1 hour ago, Funky D said:

Since it looks like you've decided to get some pedals, my only advice would be to either go cheap or go all out. The cheap pedals will likely have a cheap spring and maybe an annoying dead zone, but they'll get the job done and the positives of just having some pedals outweigh any of the small annoyances. From what I've read about some of the midrange pedals, many of them are built like a tank but have really heavy springs which could make small corrections annoying. If my old CH Pro Pedals ever die, I'll likely replace them with the Thustmaster TPR's... AFAIK they are the only pedal with movement that mimics actual rudder pedals, vs the sliding on the floor motion you get with other pedals out there.

The biggest drawback of any rudder pedal? If you don't keep them under your desk, you'll be crawling on the floor to set them up every time you load up the sim, since you'll no longer be able to fly without them!

Thanks for the wise words.

3 hours ago, qqwertz said:

And when it comes to cross wind, the demonstrated crosswind for a C172 is 17 Kts and about 35 Kts for the B747. So larger planes can handle more cross wind.

It’s not the size of the plane, it’s the geometry. Not to mention the differences in control surfaces, artificial force enhancements, and, critically: design intent.

1. for e.g., the Cirrus SR22 can handle 21kts, and the Diamond Da40 up to 25kts. The Pilatus PC-12 can handle 30…

All are small aircraft  s any large airliner  

2. The 747 is a commercial aircraft built to handle greater environmental extremes than personal GA aircraft. 

if you’ve got 400-ish people, a bunch of cargo in the hold, and are pulling down $1,000,000-ish for a single sector/leg you better believe the airlines are going to demand higher safety & performance margins. And that includes being able to handle nasty weather  

2.5. the 737-600 has the same crosswind rating as the 747, yet it is a substantially smaller aircraft. Just built for the same mission and standards as the commercial jumbos. 

again, it’s not the size, it’s the design. 

3 hours ago, qqwertz said:

[2] Yep, mass and weight are different, but as long as you stay within, say, 50 km near the Earth's surface, they are proportional to each other. So the difference doesn't matter too much for airplanes. But you are correct in stating that larger airplanes will use more powerful engines and need more torque.

Let me clarify - I should’ve  consistently used Density, a constant, rather than sprinkling in Mass, also a constant.

And I’m not at all talking about Gravity, which is indeed variable (but as you say, not really at our distances from MSL)

In re Density, e.g., a 1lb block of lead will never be affected by a 35kt wind. 
Whereas a 1lb block of styrofoam will quickly blow across the ground in even a light breeze. 

Same Mass, but entirely different Density. And size for that matter. So if it’s weight or size that determines crosswind resistance, the 1lb block of styrofoam should win every time, right? 

3 hours ago, qqwertz said:

But since they use jet engines for jets, the torque is not that big. Hence, I would still prefer to fly a 747 vs a 172 without rudders.

Torque is significant in jets, too. E.g., this is why the left engine from the crashed UPS MD-11 flew over the top of the jet and landed fully in the grass on the right side of the runway.
Similarly, though not engine torque per se, the 747F that ran off the runway into the water last month or two was due to the airframe torque imparted by the number 4 far outboard engine throttling up to 106% power, and nothing the pilots did had any practical effect. 

so again, everything’s relative, and it has very little to do with weight or size. And everything to do with design and density. 

Edited December 7, 2025Dec 7 by UrgentSiesta

7 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

It’s not the size of the plane, it’s the geometry.

...

I have no issues with what you wrote, but I stand by my assessment that, for the purpose of flying without rudder pedals in a simulator, larger planes tend to be less problematic. Let's leave it at that.