marsman2020

Just Flight had made great products for the sim so far with great support for those products and little drama. I'd love to be able to buy an airliner that had a bit more content then the stock airliners and none of the lame Adobo bugs, for a reasonable price.

Feels like we are constantly strung along here with drama on this entire thing... It's close, will be out soon after the sim releases, there are blockers from Adobo that will take months to solve, then it's close, now we are back to maybe being months due to lack of debugging tools.....

Every time they have one of these Dev Q&As they talk up all this awesome stuff but then what we get is often pretty underwhelming in comparison. So I guess we will see what we actually get.

When Virgin Orbit does their rocket launches you can follow the 747 all the way through the launch on a 5 min or so delay. All the way to when the aircraft does the pull-up to drop the rocket. I flew chase one time in a Latitude and it was super sweet.

Can't wait!

That was an indie developer with a small team that felt obligated to deliver on what they had promised. Also the developer is a private company, so once they raked in all the $$$ from the initial sales of the game, they had complete control over what happens with that $$$ (ie, use it to make a new game and leave everyone hanging, or use it to improve No Man's Sky at no cost to players). NMS also came out in August, and by the following April had had 2 giant updates which added entirely new content and game play mechanics that weren't even there at release. Asobo supposedly has 100+ people working on MSFS and we are getting nowhere near the level of new stuff No Man's Sky received. They can barely keep the word not allowed sim working in the week before and week after an update. It's broken like 1/2 the time.

10 year lifespan of a working product, not 10 years to get to a working product. Some of the people who have paid for the product might not even be around in 10 years, given the realities of the age distribution of the flight sim community. Customers deserve a working product now. Also, quite the victim blaming kissing-Asobo's-rear-end attitude. There are multiple problems with the sim no matter how hard you want to stick your fingers in your ears.

Guess that the aircraft carrier video you posted with your snarky comment about MSFS.... It's detecting the coordinates of the aircraft and then going "outside of the physics engine" to accelerate and decelerate the aircraft. All of the SimVars are present to read the relative wind direction on the aircraft, environmental conditions, etc and then apply arbitrary translational and rotational accelerations to the aircraft. That's also how the "flight recorder" apps work, which was also pointed out to you. There is nothing keeping anyone from making a totally custom flight dynamics engine, and I'm pretty sure that the freeware helicopter does just that. What I don't want to see is people using this as an excuse to clear Asobo from their responsibility to deliver the next-generation flight model that was promised as part of the base sim, because "3DPs should just go code their own FDE". Only the upper echelon of 3DPs do that, and the rest of the developers deserve to have a system that works.

BS. Not every aircraft developer should be forced to create their own flight dynamics engine outside of the sim (which is what PMDG does).

There is way more to the flight model then the global coefficients, if you want behaviors to be correct at the edge of the flight envelope (like stalling the inside wing during the base to final turn).

A straight wing vs a swept wing vs a delta wing will have different spanwise distribution of lift. Different fuselage and engine mount configurations will also have different local coefficients around them. Yet the normalization algorithm is "one size fits all", mapping every aircraft to the same idealized geometry with only a handful of parameters to adjust that geometry. It also doesn't allow for things like a true biplane flight model. It may be an interesting way to try to have some local effects like stall, etc derive "naturally" from the flight model while maintaining backward compatibility with the FSX tables, but I'm very skeptical of the results thus far.

The aerodynamics of an airfoil or fuselage operating in the supersonic regime are much different then in the subsonic regime. There are also major impacts on how for example engine inlets work to manage shockwaves and ensure the engines stay happy. Just because you can change some parameters and get a fast KIAS value doesn't mean it's being properly simulated.

I agree. I'm enjoying the MB-339 and the JF Arrow but it's difficult to justify spending a bunch of $$$ on something where one of the primary flight displays is wrong.

Without a way to implement a collimated HUD a lot of military aircraft make no sense to me to put in the sim.....

GAS published an entire video walkthrough showing all the aspects of the aircraft, so unlike say the Typhoon or the 737MAX....even the very first people to buy had the opportunity to know exactly what they were going to get. So I found the reaction to it a bit extreme even to me. If a developer wants to do a portover of stuff from a prior sim and make a video showing people exactly what it is and then sell that, with full disclosure, I don't see any issue. Showing 5 screenshots of the best angles on Simmarket when there are issues elsewhere, that's another story..... With a little bit of PBR render pipeline magic ported models can look pretty good.