2 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

This discussion makes me feel like, again, people are missing some of the point of a simulator.  The entire point is that it's NOT real, and therefore you're operating in a consequence-less environment.  That's the value.  It's a feature, not a bug.

Ummm... No.  Could not disagree more.

The entire point is that the consequences don't cause real world injury/death/destruction of property, not that there aren't any.

 

Scott

The G3000 in 2024 has Wx radar or is this a my sim vs your sim thread?

dd

22 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

The entire point is that it's NOT real

So who decides “the entire point”?  The more that is simulated, the better the simulation.

43 minutes ago, Sky_Pilot071 said:

The G3000 in 2024 has Wx radar or is this a my sim vs your sim thread?

dd

OP made an incorrect thread title, and the mods haven't changed it...perhaps you can ask them to do that, because it would eliminate all confusion

4 hours ago, SayAgain said:

The same type of damage and failures you get in the real world.  The list is long:

• Flat tire
• Collapsed gear
• Fuel leak
• Stuck elevator trim
• Broken rudder
• Cracked cockpit window (not just bird strikes, but rocks, significant debris etc.)
• Fuel contamination (very common)
• Oil leaks (engine and/or hydronic) starting a fire
• Electrical fires in cockpit filling cabin with smoke
• Landing lights going out or taken out with debris hit
• Prop strike
• passenger/cabin door pops off and is ripped off during flight (no I wasn’t on Alaska air flight, I missed it by one)
• And much more that is common in both commercial and GA.

All things that make flight a more realistic challenge and unpredictable.

Nothing is stopping a 3rd party developer from implementing all of the list above in MSFS. It's just more coding for them, but it can be done.

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

Nothing is stopping a 3rd party developer from implementing all of the list above in MSFS. It's just more coding for them, but it can be done.

That's all in the SDK is it? (And more?)

9 hours ago, SayAgain said:

All things that make flight a more realistic challenge and unpredictable.

Many of those failures would require the use of checklist / or QRH's in order to try to mitigate and/or troubleshoot.
Because that is the point no? Not just try to land like an arcade game while the wing is ablaze like in a Michael Bay film, but to methodologically work through the published steps provided by the manufacturer.

And this is where things gets slightly out of hand IMHO. MSFS ships with at least (?)50+ different aircraft. Which means the systems in these aircraft (in order to reflect the actions in the emergency/abnormal CL) would have to be very authentic, on par or beyond "study level".

To give an example, the real DA40NG abnormal/emergency checklist (not the expanded procedures) is 15 pages long. And this is for a modern, but still "basic" trainer. Stuff like Oscilliating RPM, RPM under/overspeed, ECU A/B failures, G1000 warnings etc.... I mean it's a handful IRL, and it would take an effort like COWS DA40NG in order to basically match it. And this is just one of those 50 planes in MSFS.

As a pilot, I'm not interested in "roleplaying" hero in FS. I am more interested in real procedures. Making a wishlist of failures for MSFS isn’t really worth much unless the aircraft are modeled with enough depth for most of those failures to interact with the real checklists.

Just my opinion.

10 hours ago, Mace said:

OP made an incorrect thread title, and the mods haven't changed it...perhaps you can ask them to do that, because it would eliminate all confusion

We don’t change topic titles unless requested by the topic starter. That’s up to @kholt.

3 hours ago, MarcG said:

That's all in the SDK is it? (And more?)

I already commented earlier in this thread, that it's probably not in the SDK. 

But MSFS allows flexibility, in that you can almost do whatever you want, and I pointed this out earlier in my comment about A2A's Comanche: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/679269-xp12-now-has-weather-radar-why-can’t-msfs-2024/page/12/#findComment-5588024 

The point being, it doesn't need to be in the SDK because the flexibility is there for the 3rd party developer to do whatever they want just like A2A.  That doesn't stop a 3rd party developer from writing more code to simulate damage.  The 3rd party developer just ends up writing more code.  There probably isn't any bird damage strike in the API, yet iniBuilds is simulating bird damage in their A350. There probably isn't any engine flame out in the API either, yet there is a whole add-on that simulates engine flame out: https://tritrisim.com/. 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2025Oct 2 by abrams_tank

16 hours ago, SayAgain said:

We have very different priorities.

The same type of damage and failures you get in the real world.  The list is long:

• Flat tire
• Collapsed gear
• Fuel leak
• Stuck elevator trim
• Broken rudder
• Cracked cockpit window (not just bird strikes, but rocks, significant debris etc.)
• Fuel contamination (very common)
• Oil leaks (engine and/or hydronic) starting a fire
• Electrical fires in cockpit filling cabin with smoke
• Landing lights going out or taken out with debris hit
• Prop strike
• passenger/cabin door pops off and is ripped off during flight (no I wasn’t on Alaska air flight, I missed it by one)
• And much more that is common in both commercial and GA.

All things that make flight a more realistic challenge and unpredictable.

Just like in the real world no one wants to setup a 20+ minute pre-flight only to have to cope with a door popping off.  This is why I don't want MS/A to spent coding time on something that hopefully never comes into play.   In fact, I'd be miffed if that happened!  Because it would be a colossal waste of my time!  As abrams_tank mentions at least some of these areas can be modeled already by the developer for those who care to pay for it.

Try flying for score.  Here's just a small taste of all that SLC monitors per each flight:


 

Ok folks, this thread is about the weather radar implementation on the MSFS platforms. Let's stay on topic.

26 minutes ago, Krakin said:

Let's stay on topic.

Heaven forfend! Have you no sense of tradition, sir?

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Just like in the real world no one wants to setup a 20+ minute pre-flight only to have to cope with a door popping off.

Don't speak for everyone, I would love to see damage/issue better implemented, just the same way I spend time practising & qualifying for a car races only to be punted off in the first corner with damage that needs repairing in the pits or I suffer from brake fade late in a race which costs me a Podium.

Different people, different priorities, different needs.

Well it's all over now.  Happy Landings

 

19 hours ago, SayAgain said:

We have very different priorities.

The same type of damage and failures you get in the real world.  The list is long:

• Flat tire
• Collapsed gear
• Fuel leak
• Stuck elevator trim
• Broken rudder
• Cracked cockpit window (not just bird strikes, but rocks, significant debris etc.)
• Fuel contamination (very common)
• Oil leaks (engine and/or hydronic) starting a fire
• Electrical fires in cockpit filling cabin with smoke
• Landing lights going out or taken out with debris hit
• Prop strike
• passenger/cabin door pops off and is ripped off during flight (no I wasn’t on Alaska air flight, I missed it by one)
• And much more that is common in both commercial and GA.

All things that make flight a more realistic challenge and unpredictable.

 I think most of that is simulated in MSFS2024 as part of the failures. I'm not sure if there visuals like bent prop, smoke in the cabin, collapsed gear or oil leaks, but I guess it can be added easily by 3rd party.

Stuck elevator and broken rudder is part control surfaces failure, which is very rare especially in flight . If I'm not mistaken some even simulated by 3rd party developers.

Landing, nav, strobe light in older airplane goes out on their own all the time LOL