flying_carpet

Riiiight 😁 - so, I interpret your statement as following: "... the results showed that a realistic aerodynamic model was the #1 answer with 60% rating it as very important, and 35% rating it as important. .... And that's why approx 70% use MSFS as their primary simulator." Riiiight - (don't pin me down on the exact figures) so, you may know that if people get asked what is very (or the most) important for them when buying food, the responses are usually - say 42% of them are saying : "high quality and produced locally to save the environment, even if it is more expensive". However ,the real figures are: only 10% are buying high quality and produced locally, the rest is buying the lesser quality.

Interestingly enough there is a post in this very subforum (see below), probably because there was a need for it - already around 6 months before release of MSFS 2020 ... In none of the other subforums at avsim there is such a post - probably because there was no need for it ... isn't it? 🤪

The wind graph shows wrong values.

I just have seen a very interesting post "over there" in the X-Plane forum. It is about the age of the simmers, namely that earlier the average age of the community was around 50 years or even older. Currently, we have ... see below. So, I rather would call these young people "kiddies" or at best "gamers". Undoubtedly, older simmers have and invest more money into their hobby and I would also claim that they are taking their hobby more seriously (i.e. flight/ground physics, failure simulation, ... etc. over scenery). But that's only my interpretation 😉.

No, he didn't! Or the other way round? Namely he did. Either way ... they (LR) don't say, they have the PERFECT simulator, but "the most realistic". By that they mean "the most realistic currently available, but further improvements are possible and definitively will come (like during the last around 30 years)".

Ok, last last quick response. As I've said already earlier, in other environments you can do BOTH: beta AND skip update if you want/need to for the stable version (although you have server/client communication, too).

This gets a bit silly now, but ok ... one last response. Topic missed 🤦‍♂️ ... I wrote analogously "I don't want to be the guinea pig, therefore I DON'T use the beta, but wait to update to the 'stable' version. However, if that is borked and I have no possibility to skip that update for a certain time, then ...🔥💣".

Are "you guys" aviation experts? Then you might know that many systems in planes are duplicate or triplicate. Why? To avoid a failure of the (whole) system. If one system fails, the second (or even third) takes over. And the second (or third) system are NOT configured as the first one, but often even made from different hardware, or if on the same hardware on a different OS or programmed in a different programming language to avoid the single point of failure or configuration error. Isn't it?

Thanks for confirming my and bobcats earlier statement of the need of call it backend-/fallback-/backup-servers. The initial opinion in this thread (although not by you) was, that such thing isn't possible (or required). Why? ??? That's not the topic of this thread as we are in the "glorified scenery simulator"-forum here 😁.

So ... that's your explanation? Some magic proprietery alchemy? Are they changing every few months the way they transmit (stream) the data from the server to the clients? That would be indeed a reason to update every few months server and client, so they both talk the same "language". So be it. However, there is still a VERY good reason to offer a "Skip this update" as I pointed out earlier and what was my starting point. So, an update is rolled out and ... Scenario 1: I just want to do a short recreational flight of 15-30 min, but now I am told I have to update. Oh no! Slow download speeds were a problem already before, and if I have bad luck, I have to wait some hours until the update is finished. Scenario 2: I didn't participate in the beta phase, as I don't like to be the guinea pig. However, I have a relative seldomly used combination of hardware and software (rudder, yoke, navigational software, ...) and I'm a bit frightened it may not work after the update. So, I'm waiting for, say 2 weeks, to check the forums if there are problems with the new (forced) update. After these 2 weeks I recognize, no problems, so I do the update and it works. Fine. However, for 2 weeks I wasn't able to play with MSFS. That's the price I was willing to pay. Scenario 3: I didn't participate in the beta phase, as I don't like to be the guinea pig, so I didn't update yet. I waited for some days and observed the forums and tadaaa ... some people with a very similar setup to mine report problems or even CTD's. So ... what to do? Be brave and try it nonetheless with the risk of getting CTD's? Or should I wait until a fix comes out with the next beta and update (i.e. including beta testing time, in some months). During this thime I can't use my MSFS. Scenario 4: I didn't participate in the beta phase, as I don't like to be the guinea pig. But I am brave and install the update. I start my MSFS and ... boom ... some problems occur or even CTD. NOW im borked. Do I have to wait until the next beta phase ... (see scenario 3)? I.e. I can't play MSFS during that time. So, for ... Scenario 1: solution is ... "Skip this update" (for the price of not getting some new features which I won't be using anyway). But I can play MSFS for this short flight. Scenario 2: solution is ... "Skip this update" (for the price ...) until I checked the forums and find out with relief that there aren't problems to expect. But I can play MSFS ... during these mentioned 2 weeks. Scenario 3: solution is ... "Skip this update" (for the price ...) until the next beta/update. But I can play MSFS. Scenario 4: solution is ... "Skip this update" (for the price ...) ... something along those lines ... Still, this is "only" the "entertainment software corner" of MS. What about professional use, e.g. Office 365? Imagine, I'm a company owner and MS announced a mandatory update of Office 365. Ok, fine. Finally some new features ... which I probably won't ever use, but so be it. Monday morning ... a growing number of employees complains that their Office suite is borked. At lunch time it turns out that it is around 25 % of the employees, who can't work any more. Due to the forced update. If MS had implemented a "Skip this update", we could have tested in my company on some PC's to find out whether it works. But now the update is rolled out and I ask MS what to do. Can I have the old server/client-config? "No, we don't have a backup-solution (the previous server/client-version) any more, we deleted them. This is a mandatory update for working with the latest and best Office365-experience ...blah, blah, marketing gibberish.". Still, around 25% CAN'T work - neither with the latest blah, blah nor with the previous config. After all, MS found the reason for these problems and writes a report what happened. GREAT!! Now I'm satisfied and love MS again. Although 25% of my employees can't work ...

