60North

From a GA type aircraft perspective not very much, they are very direct and light on the controls. On larger aircraft however, it definitely is relevant; - In real there are small delays, cables stretching, bearings slack, hydraulic actuators delays, control surface parts bending, low temperatures causing less tension in wires etc. - But, maybe the biggest reason is the difference in CONTROL FORCES needed between sim hardware and real hardware. There is no way you will be able to deflect the yoke on a real airliner nearly as fast as they do on the sim yoke in your video. To move the controls on airliners in real you need forces of up to 80 lbf (rudder)! Also remember, you most of the time while handflying only use one hand/foot on the controls (other on the throttle) So moving a 30-40 lbf yoke to full deflection with one hand WILL take more time in real than on sim harware - not to mention joysticks which maybe just move 10% of what the real thing does to full deflection. - Another example is the 757 and 767. They both have very similar rollrates at full deflection. However, the 767 yoke only deflects 90 deg, but the 757 deflects 180 deg. So... the 767 will FEEL much more sensitive to the pilot in roll than the 757.. So time delays are both realistic and necessary in a sim to give the most realistic feel, and it also depends on your sim hardware. M

As Murmur said, the default RoG values are usually off, but they are customizable by design in PlaneMaker A skilled designer can fix this in a few minutes. If done right both the short period damping and long period phugoid oscillations will be correct. http://www.xplanefreeware.net/morten/MOV/pitch.mp4 So basically just up to the designer..

Cameron said in his very first response to you; There is your technical explenation, you will have problems when upgrading-> which again might cause the aircraft not working properly -> which will annoy you -> which will make you file bugreports -> which will have us chasing bugs that do not exists -> which again will delay further progress of the aircraft -> which affects everyone. M

Thanks Ryan, that means a lot to us personally, looking forward to your Mac release :smile:

I will :wink: About the dihedral, he is showing lack of knowledge on how this works, and from what I can tell from his movie, the aircraft is performing just fine. (I wount go into the aerodynamic details here, but 25+ deg bank, coordinated turn.. seriously? And not even mention other parameters that ALSO influence lateral stability) Regarding his "aerobatics" and yaw induced roll - it's not even worth to even comment on, he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about! PMDG, you are doing just fine, this guy obviously has an agenda. (And this is with FULL oposite aileron+spoilers)

This is correct. X-Plane has a much more advanced wing than FSX/P3D. In X-Plane we can have dozens of wing stations with individual airfoils, incidence, dihedral washout, sweep, reynolds# etc. FS has a much simpler approach mainly dealing with "total" forces. Also there is the stability, I think the expression "flying on rails" best can be related to this. Phugoid Oscillations (long term), Short period oscillations (short term), Roll subsidence, Dutch roll, spiraling etc. XP handles most of these very well out of the box (if the aircraft is well designed). But, offcourse - like all sims - it doesn't help you if you do not have the skills or information needed to take advantage of this. X-Plane also has a few "issues", which you need to know about if you aim for the highest level of flightmodell realism, So ultimately it boils down the the skill of the designer/team, but personally I'm convinced that PMDG (being very skilled) will be able to create better performing aircraft in XP than in FS.

Welcome to the X-Plane world PMDG team! She is a real beauty, and from what I've seen so far the level of detail and love put into it by the developers is amazing, I can already tell it has a "soul" and "character" - congratulations! This will be another milestone in XP history, and I am really looking forward to flying it. So to all x-planers - lets give them the warm welcome they deserve next week!

LA, I think the expression "flying on rails" best can be related to Phugoid Oscillations (long term), Short period oscillations (short term), Roll subsidence, Dutch roll, spiraling etc. XP handles most of these very well out of the box (if the aircraft is well designed)

FYI guy's, with regards to flightmodel in XP, there has been a huge development. You have the core model which is very advanced and dynamic, but now you can also ad extra forces and overwrite or "bend" the core model in most areas with a bit of programming skills. So basically a skilled designer/team can do just about anything he wants - everything the pilots here have mentioned is no big deal to adjust. I think the problem is many designers in XP have not yet taken advantage of the capabilities that exists and just use the out of the box flightmodel. As an engineer working on Xps flightmodel for 15 years, and knowing alot about how "the other sim" works, there is no question in my mind as to which sim is more powerful from an engineering and dynamics point of view. But remember, an aircraft will never be better than it's designer in any sim

http://forums.x-pilot.com/forums/forum/183-general-discussion/ M

No problem, but there is a big difference between "bugs", "not modelled right" and "not modelled yet". So please try to keep them apart

All of these claims are wrong! - FLCH does work just like the real one and we have not had one single complaint on it by the loads of 737 real pilots that have tried it for over 1000 hrs of block time. - Autobrake, which I personally gave Austin the documentation on is 737 values. - We have a 100% custom engine model which is most likely the most accurate jet-model ever made in ANY sim in terms of thrust and drag at all altitudes, mach and temperatures. The FMC is still missing a few functions as we stated long before release, but will be implemented. And yes, we had our share of bugs - like everyone else.

