Jump to content

BusheFlyer

Members
  • Content Count

    131
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BusheFlyer

  1. Thankfully in light aircraft autopilots are superfluous.. just don't worry it and enjoy actual flying. I am sure in time they will straighten out these bugs.
  2. I have been playing with the AP climbing out on both FLC and VS, it functions exactly as I expected it to.. if you leave trim alone and just pull the aircraft with the yoke at your chosen speed then enable either mode.. the nose will instantly drop as expected until the aircraft trims itself.. it will then porpoise around whilst trimming out. If you however establish the climb at say 110kts trim it stable at that speed turning on AP will hold it as expected. The aircraft has only 1 elevator trim.. the thing you are describing is in a real aircraft the autopilot will be adusting the trim of the aircraft using servos.. the secondary effect is the trim wheel in the cockpit will also turn because it's linked by cables and pulleys. If you observe in MSFS you will see the wheel moving as the autopilot makes adjustments. The problem is with most simulator setups is you have a joystick axis (most likely a wheel) that only moves when you manually touch it. It does not move in sequence with whats happen on the aircraft unlike the real one. So if you disable the autopilot and touch the trim wheel it will cause the sim aircraft to suddenly react to whatever your trim was at prior.
  3. MSFS is close enough to be realistic in terms of performance. It might be off little bit here or there but then so are real world aircraft. This striving for exact numbers is the proverbial dragons tail. That is the point I am trying to make. The second point was no matter how good the sim, real world flight especially when it involves flight in those extremes of the flight envelope just can not be compared. A spin in a real aircraft can not be simulated, neither can any aerobatic flight or even simple things like steep turns and stalls. The absence of any 'g' or any seat of the pants sensation makes any simulation anaemic.
  4. Hello new member, so MSFS is no doubt your first flight sim, you have zero actual real world flying experience and you are relying on the word of a single Youtube pilot over the accuracy of the flight model. Okay, think we have understood enough. Have a nice day.
  5. I should test it again myself, I pretty much gave up on using the autopilot except the way I described. I fly only GA types as a rule so I basically don't use the autopilot hardly at all.. just really for those long legs in the caravan or the kingair.
  6. Well, that sounds like half the problem.. if you don't trim it then the moment you engage AP and release the yoke the nose is going to drop rapidly. The trim wheel is just that a wheel.. which the autopilot will take over from the position you left it. It will start to trim nose up when engaged but that takes time which explains what you are seeing happening. The same thing would happen in the real aircraft.
  7. I have been flying the caravan a lot... about 74 hours logged according to my log book. Mainly because of FSEconomy. The autopilot is way too aggressive in pretty much anything it does.. therefore I only use it occasionally to hold altitude or in heading mode. I take off, trim to climb around 110kts, and follow the SID in the climb or the desired heading. Once I have reached altitude and am on track I typically engage hdg mode or nav mode and alt. Then enable autopilot. It then works fine, it holds altitude and tracks fine. I absolutely do not trust it on flying procedures, so at the descent I usually take back control and hand fly the procedure. All in all, it's a fun aircraft to fly IMHO. And until the various issues with the AP are ironed out it's not really a problem.
  8. I do understand what you are saying, the thing is POH's (Flight Manual's for the bigger boys) can be far from totally accurate. This doesn't just apply to the light aircraft types, I can assure you from years of experience with real Citations and Learjets and the 737 that the given data is often very coarse. Aircraft performance data is derived from actual real world flight tests in order to build a picture of approximately the performance you should expect. This data therefore was valid for that particular airframe with those engines and on that particular day. Margins and tolerances are used to ensure that the AFM data will be good for all aircraft of that type. I have a 737 AFM sitting in my garage and I am sure you would be surprised how coarse that data is.
  9. Airplane! (2/10) Movie CLIP - Automatic Pilot (1980) HD - YouTube
  10. This right here is the problem.. you simply can not compare real world flying to simulated flying. It's not a case of numbers.. In the real world flying is those numbers are variable. Let's suppose my Cessna 182 POH states my performance, what it is not stating is my 182 is a 20 year old airframe with an engine that is almost at TBO. It is also not accounting for that the airframe is a bit dirty after a summers flying adventures. I might hit those performance numbers or I might not.. probably not. Different 182's may well exceed those performance numbers on a regular basis. Mine might stall at 1-2kt's slower than that other 182. Real world flying is not exact, it's all an approximation with some sensible margins. From my real world flying experience and my simulator experience, then the stated goal of "something close enough to it" has been achieved. What I will say from buzzing around in the DV20 in MSFS.. that plane is extremely well modelled, I have over 100 hours in the real one and it's so close to be amazingly real in the sim, if it had wing flex then it would be perfect. I am comparing just the aircraft here. The actual sensation of being in a real DV20 to the sim one is of course incomparable.
  11. Well, statistically most pilot error accidents are not by newly qualified pilots. New pilots are very much aware of their limitations and lack of experience and tend to be pretty switched on. The danger zone is something like 600 - 1000 hour pilots, who are experienced enough to feel confident which naturally can lead to complacency. Although I am not sure on the statistics for deaths whilst using a simulator.. I am sure the blood pressure issues that software bugs can induce have claimed a few victims.
