1 hour ago, tpete61 said:

Yup, This thread has taught me alot about MSFS2024!!!

Seriously folks the largest audience is gamers and non-pilots most likely.

Not sure why this discussion is even relevant!

Oh look tpete61 is mad again that something is being discussed on a discussion forum 🤣 ... this particular thread is irrelevant due to the fact that the OP premise is comically flawed and their usual intention to spread FUD and a desperate need to draw attention to their equally comical YT channel. But yes inbetween the FUD, thankfully we have learned some cool stuff courtesy of Matt Niscahn and other *actual* experts.

And yes we all know a majority of the MSFS audience is gamers/casual-users/non-pilots, doesn't take a genius to figure that out given that MSFS is a broad enough platform to appeal to all kinds of users and given that it is available on the hardware platforms that it is. But quite obviously despite that MS/Asobo are also catering to serious users aren't they? Otherwise why are they are wasting dev resources in building up complex default avionics that are payware level, default aircraft that are far more complex than any other sim's default aircraft, providing more elaborate ground handling in 2024 rather than just sticking to 2020's modelling of wheels as single points, etc?
 

Edited February 12, 20251 yr by lwt1971

5 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I'm confused. I thought @jcomm said the free castering nosewheel was not working in MSFS? But with the Cows DA40, it is working in MSFS?

Probably some "trick" just as Flying Iron does with their WW2 models... Not quite castering ...

5 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

We are talking about 2024 here, so please do tell us.. what particular Asobo developed aircraft in the 2024 default fleet have ground handling problems?, and what exactly are those problems? Matt might be able to comment on those.
 

For consistency, I would recommend the following.

Put the airplane on RWY22R at KJFK.

To prevent variations during taxi, takeoff, or landing, set clear weather conditions with a wind of 310/40 mph up to 10 K FEET.

Load the aircraft with only 20% fuel, nothing else.

 

First, I noticed the initial issue with the wind displaying only 22 KTS instead of 40 KTS compared to what was set manually. This wind reduction is consistent across my testing with the 707, 737, and 747s. So, for that reason, if the wind is reduced, the ground handling will be easier.

The other problem noticed regarding ground handling is that during taxi and the takeoff roll, the rudder is very sensitive. In real life, the rudder becomes effective (on these airplanes) at around 30 KTS and is almost fully effective by 60 KTS. During taxi/acceleration, the rudder actually controls the nosewheel steering within a certain degree, about 7 degrees left or right, and the aircraft's reaction should be very smooth. 

 

Something noticeable and reproducible is that during this test, the 20 kts x-wind (EVEN IT WAS SET FOR 40 KTS) was consistent up to and between 300 - 700 FT; after that, I noticed wind increasing slowly to 40 KTS. I think this is done in coding.  On the ground, if the wind is in excess of 30, the airplanes show some difficulty with the rudder. Yes, I checked my settings.

 

Therefore, the 707s, 737s, and 747s, and most likely the other airplanes in MSFS2024, have lots of room for adjustments, even if they show some ground/taxi improvement. 

Edited February 12, 20251 yr by LRBS

2 hours ago, tpete61 said:

Yup, This thread has taught me alot about MSFS2024!!!

Seriously folks the largest audience is gamers and non-pilots most likely.

Not sure why this discussion is even relevant!

All sims are for gamers.  Flying a plane in xplane, MSFS, DCS, FSX, p3d WHATEVER, is probably only 50% close to real life and that's with the finest high quality addons .   My only exception to this amount would be the Challenger in XP from HotStart.  That probably gets you closer to 60-70%.  There are SO many more factors that go into real flying and they simply aren't present in any of these entertainment simulators.

10 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

All sims are for gamers.  Flying a plane in xplane, MSFS, DCS, FSX, p3d WHATEVER, is probably only 50% close to real life and that's with the finest high quality addons .   My only exception to this amount would be the Challenger in XP from HotStart.  That probably gets you closer to 60-70%.  There are SO many more factors that go into real flying and they simply aren't present in any of these entertainment simulators.

You should try Aerowinx PSX for the 744 🙂

And... I 100% second @LRBS's post above describing the results of his tests.

I loaded a few default aircraft too, tested as far as I could, but being default aircraft and encrypted I was prevented from using the necessary debugging windows that would provide additional details on the way wind varies close to the ground.

Of course due to various effects, of which friction caused by the surface (and depending on the type of surface and also on surrounding obstacles) attenuates the effective wind near the ground and can make it really different between a typical GA prop and an airliner, specially if medium / big with it's tail fin & rudder well above the ground.

In Meteorology and in Aviation the reference is 10m / 30 ft for the reported wind intensity.

