41 minutes ago, FedDriver said:

When you can observe a little nice cushion breaking your descent, followed by a brief battle between mass, gravity, and the gear suspension as the plane settles. In MSFS its instead simply a hard SMASH. Like your struts hydraulics is completely jammed. In real life however (And In *cough*Xplane*cough*) its a soft plop (unless you bottom out the suspension), bounce, and settle. Sometimes, that gear compression will cause you to spring back up into the air, albeit very briefly. Depending on how much air is flowing under your wings on touch down. In MSFS however, this isnt really well simulated, even on a Fenix. Which to me strongly hints at a physics limitation of MSFS. But on all of Inibuild planes, its not simulated at all. Observably less than other competing developers. I don't know why they struggle with it, but its horrendous. Its all bad. No one can deny this. But at the same time, no one seems to care. So oh well.
 

 

I'm no sure I'm aware of any "little cushion breaking" or " how much air flow under the wing during touchdown". Do you fly IRL?

1 hour ago, FedDriver said:

In real life however (And In *cough*Xplane*cough*) its a soft plop (unless you bottom out the suspension), bounce, and settle.

Indeed. And in *cough*X-Plane*cough* even every default plane has suspension. And not only since XP12 or XP11, but (IIRC) XP8^*, more that 20 years ago, as a friend of mine has shown me. Just sayin' 😉.

* Or even longer ...

17 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

I'm no sure I'm aware of any "little cushion breaking" or " how much air flow under the wing during touchdown". Do you fly IRL?

I have eyes. I fly xplane and msfs. There is a massive difference between the two in regards to this. Yes, if you land faster, you have more lift, which makes the plane "lighter", which means its easier to bounce. Especially upon hard landings where the gear compresses and spring the mass back upward. Yes, landing gears slowly arrest descent of planes to cushion the impact
I can clearly see MSFS's lack of proper gear suspension. And I can clearly see Inibuilds completely abysmal gear simulation. Spare me the "Do you fly IRL" nonsense, would you like me to record a video for you to demonstrate? 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by FedDriver

2 hours ago, FPVSteve said:

I'm not entirely sure what point it is you're trying to prove other than "hur hur fpvsteve you're wrong hur hur" but all you've proved with your figures is that despite marketshare being much larger, MSFS addons aren't, despite us being told they would be, that much cheaper than those on X-Plane (which are usually criticised for being so expensive despite having detailed and accurate systems).

I'm not entirely sure what your point/aim is to come on a thread about a new aircraft for MSFS to "hur hur we were told about MSFS add-ons would be cheaper than XP add-ons hur hur"? 🙂 https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/665498-inibuilds-a350-has-been-released/page/13/#findComment-5388539 . Who here even talked about XP add-on prices until you brought it up? Not sure many here care that MSFS add-ons are cheaper or more expensive than XP add-ons, I certainly couldn't care less 🤷‍♂️

ini chose this price point for the A350 (-900, -1000, ULR, 2020 + 2024 versions) ... that doesn't necessarily speak to the general pricing trends of other MSFS add-ons, and XP's add-on pricing has no relevance here.
 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by lwt1971

1 hour ago, FedDriver said:

But at the same time, no one seems to care.

Indeed, I don't. I never watch my landings from outside. Virtually never. I know the interest exists, and for people who into video editing of flights this of course a major let down.

3 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Indeed, I don't. I never watch my landings from outside. Virtually never. I know the interest exists, and for people who into video editing of flights this of course a major let down.

Have to admit, didn't expect someone say they dont care about physics of all things... It doesnt effect you just from the outside view. It effects whole dynamic of the touch down. Its not just "visuals". Ini's A350 and all their tubeliners dont feel heavy on the ground. Imo, thats a valid complaint.

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by FedDriver

48 minutes ago, SAS274 said:

That being said, it's not a bad plane, some people are behaving as if this is not even worth looking at because Fenix said it's missing stuff. Don't think that's the case. Think it's just a case of wrong pricing.

You summed it all up very nicely. Compared to other aircraft in the price range, this one falls short.

It is still good, no doubt and no criticism. But they ask too much for what they deliver when you compare it to what competitors deliver for the same asking price.

3 minutes ago, FedDriver said:

Have to admit, didn't expect someone say they dont care about physics of all things... It doesnt effect you just from the outside view. It effects whole dynamic of the touch down. Its not just "visuals". 

Whether the gears have properly simulated animated suspension or not makes zero difference to whether my landing was executed correctly or not.

Not to mention that real pilots point out again and again, that no simulator, no matter how expensive, will ever teach you how to fly correctly. The systems and procedures can be trained, but airmass and physics simulations is always just an approximation and will never be the same as the real thing.

So I wouldn't worry too much about a simulators physics and the influence on the landing technique.

 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by Farlis

8 minutes ago, Farlis said:

You summed it all up very nicely. Compared to other aircraft in the price range, this one falls short.

It is still good, no doubt and no criticism. But they ask too much for what they deliver when you compare it to what competitors deliver for the same asking price.

Whether the gears have properly simulated animated suspension or not makes zero difference to whether my landing was executed correctly or not.

