cyril972

Same, I noticed only 2 issue with this update : 1 ) My TOBII doesn’t work in “pitch” when my head tilt up to down 2 ) The 172 load on the parking with a 180° shift Otherwise, it’s early smooth, VRAM seem to be lower, the UX is polished….no add on seem broken

Physics Сessna 172 (classic and G1000), Extra 330LT: Integrated full inertia tensor support, MOI recalculation fixes for aircraft weight changes, and rotational dynamics fix. Added support for a full inertia tensor used in aircraft rotation modeling via the new “empty_inertia_tensor” parameter in the [WEIGHT_AND_BALANCE] section of flight_model.cfg file (see SDK for details). When this parameter is specified, it also enables the following fixes: Fixed incorrect effect of payload stations on MOI changes. Note: if you previously compensated for this by increasing the empty aircraft MOIs, re-adjustment may now be necessary. Fixed incorrect MOI recalculation during in-simulation weight changes. Fixed several issues in rotational dynamics modeling: the laws of conservation and evolution of angular momentum and rotational kinetic energy are now satisfied with high accuracy. Increased limits for angular velocity (to 10 revs/sec) and angular acceleration (to 100 revs/sec^2). These limits only safeguard against crashes from incorrect flight model settings and are not expected to trigger in normal gameplay. Fixed excessive drifting on the landing gear when the rotational dynamics fix (activated by “empty_inertia_tensor”) is enabled. performance is way better, hope the improvements continue but I was curious about this « physics » section of the update. I tried the 172 and it’s better, more stable in the pitch wich was a small issue for the 172 in 2024. we also need more rudder to keep a coordinated turn. Try it and report if you like it or if you don’t fell anything different

No you obviously can, but the paint kit is harder to get since you have to use the « projector », then their is the new format is « Ktx2 » which is not straight forward as before. also I want to learn how to make livery’s in MSFS2024 but I found no tutorial or help on YouTube nor in the dev forum since livery’s are not compatible from a Msfs2020 plane to a MSFS2024 planes, you see very few livery’s for default planes

I really want to fly it, it’s a fantastique plane with capabilities and a lot of uses cases. But it lacks livery’s, Tradewind, St Barth Executive, Jetfly, haute aviation many airlines are flying PC12NGX but I cant find any livery for them. recently someone released a Fly7 livery pack for it, that’s a good start. This is a common problem for default planes, there is a shortage of livery’s in 2024. The PC12, C172, C208, SR22 all of them need love. I would love Asobo to release a tool to design livery’s in game

Just find out the YT video, I’ll try that tonight

Yes St Lucia, I’m super keen about staying connected and linked to all the Caribbean community. IRL first obviously and online too, I will pay ST Lucia a visit whenever I can

Yeah that’s true, I also don’t like it when there is a guy with it’s tiny pushback just in front of my GA plane, hope Asobo improves the logic behind ground véhicule. But I like having them around, an airport is a lively place

I work at an airport, and I’m often in my car on the taxiways, runways, and parking areas. My team and I maintain the ILS, VOR, and DME systems at TFFF (Fort-de-France Airport). But there are tons of other jobs happening on the airfield too Safety and security personnel, firefighters, fuel services, companies that handle VIP and private jet operations (sorry, I don’t know the English term for those), ground service providers, catering companies… Basically, every time I request clearance from the tower, there’s always another vehicle already on frequency. So no, I’m not bothered by the number of vehicles in MSFS!

When you write a text using the dark mode of your web browser…..it ends up being white text on a normal white page…stupid me😭

Honestly, at this point, even if MSFS24 were just in alpha, it feels like MSFS2020 was a proof of concept for MSFS2024. Everything is significantly better: the flight model, ground handling, lighting, reflections, ground textures, clouds, turbulence, and the digital twin. All have seen major improvements. The user experience, tablet integration, and flight planner are also much more refined. (We keep wating for the new ATC, completely revamped but coming later they Said) After what I experienced this weekend, if all the default planes are as polished as the Cessna 172, I won’t need to buy third-party aircraft for a long time, because they will need to catch up. I’m excited for the PC-12, SR22, A321/A330, C172, and C152. Yes, the flight model really impressed me, but did you notice how circuit breakers are functional now? The tires even compress and deform under the weight of the airplane. This is the kind of attention to detail they can truly be proud of.