I accept that the simulators reduce the effective wind components equally... I do not like when they start massaging numbers in a odd way, like reducing the normal component, or even zeroing it, but not the axial one. This was done in FS 2020 to overcome the ground physics (and probably not only) limitations, but it appears not to be the case in FS 2024.

OFC as has been mentioned, ASOBO has added new features to undercarriage / landing gear / wheel simulation, as well as to the aircraft objects which can now include hundreds of surfaces exposed to aerodynamics effects. Unless developers make use of these new features the aircraft can not show all of the potential, and I really don't know if any of the default aircraft presently in FS 2024 Standard Edition have explored these new features.

I then went testing the same scenarios with similar aircraft in X-Plane 12 and, as expected, the results were more plausible, both for stopped aircraft subject to strong winds and for moving - taxiing, rolling for takeoff or during landing!  X-Plane 12 has a more plausible ground physics and flight model, that,  I can't deny no matter how I really like MSFS too, and that's the reason why I keep using it.

Edited February 13, 20251 yr by jcomm

10 hours ago, LRBS said:

20 kts x-wind (EVEN IT WAS SET FOR 40 KTS)

As the weather menu does not define METARs but true wind in altitude ranges, the wind is correctly modeled to follow alt dependent gradients such as this: Information

Imho this is correct.

On 2/12/2025 at 7:29 AM, 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

Or tried to open the door 😁

On 2/12/2025 at 8:52 AM, 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 think this includes an important observation: The C172 is the only aircraft that reacts close to the expectations of how the wind affects planes.

The C172 is the only default aircraft that has the full range of improved physics including soft body simulation (SBS) implemented, and the latter is likely what makes aircraft shaking in the wind possible at all. The sim has supported this for a year or so, but few aircraft have actually made use of it. To my knowledge, this hasn't changed yet with MSFS2024, see list here: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/new-propeller-cfd-soft-body-simulation-aircraft-list/504719 .

They said they'd overhaul the included planes one by one in one of the Dev Q&As, when they talked about the improved physics. As with the improved propeller simulation and CFD, SBS is opt-in per aircraft, and doesn't automatically apply to existing aircraft because it requires tuning of the flight model.

My take is: It appears that MSFS 2024 is fully capable of simulating the wind effects properly, but so far, very few aircraft make use of the improved physics that's necessary for a realistic behaviour.

Edited February 13, 20251 yr by pstrub

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

I then went testing the same scenarios with similar aircraft in X-Plane 12 and, as expected, the results were more plausible, both for stopped aircraft subject to strong winds and for moving - taxiing, rolling for takeoff or during landing!  X-Plane 12 has a more plausible ground physics and flight model, that,  I can't deny no matter how I really like MSFS too, and that's the reason why I keep using it.

I think what's happened here is with FS24's new introduction of the ground contact model, while retaining aircraft transition from FS20 to FS24 they've made these new feature opt-in. If you're a dev whose sole goal is getting your aircraft working in FS24 I doubt you're going to explore these new features (yet). So now you have aircraft that still retain the issues of the old ground contact model but functioning in FS24.

Meanwhile xplane as we all know,  has always had a pretty good contact model which I imagine is not opt-in at all. So you're an XP11 dev moving to XP12 and your ground contact parameters are already highly configured. Bear in mind I'm hugely guessing here as I haven't taken a look at Xplane's Dataref system recently.

IMO the new model should've been a requirement, but obviously they would present longer transition times for devs, double edged sword situation.

6 hours ago, fsiscool said:

As the weather menu does not define METARs but true wind in altitude ranges, the wind is correctly modeled to follow alt dependent gradients such as this: Information

Imho this is correct.

There are a few considerations to be taken into account.

This is not a METAR situation, as you rightfully mentioned, where wx conditions constantly change.

This is a totally different situation where (if read carefully) I created a specific fixed wind condition of a steady wind up to 10,000 ft. with no other changes. What you are missing here is that because you didn't test it, didn't even bother to check it and notice no wind changes above 700 ft, where actually wind change happened from 22 kts to 40 kts, all the way up, and you can't understand what is going on here, unfortunately, you and others only show the desire to argue, NOT TO FIX ISSUES. The wind is still not modeled correctly, and it still needs tweaking. 

Edited February 13, 20251 yr by LRBS

On 2/12/2025 at 6:05 AM, Aglos77 said:

Did I understand correctly and is it something that has been removed because it gave problems in arcade mode (career mode)? 

No

6 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

think what's happened here is with FS24's new introduction of the ground contact model, while retaining aircraft transition from FS20 to FS24 they've made these new feature opt-in

It was also the same in 2020 when they added some new features. It was up to devs to add them.

 

the 172 G1000 has always been Asobo's testbed for new features which is why it's flight model is so detailed compared to everything else.

Edited February 13, 20251 yr by Tuskin38