25 minutes ago, jcomm said:

You can come with me !  We prcatlically never communicate in a glider 😜 or at least we try hard not to...

 

My glider instructor hardly talked. He carried a rolled up newspaper and hit you on the head when you tried to land in a 150 kts crosswind.

1 hour ago, sloppysmusic said:

grandma used to say if you can't say anything nice about a sim then don't say anything at all

Love it!

Would make for a pretty quiet Avsim though.

Guys, us usual, the usual suspects don't test/calculate themselves, they only repeat belief systems.

3 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

So this whole thread is based on a bug 🤣.  @flying_carpet, I hope you realize your thread is based on a bug 🤣

If you only would read and understand the whole thing (sorry to be this harsh again). jcomm wrote ...

 

3 hours ago, jcomm said:

1) I guess I've read somewhere at another thread, and I believe  that there's also a thread at the Official MSFS forums, where a bug is identified so that at or above 149 knot wind, MSFS's weather reverts wind speed to 0 knot ;

Wind bug preventing full Jetstream impact... - Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020/2024) - The AVSIM Community

so, the tests made by the OP are probably not valid. He should try with, say, a 75 knot wind (I see him using m/s instead..., which is about half the value in knot, so, much above the limit given that bug in MSFS that ASOBO is aware of and will surely fix in an upcoming patch).

It might be that there's a bug above 149 kts wind, BUT ... if you would calculate yourself: 75 m/s (I chose the 'hybrid' settings, not metric or imperial) is 145.788 kts. That's the maximun I can set in MSFS. I assume, they limited it to this value to NOT run into the (be it a) bug above 149 kts.

 

3 hours ago, jcomm said:

Other than that, and with aircraft models designed to take the best advantage of the new flight dynamics in FS 2024 compared to what is available in FS 2020, I honestly think MSFS does a very plausible job in simulating various aspects of ground physics, such as runway contamination (which btw is poorly, or at least not plausibly modelled in XP12), and reaction of the aircraft to wind on ground, including under x-wind conditions.

As I'm not allowed to post XP videos in this subforum (I was told by a mod to not do so), I'm trying it by a 'detour' - I hope it's ok, namely linking to some threads her on avsim: thread 1, thread 2.

However, I haven't tested braking on snowy/icy runway in MSFS 2024 yet.

 

High praise - someone has thought about it and understood what it's all about:

3 hours ago, LRBS said:

This example shows the aircraft's lack of dynamics and reaction to wind conditions. He chose that type of scenario. Whether it is a crosswind or not, it's a valid observation.

 

It's not nitpicking at all. If you noticed, he progressively increased the wind without a reaction from the airplanes (except from the C-172). They sat on the runway without any significant movement while the trees reacted correctly. I'm afraid you can't see the difference in reaction between the two, which is right and wrong.

 

Regarding the level D simulator, this type of event is not included in the curriculum.

 

You are most likely unaware of real events in which airplanes worldwide are relocated during severe winds, tornadoes, or typhoons, and those that remain face significant damage. 

I hope you're familiar with small GA airplanes being tossed around or turned upside down on ramps with less wind or airliners simply pushed into terminals.

 

You need to calm down and not react this way. This is not an example of bias or something that is unimportant to have correct dynamics, especially when you are unfamiliar with certain things/facts. 

 

What would you guys do in the following scenario? You own a (real) plane and a hurricane is announced. But ... as in MSFS (most) planes don't get tossed around at such a high crosswind, you don't have to worry because nothing will happen to your (real) plane 🤣.

 

22 minutes ago, flying_carpet said:

As I'm not allowed to post XP videos in this subforum (I was told by a mod to not do so), I'm trying it by a 'detour' - I hope it's ok, namely linking to some threads her on avsim: thread 1, thread 2.

However, I haven't tested braking on snowy/icy runway in MSFS 2024 yet.

As I wrote above, I have to test it myself, and will report here my findings.

I'll try to enable the Developer Mode diagnostics window to check how massaged the normal and axial components of the ground winds are. In FS 2020 ASOBO introduced a "trick" that made the normal component fade to zero m/s bellow a given threshold taxi speed (10 knot if I'm not wrong...). But apparently in FS 2024 it doesn't work this way - I have to check...

Again, even with winds reported as 15+ knot I **really** have to use the steering wheel or the rudder to align my Fenix A320 or the freeware / default Inibuilds Airbuses when taxiing, taking off or landing.

With some GA props, including for instance the Baron 58, I run out of rudder authority to keep straight during takeoff runs with stronger crosswinds...

Now, I also can say that taxiing or taking off / landing, with or without x-wind, is rather far from the real thing in, say, the SR22 which uses a free castoring nose gear... while in XP12 I have it correctly simulated, and I am forced to use RW techniques such as asymmetric braking to steer...