Outstanding work B)

Try with a bit of surface winds (waves)

Very nice B)

Correct, the airliner packs I made are highly modified in many areas to dramatically improve framerate, but also how they fly and taxi to match the logic of XPs AI system. Think I posted a tutorial somewhere here how to make them that you could also use on GAs. EDIT: Found it;

Awesome!! Downtown Oslo looks soo much more real! "Barcode" and everything. Btw, anyone have some tip on how to get city night-lighting in XP more realistic?

Excellent work - thanks a lot! :smile:

Actually, most X-Plane designers with a name started out as freeware developers. Only the last few years payware really got a boost in XP, and that is probably due to the large increase in the user base. On our team all of us have been developing in XP for 10-15 years, and mostly freeware - as a hobby. We are all in our 40's, settled and have other jobs. So the main motivation for many XP "old" designers like us is not the $, but the technical challenge, the social aspect and a genuine interest in aviation. At the time we got into this a copy of XP costed about 250$, so the community was small and mostly "adult" users that could afford it. This probably also explains the "culture" in XP of having a "less professional" and open relations with the users, which give us so much motivation with their feedback. Thats what keeps freeware projects going. This open culture also leads to to new designers relations, sharing of skills and knowhow and the making of friendships for life. PMDG being an employer and a professional company with big serious customers for many years off course needs to operate in a much more professional manor in public, and I guess we (might) have to learn from them when our project gets released. Anyhow, on behalf of XPs old time designers, we are extremely happy to see PMDG - such a great team with their history and merits - entering the XP world. It will surely attract (well deserved) attention to XP. It will raise the bar, it will be a catalyst, it will be a win-win for everyone. So in the old XP spirit - lets welcome them by motivating them to stay regardless of what project is first and what the release date will be, it will be awesome - as usual! Cheers Morten Melhuus

X-Plane.org has a long history in the community. It started as a free site where all developers posted their freeware work in the late 1990's. At the time the community was very small and there was no payware. I joined in around XP v5 which was released in 1999. The whole community was build around the registry of freeware at .org, so basically one can say that we aircraft designers built the org. Or the Borg as we called it. At the time there was no hosting of files etc so we designers had to host our own files vis ftp. Bandwidth was really expensive, so the org struggled to stay alive financially and we all had to donate several times to save it. The .org changed owners a few times that period and some of the owners/moderators behaved like dictators and didn't always get along very well with the designers. Mass banning, censorship etc. So at this point many key designers decided to break out from the .org and take their aircraft with them. We also started free hosting of files and a new registry and this almost killed the .org. Everyone then again came to their senses and the Borg again got new friendly owners and everyone started putting their files there again. The most recent owner however again took it in the wrong direction especially with his censorship policy. This off course is motivated by trying to keep it's status as the main site for XP payware, while using the freeware (designer made) registry as a magnet. Problem is that this policy undermines the growth and diversity of the community which X-Plane really needs - which again pi**** off the designers, community and LR. Lately things appear to have improved, censorship seems not to be as strong anymore. The Borg also no longer has the same status in the community that it used to have. Many new players have entered the field so I'm not worried about XP's future. M

Suggested reading on the topic http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=31137&hl=%2Bground+%2Bmodel A bit old, but most of it still apply's. Note Ben S reply in post #14. M

737 is doing well, we are getting closer each day Actually at high speeds (on the ground) real aircraft are very slippery sideways due to low weight on wheels (wing lift) which reduces friction significantly. So in XP most of the problem is below Vmcg. E.g. doing a single engine takeoff with a twin engine airliner like a 737 is almost impossible. (We offcourse can on our 737 though) M

This is correct it is too weak now, I have made the same observations on my Piper Archer a long time ago. HOWEVER, there is one problem. Austin should not fix this until AFTER he fixes the groundmodel - here is why. If you want to test how the real prop effect is, open my Piper in PlaneMaker, set the engine sideways cant to 3 deg right (the real aircraft has this). Now try to take off.... Most likely you will end up in the ditch to the right. This is because of the sideload friction model in XP is too weak. This is not really a flightmodel problem, but a computation thing. Ben S explained it once, don't remember exactly what it was. So basically, if he fixes the prop, then most aircraft will become useless on the ground.... doh.. M

LR turning into a patent troll, good one Austin :lol: M

Right, most commonly on airliners is a slight difference in engine performance, especially on older aircraft. As engines get worn the gap between the tip of the turbine blades and casing increases slightly which makes it less efficient. The same N1/EPR will give slightly different thrust/EGT on each engine so rudder trim is needed to make it go straight. M