humongodongo

Great breakdown, and I agree with a lot of it, especially the distinction between control sensitivity and control feel. That's exactly where I think much of the "twitchy" perception comes from, though I'd put more of it on our hardware than on the flight model. The real 757 has a long yoke throw, and its feel system loads the column up as speed increases, so a small pitch change at cruise takes a deliberate, measured input against real resistance. Most of us are flying with a home spring yoke that has a fraction of that travel and the same light spring force at 140 knots or 340 knots. A small, "normal" movement on that hardware can map to a much larger elevator deflection than the same hand motion would produce in the airplane. Trim doesn't help either: in the real airplane trimming relieves the column force, but on a spring-centered yoke the force you feel never changes, so you lose one of the cues pilots rely on to make smooth corrections. So the airplane can respond correctly to the elevator it's getting and still feel nervous, simply because we're commanding more elevator than we think. Before calling it a flight model issue, it's worth trying a gentler sensitivity curve on the pitch axis and seeing how it changes the feel. That said, I wouldn't rule out some tuning on BlueBird's side, and the slow stab trim point is fair. I just think we need to separate the airplane from the hardware before we can say for sure it’s twitchy.

Not only does he say it, but he’s showing concrete evidence to that effect via the video (in terms of how little back pressure is required)

“All of avsim’s real life pilots” is a silly statement, I’ve seen a number of them here defend the model lol. Not to mention, we have eyes - the video demonstrates visually just how little back pressure is required to rotate the plane…, not to mention the commentary over the video by another active 75/76 pilot. I’ve noticed most of the complaints are from non pilots and have now seen numerous videos from known, legitimate 75 pilots defending the model. I think an unfortunately reality for simmers is that BB did not design this plane to work best with a joystick or “basic” spring loaded yokes with very little range of motion compared to a real yoke. Simmers without IRL flight experience tend to over control as is, even fundamentals like trimming are broadly not understood well or adhered to. Whether that was the correct decision from BB given it is ultimately a sim product and most people do not have the necessary equipment is for the customers to decide but at this stage I think it’s quite evident that it’s less the flight dynamics, and more the equipment most simmers, have. I imagine the sensitivity slider they’re including in the next patch will address much of it. 2 inches of travel on a honeycomb alpha equals a significant and disproportionate amount of action on the BB, not to mention the lack of force as you would find. This is true for most in depth simulations but it’s more pronounced on the BB because they didn’t necessarily accommodate that reality at all in V1.

Credit to Phillip Cooke

Really well said 👌🏽

Thank you sir, may be worth following the planes journey and giving her a spin down the line!

Thank you! Hope it only gets better and better and happy flying.