Could you please elaborate that in a bit more detail so that even I 😉 can understand it? Does that mean, they are changing every few months the clients and also server sides? What a waste of time ... You need to know that I have a fair understanding of data transfer protocols like - not only - http (for www), ftp (file transfer), POP/IMAP (email), rtsp (video streaming) etc. and these protocols don't get changed every few months, for good reasons. They are backwards compatible to a certain extent (however, not for 20 years or so 😄).

Ermm, I remain skeptical ... Isn't the streaming data on the servers? Google* has its Maps and Streetview data also on servers as "streaming" data. Still, you can access it from an outdated Google Earth app (I know it from own experience), from within a browser (be it on Win, Lin, Mac, Firefox, Edge, Safari, Internet Explorer, Opera, ...), mobile devices, ... Do they have the streaming data stored for each of these options separate? * However, Google is bigger than Asobo, but then again, the company behind all that is ... MS.

Or why not introducing the option to skip the update this time and do it at a later time? Other, smaller companies than Asobo are able to do that and even do so ...

MSFS software DIED?? Some people predicted it ... Oohh ... misunderstanding. SCNR 😁.

Thanks jcomm for showing us these videos. That's the difference between a real (good) flight simulator and a fine weather simulator. RW pilots don't train "normal procedures" in "real (or fine) weather", as that's what they do in their daily routine, so no training in a simulator required. It's the emergencies what they train in a simulator - even level D (go figure 😄). That's the purpose of simulators, to train situations which are way too expensive or dangerous in real life.

Holy moly, it looks (and simulates *) like 4K streaming compared to VHS tapes 😁. * Snow and ice have an impact on the plane's behavior - in the air and on ground. And turbulences in the clouds and all the bells and whistles ....

How would you like me to better describe the conditions? In the description of the video? "Nobody" reads description below videos and people would complain to better describe/show the conditions. So, should I do it IN the video? Ok ... good idea. Oh ... I did that already ... 🤪. Maybe I should make them even wildly flashing? If you aren't able to understand such easy things, please don't post such comments. By doing so, you are undermining your own credibility and expertise. However, which is Vr of the CJ4? Of course Vr varies, depending on different factors. In the manual there is no hint (not even an approximate value), also not for other speeds, apart from the max. demonstrated crosswind, VMO and VMN. Of course 😉 planes (and pilots, too) experience headwind (miles) beyond Vr. Every day. Not while standing on ground, true, but while accelerating and taking off. What's the difference between both scenarios? The wind/air hitting the plane is the same with the same speed. Standing on ground is like in a wind tunnel (also not a very uncommon situation). Of course the wheels aren't turning as they would during acceleration of the plane but aerodynamically (lift of the wings) it is the same. Otherwise, wind tunnels were useless. Apart from that, from 120 kts on the brakes seem to be inoperative, as the plane starts to roll backwards. And even at 150 kts of wind the plane doesn't take off. That's silly (on the first sight) - but explainable. Who knows why? 😉

So, the CJ4 was tested by type rated CJ4 pilots. What was the outcome? I remember advertisement for e.g. toothpaste "clinically tested". But they don't tell us the outcome. Although not a type rated CJ4 pilot I tested it myself. As demonstrated before the crosswind behavior of several default planes is simply wrong. So I tested the CJ4 and while standing, it isn't glued to the ground like other planes, but tosses around at ca. 90 kts into the right direction. I don't know whether that's correct at that speed, but so be it. Apart from that, it is said that while rolling forward during the start, it should behave better. Additionally I have tested it with headwind. Outcome:

First, 2 videos: Download link: https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/langley/instructions-for-downloading-and-flying-all-three-x-59-laptop-flight-simulation-models/ (remark - made for/with XP11).

THIS !! Such features makes the heart of engineers (and I'd say pilots and physicists, too) beat faster - I know what I'm talking about 😉.

That will make ground physics even more advanced and increase the lead in this (and many other) aspects of flight simulation.

And in MSFS 2028 you will recognize every sand grain. I want to build sand castles ...

BTW, also the PC 6, DC 3, Icon A5, A320 show the same behavior. You can watch my videos or try yourself ...

Guys, PLEASE!! Read/watch THOROUGHLY my posts/videos. Yes and no. First, some other aircraft stay glued to the ground (e.g. the CTSL and even the highly praised iniBuilds A310), be it at 10, 20, 50, 100, 150 kts crosswind. Second, the C172 slides away with 40+ kts (however independent if on dry, wet or snowy runway). BUT: I've written it somewhere further above (several times) - starting at 4:45 min, you can see how it is sucked into the wind at 37 kts (parking brake set). EDIT: Finally 🙏 someone understood it 👍😉. EDIT 2: I have the latest version of MSFS, as I run it through Steam (as it only works through Steam on Linux and you can't refuse updating). But that's also something what I have written already in my very first post.