mtr75

But it’s not, which you don’t seem to understand. It’s a document describing the absolute perfect performance of that aircraft in a brand-new, flawless state, with a professional test pilot at the helm. You say you want the simulator to be accurate. An airplane that doesn’t hit book numbers is absolutely, 100% accurate. And I will say it again: ask any pilot, ask any CFI. The POH numbers are an ideal. You cannot and will not hit them. That’s the reality.

That’s called P3D. I believe it’s already out.

Nope, I take the numbers and add 50%. 🙂 At least for the takeoff and landing distances. For airspeeds (approach speeds, VX/VY, etc.) I fly 'em how they are written. I guess I should be specific, I am talking (in particular) about takeoff distances. The other thing that I think is important is range. It doesn't surprise me at all that people can't get the book fuel flows and ranges from the POH. Happens in real life as well, for example, wind is what you expected it to be, etc. Gotta stop and get more go juice! Don't mean to be argumentative with you, Manny. Sorry if I was.

Just did a quick hop in the Caribbean to test out the update. Real world weather worked! Spot on in fact. And the ground handling in the 152 seemed much improved. Quite happy!

👍 Did you fly real weather? Nasty down there today. Just got done with a quick TNCM-TQPF hop in the 152 to check the update.

For real pilots, adding percentages to these performance numbers are life. Following the performance numbers can and has resulted in death. If you think you're going to nail the performance numbers on a takeoff over an obstacle, you will be a lonely pilot. Because nobody will fly with you. There are old pilots and there are bold pilots. There are no old, bold pilots.

False. Find that for me in the FAR's. It ain't in there. TBO is not regulatory. It is actuarial. That's what the insurance company actuaries established as the most likely time your engine will word not allowed out. You can run an engine for 10,0000 hours if the compressions are okay and you're comfortable doing so. I've been involved in two engine overhauls in GA aircraft, and the overhauled engine in one case got a 30% improvement in fuel usage per hour for the same speeds. And the engine it replaced had gotten a top overhaul at 1,400 hours and we ran it until past 2,100 hours. So no, that's not why TBO is 2000 HRS, and an engine at 1,999 hours is not performing anywhere near how a new engine performs.

I'm sorry, but you are not getting rated horsepower from any 2000-hours engine in any context. Not a plane, not your car, not your lawnmower. Just ain't happenin'.

Disagree. Saying "we can create ISA standard conditions, therefore the planes should be perfect" is fallacy. Do you have the engine leaned properly (for pistons)? Do you have power set properly for the altitude (for turbines)? Are you trimmed properly or are you dragging the plane around the sky? I can think of plenty of variables. Remember, the most unreliable piece of equipment in the airplane is the pilot.

Yeah, I mean if you're going to try and clear a 50-foot obstacle at the end of a short field by using book numbers, good luck. I will be watching, not riding along! I know a guy who killed himself and a friend doing exactly that in a 172.

I didn't realize we got all these Chuck Yeagers up in here! Lol

A 45-year old engine that's been overhauled twice and has 900 hours on it does not produce rated HP, period. Same is true for a prop that's been overhauled and has 1,000 hours on it. Then you've got a ham-fisted private pilot with 180 hours total time, and no, you aren't going to get the book numbers that the professional test pilot got with a new plane. Ask any GA pilot and they will tell you the same.

Yep! Worked the one time I tried it. And $10 to the first person who can fly the NDB approach without a GPS! 😂

This option to request a different runway or approach is a massive leap forward in ATC, in my opinion. I actually filed a Zendesk report about this. Extremely pleased to see his addressed.

As a licensed pilot, I can tell you, POH numbers are a guide at best. The general rule of thumb for pilots who want to get old is to add 50% to the book numbers. In other words, if the book says to expect a 1,000-foot takeoff roll, plan for it to take 1,500. (Just a round number example). Many a pilot has wound up in the trees expecting book numbers. As my instructor always points out, POH numbers are with a test pilot and a brand new airplane. So the idea of modding planes so they achieve book numbers is actually unrealistic rather than realistic.

It does have RNAV approaches, and also has a VOR approach.

I'm a licensed pilot with my instrument rating. 🙂 Aileron into the wind doesn't work in the sim.

Yeah, aileron into the wind ain't work.

The ground handing is a joke in the sim. As soon as you touch the throttle for takeoff in the 152, with its overwhelming 110 HP, the airplane jerks to the left 45 degrees. I think basically the sim applies full torque/p-factor the second the plane is going 1 MPH, and that you see the same on touchdown. It’s ridiculous.

More than glass cockpits, I think developers should stop releasing so many niche planes. How about a Cherokee? We’ve got the Icon, some LSAs, some antiques, but no PA28? Kind of ridiculous.

Was doing pattern work (touch and go's) yesterday at my RL home airfield in the stock 152. Had real-world weather enabled. Slight crosswind at about 6 knots. I have to say, he flight physics are pretty darn good. Of my 3 landings, two were pretty good, one was an absolutely perfect downwind wheel-kissing crosswind landing. I've found in P3D that some aircraft land well, others don't. For a stock aircraft in the sim to handle as well as this one does, I'm impressed. Ground handling is still appalling, but that's another story. 😊

I would say, as someone who spends like 80% of my time, at least, flying over water, that it's hugely important. It is one of the things I think they did a superb job with.

Sure it moves, water moves. But how fast? It's a feature of flat water. And you're flying over it at a few hundred miles an hour. Do you think you'd notice if it was moving at 10-20 MPH? Nah.

That's one of the first things I noticed, and it's amazing! If you've ever flown over flat open water in real life, that's exactly what it looks like. Asobo did an amazing job with this!

It's weird to me that nobody is thinking PA-28. We'd all be howling if there wasn't a single Cessna piston single in the game. That said, the Piper Aerostar has the potential to be one of the coolest flight sim aircraft ever. Fastest piston twin ever made.