Before anything else: I have no affiliation with BlueBird. I'm a customer like everyone else. I also want to be clear about where I stand. The BlueBird 757 is not a finished product. Engine performance needs work, fuel burn is off in places, there’s flight model enhancements to be had, and there is a long list of legitimate issues the developers need to address. I am not here to defend it as perfect. But I've spent a lot of time in the support Discord and on the forums, and a large share of what gets reported as a "bug" is the aircraft doing exactly what a real 757 does. That matters, because every misreport buries the real ones, burns developer time, and feeds a narrative of a broken product when what is often broken is our understanding of the airplane. A few examples come up again and again. "I can't start the engines, the aircraft is broken." Almost every one of these turns out to be a pneumatics problem, not a software one. The 757 starts its engines with bleed air, and that air has to actually reach the starter with enough pressure to do the job. If the packs are still running during the start, they're drawing off the very air the starter needs. If the APU is supplying the duct but the isolation valve is closed, that air never makes it across to the other side of the system. Check your duct pressure before you turn the start selector, get the packs off, open the isolation valve, and introduce fuel at the right N2/N3, max motoring, etc. The 757 is not an airplane that starts itself with one button, and it was never meant to be. "My ILS frequency is wrong / not working." It isn't. The 757 doesn't tune its ILS from the frequency window up front; that window is for the VORs. The ILS frequency and front course are set on the ILS control panel on the aisle stand. If you're tuning the VOR and wondering why the localizer never comes alive, the airplane isn't bugged. You're tuning the wrong radio. "The plane accelerates when it captures the glideslope." This one usually comes with the explanation that "I entered my approach speed in the FMS." The VREF you enter on the approach reference page is a reference. It sets your speed bug and gives you a number to work from. It does not tell the autothrottle to fly that speed. Once you're off the VNAV path and on the approach, speed is yours to manage through the MCP speed window, using speed intervention to step down through the flap schedule as you configure. If that window is still holding a higher speed when the glideslope captures, the airplane will enter SPD mode on G/S capture and fly that speed. That is the logic working correctly. "The climb rate is way too high, look at this YouTube video." Comparison videos are only useful if you know what thrust the real crew was using. Many operators routinely take off with an assumed-temperature reduction and climb with a derate, CLB 1 or CLB 2, to save engine wear. A real 757 on a reduced-thrust departure will climb noticeably slower than one at full CLB thrust at the same weight. If you take off at full rated thrust and compare yourself to a video of a derated departure, of course the numbers won't match. Weight, temperature, and thrust setting all have to line up before a comparison means anything. I certainly recognize and it’s evident, especially the PW engines, are not dialed in right. “The pitch changes and climb thrust happen too early, before acceleration height.” This comes down to two things: the VNAV takeoff behavior setting (EFB › Settings › Livery options), and understanding what actually happens when you press VNAV on the ground versus in the air. Pressing it on the ground only arms it; the airplane then decides when to engage, at 400 ft RA at the earliest. Pressing it in the air engages it right then, at the moment you choose. With Option 1, VNAV sets the climb thrust for you. United flies it this way: VNAV isn’t armed on the ground, and at thrust reduction altitude they select VNAV, which automatically reduces to CLB thrust, while acceleration still follows the ACCEL HT set in the FMC. The trap is arming VNAV on the ground with Option 1 selected. It will engage at 400 ft RA and pull the thrust back to climb right there, long before your planned reduction, and a higher ACCEL HT won’t change that. With Option 2, VNAV won’t touch the thrust reference; you set climb thrust yourself. Delta flies it this way: VNAV also isn’t armed for takeoff, they select it at acceleration height, and then at thrust reduction height the PM presses CLB (or CLB 1 / CLB 2) by hand. Option 2 also lets VNAV sit armed on the ground without engaging until you select a climb reference at or above 400 ft RA, though I’m not aware of operators that actually arm it before takeoff. Either way, the core difference between the two options is simple: whether VNAV sets your climb thrust or you do. If the thrust comes back at 400 feet and you're operating under the "VNAV Behavior Option 1," the airplane isn’t misbehaving. It’s doing exactly what it was told.... Another area that catches people out is the autothrottle, specifically the difference between SPD, EPR, and THR HOLD. Each one changes who owns your speed. In SPD, the autothrottle moves the levers to hold speed while pitch handles the path. In EPR, it sets thrust to the selected limit and speed is held with pitch. In THR HOLD, the autothrottle stops moving the levers entirely, which means it will not save you if the speed decays or runs away. It’s no coincidence that the people who don’t know these differences tend to be the same ones complaining about speed management, climb rates, overspeeds in the descent, and odd behavior on approach. The airplane isn’t guessing. It’s doing exactly what the FMA says, and reading it and understanding what they mean is the habit that resolves many of these reports. This is genuinely a small list of examples I’ve seen to date. From my perspective, there’s an irony here worth naming. In many areas, the BlueBird 757’s systems simulation is remarkably deep. The pneumatics, the VNAV and speed management behavior (particularly in the descent and final approach phases), and the way each system depends on the others are modeled with a level of fidelity that rewards real knowledge of the airplane. And I suspect that, beyond the genuine bugs and areas for improvement (of which there are ample), that depth is exactly why so many people struggle with it. A shallower simulation would forgive the closed isolation valve, or a hung start because you weren’t monitoring the right parameters. This one doesn’t, because the real airplane doesn’t. A not insignificant number of the bugs being reported or complained about are, in a strange way, evidence of how faithfully parts of this aircraft have been built. The middle ground: None of this is gatekeeping. Everyone starts somewhere, and the 757 is an older, more hands-on airplane than many people are used to. It expects you to know your flows, manage your own systems and speeds, and understand what each switch and mode will do before you select it. That's part of the appeal. But there is a difference between "I don't understand why the airplane did this" and "the airplane is broken, I've been robbed, I want a refund." The first is a question, and this community is great at answering questions. The second, when it's wrong, makes it harder for the developers and the rest of us to separate real defects from procedural ones. So before you file a report, open the manual, check your setup, and try to determine what you did and if you did it correctly. If the answer is yes and the airplane still misbehaves, report it loudly and in detail, because that's exactly the feedback this aircraft needs. It's also worth some perspective. Plenty of us remember the Fenix A320 at V1. It had its rough edges and its share of frustrated customers, and look at it now (it took a long time). It has become one of the benchmarks for study-level airliners, and it got there because the developers kept at it and the community gave them clear, accurate feedback along the way. I have every faith the BlueBird 757 can follow the same path. The foundation is there, and the developers are clearly committed. Let's give them the signal they need, not the noise.

If you say so, I've seen different 757 pilots have wildly different reactions to the flight model. If you're in fact right (which I don't dispute) then I'd hope they update it accordingly.

They have an active 757 pilot on the team (and multiple active pilots as consultants). I met them at FSExpo 2 years ago, just for awareness

Its not twitchy, or light on the controls. you need small inputs to get her rotating and moving, Especially at lighter weights. My understand is very little pressure on the yoke in the 757 achieves big effect. I'd suggest flying the plane before taking the word from a bunch of armchair simmers

The BB757 has been developed under the 2020 SDK, your point is completely moot. Please inform yourself and get a grip.

Nonsense, there is a myriad of problems

Plane was, is, and will remain a complete and utter failure / disaster. I will never purchase anything from FSS again.

Could an existing owner please report back with a brief review / whether this is worth picking up now? I know V2 is in the works.