To me the 172 in MSFS2024 is much much better than in MSFS2020, it’s not even comparable. It’s not as twitchy as before, you feel the inertia, also you can finally trim the aircraft for a specific power settings and it stay right at the altitude you trimmed it at. Try doing that with 2020 During an approach it’s not as draggy as before and you can finally do approach with the right power settings(1800 to 1900 RPM) and most importantly a nose down pitch during the approach exactly as in real life (in MSFS2020 it’s 2100-2200RPM with a nose up attitude as if this was an airliner) I won’t even talk about how different the plane feels on the ground because it’s night and day. Asobo and Microsoft did wonder in the Flight model department

That’s on purpose…actually, they said multiple times that today wasn’t the day to discuss some things they want to deep dive in later on

Let's do a small recap: - Working Title is elevating default avionics to unprecedented levels (G100, G3000, G5000 and G3X), they are also producing study-level planes like the SR22, the CJ4, and the Citation Longitude. They are also leveraging their expertise to completely revamp navigation in the new sim. Their is strong evidence they are curently working on the Honeywell Epic avionics for the PC12NGX we saw in the last MSFS2024 trailer - Inibuild is bringing their well-known A310 from X-Plane to MSFS as a default plane and building a new, high-quality A320Neo V2 to replace the old one. It seems Inibuild is now in charge of all things Airbus-related in MSFS. - Microsoft is incorporating the excellent study-level Flight FX Cirrus Visionjet G2 as a default plane in MSFS2024. - Asobo is recruiting a well-known developer from IL2 to help improve flight dynamics in the new sim. Additionally, Asobo has released countless updates to enhance various aspects of MSFS2020. The latest addition in SU15 includes improved ground physics with parameters backported from MSFS2024, which will feature a completely revamped ground physics system. They are also seeking an ATC expert to revamp the ATC system. There is so much more going on, but I'll stop here. Do you really think all this work has been done just to dumb down MSFS2024? That idea is beyond ridiculous. Why would they invest so much in improving physics, avionics, and bringing default planes to study-level quality, purchase well-known excellent products to make them default, and pay Inibuild to develop all those planes, only to release MSFS2024 as an arcade platform? You don't seem to realize how nonsensical this is. Maybe you think Microsoft is foolish enough to pour all that money into improving MSFS2020 only to waste it in the next version of the sim. After all, Microsoft is such a new company—they surely don't know how business works, right? I apologize if I come across as a bit rude for some AVSIM users, but this mantra really frustrates me.

That’s what ya’ll said when the original MSFS2020 trailer droped, but nothing was handcrafted and the game looks exactly like all those trailers. And if you remember what have been said before by MS or Asobo about MSFS2024, it clearly indicates that what we are seeing in the trailer is autogenerated worlwide…Jorg even once said… « You land in a random place in MSFS 2024 and it looks like Forza »

That’s true, but I’m happy to see them even try, one thing wee can’t accuse Asosbo of is, not working as hard as they can to improve the many flaws the sim had when it first released. So we will see how it goes, but dismissing any attempt at implementing thing is not the right way to go in my opinion

When FSDT releases GSX or FSRealistic introduces an add-on for first-person walkarounds to enhance immersion, it's praised as a tool for serious simmers. But when Asobo integrates a global system that lets you roleplay various real-world flying operations, it's dismissed as a game feature for Xbox and less serious simmers. The bias in these attitudes is clear. Stay open-minded, wait and see, and if it's not for you, don't use it. Personally, I'm thrilled about this feature. I see it as a way to simulate new kinds of flying activities you find in the real world but couldn't simulate before. For example: - Crop dusting, which helicopters and Skywagon used to do 200m near my childhood home. - Coastguard missions flying at low altitude to search for suspicious boats. - Skydiving missions, taking a group of jumpers above an airfield or above the laggoon - Rescue missions, taking off from the airfield to find a hiker with broken bones and transporting him to the nearest hospital. These are all operations you'd find at my local airport, Martinique TFFF 🇲🇶 in the Caribbean, but they're impossible to simulate currently. So how can you call MSFS2020 or X-Plane a true flight simulator if I can't simulate everything that happens at my local airport?