  12. Yes, I am not knocking those devices or purchase decisions. If you can afford it then why not. The beautiful thing about a sim is the aircraft is always ready to fly, real world aircraft ownership can often be a case of opening your wallet and watching as many hands dip into it on a continuous basis until the day comes you sell it. Private flying is and always has been impossible to reason financially.
  13. In my opinion, MSFS does a pretty good job at doing what it can to simulate real flight. There are lots of areas of improvement of course, but the reality is.. it is an unreachable goal. When VR arrives, just like in P3D, then it will be a huge improvement to the sensation of actually sitting in a cockpit. The reality however is feel, if you spend $1000's of dollars buying decent control yokes/throttles/pedals then you will get a better experience no doubt... but if you are going to spend that money.. why not spend it on real flying. There are certain things that simply can not be simulated.. aerobatic flight is the big one. Having spent many happy hours in real aerobatic types I just don't even touch aerobatics in a sim. It's these cases of flying in that 10% margin of the flight envelope that sims just can not represent realistically. Personally I get a lot of pleasure from flying in MSFS, I accept it for what it is.. and if it's real enough then to me at least it's doing a pretty good job.
  14. No thank you. Cockpit environments are getting so very good in MSFS with such high fidelity, in order not to ruin that environment, you would need a super detailed and realistic looking co-pilot. It would need to be animated to take the controls and operate radios when enabled to do so. Otherwise it is just a superfluous manikin that I would immediately disable. I would much rather they spent development time to implement that into something actually valuable.. such as improvements to aircraft and so on.
  15. Everyone. The thing is, many flight sim enthusiasts are never ever going to be satisfied totally. They are chasing the proverbial dragons tail, thinking this 'addon' or the next update.. or DX12 is going to reach the apex of their goal. The reality is somewhat different.. flight simulators are just that.. simulators.. they are not REAL. Technology will never ever be able to create a real flight experience with all it's complexities with aircraft, weather and so forth. So everyone, should enjoy it for it is and for what they personally get from it.
  16. On the kingair, condition lever is set to idle for taxi, and high for take-off, during flight you leave it in high. Then after landing checklist you set back to idle.
  17. Yeah I am a bit hazy on the date of it's manufacture, was many years ago that I owned it. It was definitely a H model. The O-300 was lovely sounding although a bit underpowered in a 172, not vastly so, just you had to think of it as a 3+1 aircraft rather than a true 4 seater. Anyway, many happy memories in that old girl.
  18. Well mine was a Cessna 172H from I believe 1974 (if memory serves me right), it really had very few panel upgrades aside from a c mode transponder and KTX radios, it had an RNAV unit. The autopilot unit was not much more than a wing leveller with basic features like altitude hold and could follow a VOR. The ASI was also in MPH. The nice things about it was it had the super smooth 6cyl continental as opposed to the much more common 4cyl lycoming. It also had 40degree flaps, which were both good and bad.. 40degrees could drop you into some tight fields. The problem with them, and why they removed them, was you simply could not climb or in many cases even hold altitude with them all the way down. So an unexpected go-around could catch you out if not careful. It was a solid touring aircraft, and was decent for IFR, just a bit on the slow side.
  19. Can speak as a former owner of a real C172, I almost never used the autopilot in all the years I owned it. When I did briefly use it it was just the basics like following a heading bug. I certainly wouldn't ever use VS mode on an aircraft like a cessna, it flies low and slow in mostly bumpy air, with a mixture control, VS mode would just be asking the aircraft to constantly trim chase. It is an easy aircraft to trim.
  20. Your post brought a recollection to me, many many years ago I was lucky enough to be on a safari in South Africa, in the Kruger. Crystal clear and freezing cold night, not a single hint of light pollution. The milky way was so utterly overwhelming in the night sky, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. It is something every man should see at least once in their life, it is surreal and you get an appreciation for how religions came to be.
  21. I have over 100 real world hours in MSFS so far without ever experiencing a CTD. So I would perhaps suggest that you might reconsider that stance.
  22. I use FSUIPC with the CH Throttle quadrant and assign the axis to both thrust and reverse, so detent is idle, backwards from detent is reverse and forwards is throttle. Just be sure to clear all the bindings from inside the sim itself for the device.
  23. I don't touch the airliners in any sim. The GA types are more my thing, just like in the real world.. a whole lot more fun.
  24. In terms of my full spec: AMD Ryzen 3800X 32GB 3600Mhz CL16 Team Group 8Pack Edition ram Gigabyte Aorus X570 Master Nvidia 2070 Super Not overclocked anything. You can save a few dollars on the board, the Master however is an amazing board if you want all the bells and whistles. At 1080p the sim sits almost always at 60fps, with slight dips in the busiest areas like NY. No stuttering at all, smooth as silk. At 1440p then the GPU is the limiting factor with frame rate between 50-60fps. I am only really interested in VR performance, so will see how well it does when VR is released. All in all, bang for buck.. the Ryzen is a great choice. I came from Intel also, and not at all disappointed. If I all I did was play games then the Intel might be a better choice, but I don't play games really and use my PC for all kinds of work along with simming.
  25. I use the Ryzen 3800X, and personally couldn't be happier with it. MSFS runs perfectly smooth at 60fps on my setup, dropping to around 50fps in places like NY. In terms of difference between this and the 3700X.. on paper not a whole lot, however, the 3800X chips are supposed to be picked from the best performing silicon and therefore tend to meet their spec a lot better. 3700X's are a bit like playing the lottery and hoping you get a good one. Mine boosts on all cores to 4500Mhz min.
×
×
  • Create New...