I'm impartial in as far as reporting bugs / limitations / innacuracies goes, in any platform... as you probably already know.

Edited February 12, 20251 yr by jcomm

Are those figures for windspeed meters/second?, if so that second video of the ultralight taxing with that crosswind is ridiculous.

152 meters/second is nearly 300 knots and all it does is slightly weathercock?

10 hours ago, LRBS said:

Unfortunately, ASOBO/MSFS lacks a clear grasp of aircraft physics and fails to provide adequate guidance to programmers. 

Why is it MSFS2024's fault, if aircraft are coded like that? Configure it correctly, and it will behave correctly. If some aircraft work and some not (as you found out), we are simply not talking about a problem of the sim. It requires intellectual honesty to admit (which I have not yet seen demonstrated a single time by the OP), but it is the truth.

So the OP is wrong in many ways:

- He is blaming the sim, when these aircraft are not making correct use of the existing parameter.

- The title should read: why the inibuilds A320 has not implemented the MSFS ground physics correctly. His title is nonsense (and he should know), misleading and stirring the pot.

- The tested conditions are far outside of any reallistic and relevant wind speed range. This is not even an edge case. It is simply irrelevant.

 

 

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

You can come with me !  We prcatlically never communicate in a glider 😜 or at least we try hard not to...

 

I've noticed this, I sometimes wish you would a bit more😬

6 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

O tell me mighty freight dog where did last time you taxied with 150 kts x-wind down a runway as part of your ops? LOL

Unless Ive misread/mis-converted the windspeeds used to illustrate are even greater!

You make a valid point, id like to see someone make a video of a cub type taxing, taking off and landing in say a 15 knot direct  crosswind...this would tell me a great deal about the much touted improvements in flight dynamics and ground handling in 2024

Edited February 12, 20251 yr by Rusty Spanner

13 hours ago, Aglos77 said:

Are these forums really useful? Because I see top rated votes that are still under investigation after several years, because I suspect they have the same utility as half of the pilot licenses that claim to be pilots around here.

I've not been here very long, but from what I've read I would say that most who claim real life experience in here are being truthful.

It's incredibly easy for someone who does fly IRL to tell when someone is telling porkies about their flying experience

22 minutes ago, fsiscool said:

The title should read: why the inibuilds A320 has not implemented the MSFS ground physics correctly. His title is nonsense (and he should know), misleading and stirring the pot.

Cause they don't actually have any intention of having an actual discussion on this topic matter.

They never do. They never acknowledge you when you bring up reasonable counterpoints, they always side with the usual trolls that further stir the pot.

We're then gaslit by the usual few that these conversations should be allowed because it's considered "valid criticism", except we're also not allowed to reasonably counter these arguments because it's considered "dogpiling". Genuinely ridiculous.

Look at their youtube channel, xplane is impossible to do something wrong in their eyes.

49 minutes ago, fsiscool said:

It requires intellectual honesty to admit (which I have not yet seen demonstrated a single time by the OP)

🤣

Echoing what a couple of others have said, Asobo's Seb pointed out in a past developer stream that various physics systems are in place, but it's the individual developer's responsibility to implement and apply them to their aircraft models, and how well they are utilised. So you can't analyse the sim's core ground physics on an aircraft that has clearly not had the required systems applied by its developer.

1 hour ago, Rusty Spanner said:

Unless Ive misread/mis-converted the windspeeds used to illustrate are even greater!

You make a valid point, id like to see someone make a video of a cub type taxing, taking off and landing in say a 15 knot direct  crosswind...this would tell me a great deal about the much touted improvements in flight dynamics and ground handling in 2024

Try Cows DA40 for 2024. It behaves just like many light GA airplane suppose to do (with proper control deflection while taxing with winds)

4 hours ago, fsiscool said:

Why is it MSFS2024's fault, if aircraft are coded like that?

Are you serious? Those are some airplanes belonging/designed and faulty coded within MSFS20220/2024. 

4 hours ago, fsiscool said:

If some aircraft work and some not (as you found out), we are simply not talking about a problem of the sim.

Again, we are talking about a sim problem regarding their airplanes.

 

4 hours ago, fsiscool said:

: Why the inibuilds A320 has not implemented the MSFS ground physics correctly

I agree 100%

4 hours ago, fsiscool said:

- The tested conditions are far outside of any reallistic and relevant wind speed range. This is not even an edge case. It is simply irrelevant.

As I mentioned, but you most likely didn't read, the wind was progressively increased to the maximum allowed value, and no aircraft reaction was noted. Oh yes, it is very relevant, but because you are not familiar with aerodynamics, you find those findings irrelevant.

 

2 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

Try Cows DA40 for 2024. It behaves just like many light GA airplane suppose to do

And the free castoring nosewheel is excellent!