Ryan, there is no different sim. This issue is well-known, documented, and has been on display for a long time. Now, if we don't recognize the issue, that's a different story. Maybe the aircraft you are flying has better adjustments in the config file, but the problem is very much alive.

Edited March 17Mar 17 by LRBS

I guess we need to try crabbing the Caravan float version as it hits the water then. 🥶

dd

Ok I just did some patterns in Duluth in the Fenix A320.  Man what a beautiful bird lol.

I'm not the greatest airliner guy but using by feel and how I think things should be it seemed right on.  I had a direct left crosswind at 15 knots.  Nothing crazy but nothing light either.  On short final I kicked in a little rudder and aileron to align the nose down the runway, left wing down of course...  totally fine... I even stuck it on centerline.

SU5 beta?  maybe that's the difference.  I used to have crappy Saitek pedals but with these Winwings (or WINCTRL) it's very different now!

(wind out of the SW here but it does change to 183 at 15 on short final)

 

 

36 minutes ago, LRBS said:

Ryan, there is no different sim. This issue is well-known, documented, and has been on display for a long time. Now, if we don't recognize the issue, that's a different story. Maybe the aircraft you are flying has better adjustments in the config file, but the problem is very much alive.

You in SU5 beta?  I just did some patterns in the Fenix there... varying the wind from 15 to 25... takeoff and landings were totally doable and I didn't notice the plane vigorously moving on touchdown or on takeoff.

Maybe Asobo addressed the issue in su5.

1 hour ago, ryanbatc said:

You in SU5 beta?  I just did some patterns in the Fenix there... varying the wind from 15 to 25... takeoff and landings were totally doable and I didn't notice the plane vigorously moving on touchdown or on takeoff.

Maybe Asobo addressed the issue in su5.

No Ryan. But as we know, Fenix, IFly737, and ASOBO 152, if I'm not mistaken, those airplanes are pretty well tuned. Unfortunately, the problem persists in the way they design the aerodynamics. Apparently, it can be adjusted to a satisfactory outcome, but developers need to find someone who understands how it works. For ASOBO to fix it, imho, they need to adjust the entire aerodynamics mechanism behind the programming, then adjust all their stock airplanes.  I think is wishfull thinking. I hope I'm dead wrong. 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

For ASOBO to fix it, imho, they need to adjust the entire aerodynamics mechanism behind the programming, then adjust all their stock airplanes.  I think is wishfull thinking. I hope I'm dead wrong. 

As already stated multiple times, the 2024 ground handling enhancements are *opt-in*. I get why they would make it opt-in so as to not break aircraft that's already developed and tuned for the MSFS 2020 FDE and whatever workarounds and tweaks the aircraft dev did.

Unfortunately, for the default fleet only the C172 and a couple of other aircraft have the full 2024 capabilities (wish Asobo would treat all their default fleet to the latest/greatest).

Out of curiosity, have you evaluated the ground handling of the C172 (G1000 version) in 2024? Evaluating that would be the true evaluation I think of MSFS 2024's core ground handling capabilities, or lack thereof (at least for GA aircraft).

In terms of 3rd party aircraft, it's difficult to know what if any of the core 2024 features they are using vs custom, etc.

Seems like its more on the devs to get this stuff right.  I think though, a lot was promised for compatibility with 2020 planes in 2024.. but that turned out not really to be the case.

I do know the SDK was really lacking at first.  Even from a painting perspective, there are more layers which are available to devs but hardly anyone uses them.

It makes me think that many devs don't know what to do for some of these new 2024 physics capabilities.  And that's perhaps why some, like A2A, have just gone outside and done their own.

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

No Ryan. But as we know, Fenix, IFly737, and ASOBO 152, if I'm not mistaken, those airplanes are pretty well tuned. Unfortunately, the problem persists in the way they design the aerodynamics. Apparently, it can be adjusted to a satisfactory outcome, but developers need to find someone who understands how it works. For ASOBO to fix it, imho, they need to adjust the entire aerodynamics mechanism behind the programming, then adjust all their stock airplanes.  I think is wishfull thinking. I hope I'm dead wrong. 

Will you be getting the PMDG 747?  Are they making the older version?

12 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

It makes me think that many devs don't know what to do for some of these new 2024 physics capabilities.  And that's perhaps why some, like A2A, have just gone outside and done their own.

Perhaps, though when a default plane demonstrates the problem (as is the case in the video) it does Asobo no favors in terms of demonstrating what's possible.  I really should pick up one of the A2A planes and see how they do I suppose.  I certainly will when the Legacy gets released but, as I've noted before, I'm not much interested in the Comanche and even the Aerostar doesn't quite push me over the edge.  If only it was turbo-charged.  🙂

33 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Out of curiosity, have you evaluated the ground handling of the C172 (G1000 version) in 2024? Evaluating that would be the true evaluation I think of MSFS 2024's core ground handling capabilities, or lack thereof (at least for GA aircraft).

