailed level, without needing to have separate handling in code for different runway surfaces types and conditions, as done traditionally in sims.

Seb explains it all here at this point in an earlier interview: 

The fact that they increased the details in the virtual environment by 4000x is amazing, and it has led to such improved ground physics for MSFS 2024.  The terrain generated in MSFS 2024 is "real" terrain now with the procecurally placed rocks able to impact the plane, not "fake" terrain like past flight simulators.

I only just looked at the Video.

Is that rock shaped like a ramp at the face presented to the tyre?, if its actually sguare edged then hitting a 2 foot high square looking boulder  should have either broke the leg off or at the very least caused a large swing to the aircraft's left and likely a nose over, prop strike etc.

Which would be partly a lack of damage model, but also a result of a far from realistic ground behaviour model that let the wheel ride over

If it is actually a gradual ramp then just a swing probably recoverable would result, no swing seems to happen but maybe the pilot intervened in a timely and precise manner.

Only AT knows the answer to the questions of rock shape and pilot intervention, perhaps he could answer?