Even if you're an IRL pilot, sitting at your desk, you're still pretending. It's not real life. In your A320 cockpit, you're probably flying solo, without a first officer. You're not talking to real ATC, and the planes around you are likely AI. Even on VATSIM, the experience isn't the same as real life. Don't act like you're the only one seeking an experience as close to real life as possible. I do too. I fly only real routes, in real time, with real weather, following real procedures. I actually do more research than flying to match airline operations as closely as I can. But you know what? That doesn't make me a better simmer than others. In fact, it can be the opposite because I tend to overlook other ways of flying. Becoming an elitist, thinking that knowing how to fly my Fenix A320 makes me superior to a an IRL BN2 pilot flying charter operations to the Grenadines or Dominica, is misguided. The point is, having the option to fly missions doesn't take anything away from what we used to do. At the end of the day, what is closest to real life is having options, and that's exactly what these missions will give us. If I want to fly a charter to the Grenadines and see my passengers arriving in an SUV, boarding my BN2, then disembarking at Union Island to wait for other passengers, I can do it. But you're acting as if restricting options makes the sim better, like the guy being offended because you can use a black female avatar. That's ridiculous. If you want your white male avatar, choose it. If you want to free fly like before, do it…and just let people have option

I'm really tired of this argument. You don't want missions? Fine, just do your thing as you used to. No one calls DCS an arcade platform even though it has plenty of missions, so why say that about MSFS? The benefits of these missions are actually very interesting. They give us new reasons to fly and new things to do instead of flying the same routes, like EGLL to LFPG or KBOS to KMIA, over and over again. You can still do those routes if you want, but missions open up other ways to fly. For example: - Take a sightseeing flight from a small aerodrome with passengers. - Fly Evansan to places you don't even know about. - Pilot a private jet from an executive airport to another with your customer. - Deliver cargo to a remote location in the middle of the forest or in the tundra. - Conduct reconnaissance flights to locate a sinking ship. - Or, if you prefer something familiar, fly a KLM A330 from JFK to Amsterdam. All of that with believable scenarios, that’s awesome and the possibilities are endless. If I'm not mistaken, Asobo said these missions will be available worldwide, even in free flight mode, which is awesome. But if you're not interested, just keep doing what you've always done. IDK why it it trendy to call MSFS arcade, maybe it makes you fell superior or something….at the end we are all playing pretending to be pilotes in front of our desk.

Would couldn't have described it better, this plane just feel real and alive, not your avarage flight model at all. Funny enough after some pratice this PC12 has become the easiest plane to land at St Barth for me. Also dont forget how great it handle on the ground, you even forget about MSFS2020 ground physics

It’s not an intended behavior, it happens when MSFS transitions from ground physics to air physics (or reverse). They said they’ll try to improve it as much as they can while staying accurate to the real pc12. For now to avoid this wee need to take off as soon as airspeed allow it, landing as slow as we can and apply the correct rudder trim

But there is so much details in the 3D model, it’s remarkable. The cargo door both of the butterfly cockpit door and even the little engine hatch or the parachute handle everything is design as if it was meant to be open and admire but it doesn’t open😢. Hope it comes latter Beside that I looove this plane really, since it came out in the SU14Beta I haven’t flown anything else, from the 3D model to the system and flight model everything is great. It fly accurate to the number and it feels right, the correct nose down attitude on final for exemple. Hand down the best default plane in MSFS to me!!! I customized the flight_model.cfg though to make the nose wheel free castering as in real life and to give it nose UP pitch on the ground like you can see most SR22 having, I’m still fine tuning the suspension and might share it on flightsim.to when I’m happy with it