And I guess I should also drag the 172 out and at least give it a try to see the improvements.  Maybe.

 

Scott

59 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Out of curiosity, have you evaluated the ground handling of the C172 (G1000 version) in 2024?

Yes, I did. I tested it at the maximum demonstrated crosswind and found it to perform excellently.

I could be wrong about the flight controls being a bit twitchy, but again, my hands and perspective must be off based on what I fly. YES, THEY GOT IT PRETTY GOOD ON CROSSWINDS!

57 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Will you be getting the PMDG 747?  Are they making the older version?

Ryan,

Honestly, I'm not interested in any 747 classics, perhaps at a later time.  I would prefer either the 744 or the 748. I'm concerned about the quality, especially given the main issues in their MSFS 2020 or 2024 products: the LNAV and intercept-to-course logic, and their reluctance to fix them.

Aside the C172 what other default aircraft have this code/ability implemented?

19 hours ago, jcomm said:

 

So, I just watched the video and I have to agree with Ashmatt7 that while there is indeed a problem in the MSFS2024, the way it's described in this video makes no sense at all:

1- The wind does not "push" the aircraft sideways on touchdown. The nose is pointing to the left, and the plane goes to the left as it should ! 

2- There is no "lack of friction", it's the total opposite: there is way too much friction, which makes the aircraft go to the left abruptly and without any kind of transition (sliding/drifting on touchdown) as soon as the wheels touch the ground.

So, on that landing and with that position (attitude?), the aircraft is expected to go to the left, but not so abruptly/violently.

 

Then my question to real life pilots would be the following: how would it happen exactly on a real aircraft in a similar situation ? I have seen a few heavy crosswinds landing videos by spotters, and almost every time the aircraft de-crabs just before touching the ground. But what should happen precisely if the aircraft lands without de-crabbing ? I suppose the pilot would align again with the runway during the drifting sequence, with a more limited translation to the left (but some translation anyway) ?

I should also point out that the 172 (and the E330) also benefits from having Asobo's corrected inertia parameters. @lwt1971 I don't think the 172 is the only one that got the ground physics treatment in 2024. That was certainly the case in 2020 but in 2024 it's the inertia physics that are exclusive to it and the Extra.

26 minutes ago, Daube said:

Then my question to real life pilots would be the following: how would it happen exactly on a real aircraft in a similar situation ?

he is an airline pilot, as he says in the video - so you already have the view of one real life pilot

i think, as others do here, that the issue is that the sim does not accurately model the tyre effect, and it's too "literal" in applying it's logic on touchdown, hence the aircraft immediately shoots in the direction of the tyres, rather than "sliding" a bit in as it does in real life in the direction it's momentum is taking it

when he says the wind would not push the aircraft left like that, i suspect he may be referring to how the wind is pushing against the vertical stabiliser which, on the ground, pushes the nose towards the wind

it does happen in real life, but far more subtle, giving the pilot the opportunity to apply opposite rudder
 

 

This problem with the ground physics in MSFS 20 and 24 affects not only how an aircraft reacts to xwind but even the way it responds to tiler / rudder inputs while simply taxiing, even in no wind... 

Observing pretty much all of the aircraft in MSFS while taxiing reveals sudden / brisk / deployed from inertia responses to steering inputs.

Some details have been dealt with in the latest updates, but there are still "trick" being used to overcome the model limitations, such as the normal component of the wind being zeroed bellow a given speed (on ground), something that for instance ActiveSky FS tries to overcome with a trick itself, but is not fully effective.

It's not only an MSFS problem. DCS World has a poor / rather limited ground physics model, and also uses the same wind reduction bellow a given speed (on ground), X-Plane has a very detailed ground physics model, but it's not as perfect as my preferred one - IL-2 Great Battles - which has by far the most realistic ground physics I've been able to experience in desktop flight simulation.

I somehow recall also the CAE A320 simulator session I spent an hour playing with, asking for really nasty weather scenarios for circuits in LPPT and LPMA, and I was quite impressed by the way it replicated strong crosswinds, compared to my desktop references by that time, a really early version of X-Plane and fs 2004 🙂

IRL gliders can present some really tricky challenges to their pilots when taking off and landing with strong x-winds, or under windshear... But things are so different IRL too, with the perfect force feedback and control throw 🙂. BTW, Condorsoaring, one of the most famous soaring simulators, simulates very poorly ground physics though 😞

 

Edited March 18Mar 18 by jcomm