 

So you think that the fact that your gears dont properly compress and have spring, which means that it could be much more likely for you to bounce your aircraft, which could determine whether your aircraft lands in or outside the touch down zone, does not have any difference on whether your landing was executed correctly.  Not sure why defending a lack of proper implementation of physics is even a thing in any capacity.

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by FedDriver

3 minutes ago, FedDriver said:

So you think that the fact that your gears dont compress and have spring, which means that it could be much more likely for you to bounce your aircraft, which could determine whether your aircraft lands in or outside the touch down zone, does not have any difference on whether your landing was executed correctly, gotchya.

While it is important to have this, Gears should be compressing and there should be a genuine showcase of suspension, I think Farlis is trying to say in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter hugely. You can't apply these skills to real world flying as it would only develop bad habits irl.

It's all fun and games at the end of the day because no matter how proficient you are at landing in MSFS or Xplane, it doesn't mean you are in real life, it's an entirely different ball game. For simmers its all about systems modelling cause ultimately procedural training is the only thing that can realistically bring into the real world.

18 minutes ago, Farlis said:

So I wouldn't worry too much about a simulators physics and the influence on the landing technique.

But there is an entire thread about 2024 having the best ground physics of any sim.  Now when it's shown that a brand new top of the line top of the price line add-on actually has no landing gear physics at all the answer is don't worry too much about a simulator's physics??

Even I am baffled at this.  

Why can't people just acknowledge something and agree this is clearly a defect? 

Personally I would like to see this implemented in AI as well opposed to the controlled crashing into the runway LOL 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by psolk

13 minutes ago, psolk said:

Personally I would like to see this implemented in AI as well opposed to the controlled crashing into the runway LOL 

Add me to this too. In Fact, when starting a flight at the gate, en then switching to the Cockpit view and than external view, the gear from -900 is not flat ont he ground, but the front wheels of the main gear are sunk into the tarmac. This happend on the MSFS2020 version several times now at my end.

The landing does not FEEL smooth, there is no suspention, main and nose gear are "steelhard". It just does not feel right. And I indeed expect them to give the user a good feeling, immersive when landing such a selfpraised product. 😉 

 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by mpo910

21 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

While it is important to have this, Gears should be compressing and there should be a genuine showcase of suspension, I think Farlis is trying to say in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter hugely. You can't apply these skills to real world flying as it would only develop bad habits irl.

It's all fun and games at the end of the day because no matter how proficient you are at landing in MSFS or Xplane, it doesn't mean you are in real life, it's an entirely different ball game. For simmers its all about systems modelling cause ultimately procedural training is the only thing that can realistically bring into the real world.

People aren't flying tubeliners to develop skills in real life. I hope not. Most just want an authentic experience, and Inibuilds concrete landing gears aint givin' it! Bah humbug. I want progression, not regression. I dont want physics inferior to whats been available for several years now. Thats nuts. Feed me slop and I'm spitting it out.

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by FedDriver

11 minutes ago, FedDriver said:

Most just want an authentic experience, and Inibuilds concrete landing gears aint givin' it! Bah humbug.

I 100% agree you and you’re making valid complaints, I think I was more trying to translate what farlis was saying why they personally don’t care.

There’s other aircraft in MSFS that express gear compression so it’s fair that you expect the same. 

16 hours ago, rickjake said:

I have done two flights so far, both in VR.  Performance was very good. On par with other planes like Fenix. 

am getting some stutters on 2024. Moreover, seems mouse zooming does not work in VR  somehow which is a huge handicap as you cannot read the frontal panels. Finally my 3d seating seems a tad backwards and angled upwards

1 hour ago, psolk said:

But there is an entire thread about 2024 having the best ground physics of any sim.  Now when it's shown that a brand new top of the line top of the price line add-on actually has no landing gear physics at all the answer is don't worry too much about a simulator's physics??

Just to be fair, not showing gear compression visually doesn't really mean they're not taking advantage of the new ground handling physics in 2024 (and the partial backport in 2020). But of course it's not known if they are or not until they confirm, or if someone who has the aircraft is able to take a look at the flight_model.cfg if that's even possible. Well hold on, actually looking at their initial intro videos, at this timestamp https://youtu.be/3cjLdfEfTow?t=2970 they do confirm they're using the new taxiing physics etc (they demonstrated skidding, carrying of momentum on turns/braking, etc). So if anything they haven't done visual modelling of gear compression on landings at the very least. Not clear if the actual ground dynamics model is accounting for this despite not showing it visually.. I'm also not sure if the ground handling physics revamp in MSFS (i.e. from modelling as single points to 3D tires with flex/dimensions/other-factors) included any additions/improvements for suspension and gear-compression physics.

And going back to that goodie of a thread, at the risk of speaking for Abrams, I think what he meant as 2024 having the best ground physics is the *combination* of the revamped physics along with the new much more detailed ground terrain modelling.. at least that's what makes the 2024 ground handling experience rather fantastic for me, especially with GA/smaller aircraft (anyways, best not side-track into that thread 😅)
 

 

Edited February 28, 20251 yr by lwt1971