5 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I would not be too concerned about the ground physics of planes climbing over boulders. I think it is a general rule of thumb in aviation to avoid obstacles of that nature at all costs. The significant aspect of boulders and pebbles (and all of that procedurally generated detail) is that it looks vastly superior to what has gone before.

 

The ability to handle the physics of wheels encountering rocks/boulders is just one consequence of the general physics of the new ground handling in 2024 (which goes hand in hand with its much more detailed ground terrain modelling and visuals).

From the micro level all the way up to the macro level they have modelled the wheel interaction with the terrain as 3D interactions and collisions. At the macro level this obviously benefits off-runway ground handling, i.e. bush flying. At the micro level it actually ends up modelling different runway surface types etc.

See an earlier post with more details, as well as an interview with Seb where he explains all this in detail: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/664166-why-msfs-2024-has-the-best-ground-physics-for-a-flight-sim/page/2/#findComment-5368154

 

Edited May 31, 20251 yr by lwt1971

On 5/29/2025 at 1:13 PM, abrams_tank said:

So everyone will have a different take. My take is, it's a part of the overall ground physics. Because nothing like that is modelled in the other flight simulators without custom scenery.

2024 massively improved ground physics, but XP12 at any airport/surface improves on it again.

On 5/29/2025 at 4:31 PM, filou said:

In reality, the plane would have been stopped. Ridiculous as an example.Paper airplane physics.

I understand your sentiment, but your comment is maybe five years too early.  Currently, it is great to have made a movement towards more ground features, making the flying more realistic - not 100% realistic, but a good move forward.  In 2024 it is no longer possible to land anywhere, and that has to be a positive step forward.

On 5/30/2025 at 12:23 PM, filou said:

I prefer an airplane that doesn't interact with the ground than an absurd resemblance. It's especially very badly done.

In five or ten years it would be badly done, but today it gives us more ground fidelity then we had previously - it is a step in the right direction.

10 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I said right here that it's not perfect but it's quite decent.

Absolutely.  In 2024 at that location, your landing will not great, where in 2020 it would be perfect.  The important bit is the step forward in ground fidelity.  

Talking about Ground features, as someone who mainly flys Bush and small rural airstrips I'd love the sim to be able to represent grass strips properly.
Most any grass is represented by 6" - 1' high grass.
IRL strip owners mow the strip. It would be a far greater improvement for most people than the rocks thing but seems like its another one of those things that is difficult to do so they just avoid the aspect.

Regarding Rocks from a IRL perspective we always scout out a landing spot before committing (unless its an emergency of course but even then one tries as much as possible to pick the best spot)


The poor representation of grass strips however is a pain as it often makes demarcation of the strip very vague, sometimes the area to the sides looks far more like the strip than the strip itself.

3 hours ago, Rusty Spanner said:

Talking about Ground features, as someone who mainly flys Bush and small rural airstrips I'd love the sim to be able to represent grass strips properly.
Most any grass is represented by 6" - 1' high grass.
IRL strip owners mow the strip. It would be a far greater improvement for most people than the rocks thing but seems like its another one of those things that is difficult to do so they just avoid the aspect.

Regarding Rocks from a IRL perspective we always scout out a landing spot before committing (unless its an emergency of course but even then one tries as much as possible to pick the best spot)

The poor representation of grass strips however is a pain as it often makes demarcation of the strip very vague, sometimes the area to the sides looks far more like the strip than the strip itself.

The grass strips in FSX and P3D are a good example of how I think they should be rendered. Well maintained, nice to look at, and comfortably visible from the air.

15 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

It is an issue in 2024.  I'm now running XP12 alongside 2024 now to get those things MS/Asobo just isn't fixing - best of both worlds ☺️

 

Every time I have tried XP over the years, the one thing I immediately notice is no matter what the weather, all I see is "Haze". It is like flying in a bucket of steam. After a few minutes of that, it gets put in my "Recycle bin". 

So, what else is missing? Failures! They completely threw them out. Even 2020 had around 5 failures per plane (IIRC, and up to ten or so with multiengine planes). Why they did that, is completely incomprehensible to me.

3 hours ago, flying_carpet said:

So, what else is missing? Failures! They completely threw them out. Even 2020 had around 5 failures per plane (IIRC, and up to ten or so with multiengine planes). Why they did that, is completely incomprehensible to me.

? 
Implementing failures is up to individual developers.

 

PMDG 737 and the Duke Turbine

 

That's all I care about and once they come back, I will be an everyday pilot

 

Yes I really want the PMDG 737 back in 2024. I used to fly it so much in 2020! Am getting my Boeing fix again now with the 772 but it isn't quite the same!

Also excited for the 747 Classic.

ILS landing challenges with zero viz to minimums with gusting crosswinds and blowing snow.

16 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

? 
Implementing failures is up to individual developers.

 

Heck ... It's like buying a car with e.g. wooden tires from the original manufacturer, and it is said "for 'implementing' tires made of rubber you have to buy them in the accessories trade". Basic things should be implemented from the beginning. Even 2020 had it - I mean failures, not rubber tires 😄 (not even to talk from the main competitor which has hundreds of failures - in the default planes).

The aircraft I fly and would want to buy have failure models built in. I wouldn't expect it in the default. It would be done to the same standard as the default aircraft so, not very good.