Basic scenarios broken! Cessna 172 engine won't start recently!

Ok, pretty much most of the time I start MSFS only to waste 15 minutes and end up closing it!

Interesting thing is that since I bought it I have been trying only one airport (KRNT) and one airplane (172 steam)

This basic scenario keeps failing for some reason or another, Makes you think that Asobo has no clue on how software quality assurance actually work. Every time they fix something something else breaks - no concept of regression testing I suppose! :slight_smile:

Today I’m not able to start 172 engine following all procedures (which has been working for me before), fuel selector on both, shutoff valve on…etc.

Sometimes I restart the game and it works but that is simply not acceptable as it takes very long time to get to the point where you ready to start the engine!

Another example is to start with half the airplane stuck inside the wall of some hanger and good luck starting engine or getting it out…Quantum computing in action!

Sorry for the rant, but was wondering anyone else is facing these issues or I’m just having bad luck?

I Just ordered latest version of XPlane and will give it a try…no kidding! :frowning:

1 Like

Why did you order x-plane?
The free demo version is identical with the release version, apart from the time limit.

1 Like

The C172 is one of the better aircraft in the Sim. Never failed to start unless I did sth wrong.

I see a lot of threads here where jumbled joystick assignments cause trouble of the kind you described. You can test it by unplugging all periphery and just use the mouse to start the aircraft (make sure you are in Legacy Mouse interface).


Unfortunately once you open XPlane with default scenery and default planes you will wonder why did you waste such amount of money in Xplane. I recently opened it to fly the E190 (as the Embraer from virtualCol is horrific) and it eas going back to the 80s graphics :pleading_face:

I hope you can get your C172 working again, I dont have any issues with it.


Maybe a silly question… but did you crack the throttle? Prime with the fuel pump, give it some fuel to fire up?

1 Like

Personally my Cessna 172 don’t start engine only when I forgot to turn on fuel valve. It’s strange.

Don’t rule out the obvious as well, like making sure it actually has fuel. I have a feeling I loaded up an aircraft previously and it had no fuel at all. A little odd really as I am pretty sure the sim will automagically load 50% fuel normally - but it is possible there is a bug that triggered this.

1 Like

Thanks guys for your replies, I’m sure it’s not an error at my end but your replies add couple items to the things to try before restarting the sim.

As for my experience with xplane:

  • xplane starts much much faster.
  • There is definitely a very noticeable difference in graphics quality :smile: but it’s not that bad with VR. I use VR only now and don’t think I can go back to desktop again. I don’t mind the degraded quality as I’ve been flying traffic pattern and basic maneuvers mostly.
  • To my surprise there is also a very noticeable difference on how the airplane handles! I never been in real Cessna but it feels like it flies much better with xplane! Lift off is much smoother, turn coordinator behave as the book said it should while in MSFS the ball is either jumping all over the place or not moving at all - and I always fly with no wind.
  • There is nothing like hitting ALT+R and replaying your flight and watching your landing quality - terrible in my case!

So I don’t regret buying xplane, but of course it will be better if Microsoft buy laminar research and we get the best of two sims in one :joy:


I get what you mean. I also go back to P3D and A2A or other devs everytime I want a realistic fligh model. MSFS looks great but that’s basically it atm. The Cessnas are quite good and I do have real C172 experience, 200ish hours on that plane. As you mentioned it: aileron induced yaw is basically not existent in MSFS but well modelled in XP and P3D (the latter with 3rd party aircraft) which gives the 3 axies controls a sense. In MSFS the ball moves around but it doesn’t make much sense what it does as the nose doesn’t show anything the ball claims. Normally in a C172 if you turn the yoke to either side the nose will veer off significantly to the opposite side. The aileron that moves down creates drag and “pulls” the nose to the side, simple lever principle. You need to counter this yaw movement with a coordinated use of the rudder, the basics of a coordinated turn. MSFS doesn’t do that AT ALL.

And yep, the visual degradation of VR is really worth actually sitting inside of an AT-6 or Spitfire ^^


YES! Some scenarios kill the c172 engine or put in slow mode the acceleration.
Fly in developer mode. Load the c172 again and it works again perfect!

1 Like

That’s interesting. What joystick and sensitivity setting in pitch are you using?

I don’t know what X-plane version you bought, my X-plane 11 take ages to load the first time. Much longer than MSFS.

Never noticed anything wrong with the MSFS turn coordinator. The whole aircraft is a big vibrator, in real life you won’t get a steady slip indicator either. So don’t know if that tells something about MSFS or X-plane.

Just to be sure, you don’t accidentally have the fuel valve closed? The fuel valve is the little lever with red knob above the pedestal.

Only thing which I found more realistic in X-plane is the bouncing around during taxiing. In my opinion the response of those leaf-springs on the Cessna feel exactly like the real deal, other than that the FS2020 flight model is no better or worse than the X-plane flight model.


Hmm, not really. The aileron moving up also creates drag so that doesn’t explain adverse yaw. The difference in drag is not directly caused by the control surface deflection. The wing with the downward deflecting aileron creates more lift and therefore more induced drag as long as bank angle is increasing. To counter this difference in drag, the drag created by the upward deflecting aileron is artificially increased, either by giving the upward moving aileron a greater deflection compared to the downward moving aileron, or by having the trailing edge of the aileron protrude below the wing.


I haven‘t studied the subject as you so I won‘t argue here :wink: however I‘ll tell you what I learned at flight school and you tell me where I‘m wrong, so everyone benefits except you :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Moving an aileron down has a similar effect like adding flaps, it increases the thickness and the AOA of the airfoil of this part of the wing. (In the case of flaps it allows to take the nose down and bring down the overall AOA). In case of the aileron you can‘t do that so the wing „goes up“.

Moving the aileron down on the other side reduces the thickness of the airfoil of this area, the chordline becomes flatter, lift is being reduced.

Thicker profile, more drag. That‘s basically what I was tought. I‘m sure there‘s more into it if you engineer a wing though.

To reduce the yaw moment, as you say, newer aircraft have a reduced aileron travel down or airliners for example even use spoilers to reduce lift instead of adding it on the other side.

Thickness to chord ratio is not applicable here, neither with flaps. The chord-line changes which affects the angle of attack (AoA is the angle between the chord-line and the relative airflow). There are several options to reduce adverse yaw, the two I just mentioned, then there is aileron-rudder coupling which cause the rudder to deflect slightly as you give aileron input, more modern aircraft have a turn coordination function, usually part of the yaw damper. The roll-spoilers on an aircraft are not primarily there to compensate for adverse yaw, they won’t even deflect at lower aileron inputs. The purpose of roll-spoilers is to increase the difference in lift between the wings and thus increase roll rate.

I don‘t understand why a thicker airfoil doesn‘t create additional drag. The air has to travel a longer was around it than at the rest of the wing which creates turbulence. Some aircraft even have vertical elements that seperate the airstream around the aileron from the airstream over the wing. Also a higher AOA in this area automatically created more drag.

The sailplanes I learned to fly on had the same aileron deflection up and down, Ka8, ASK13. Adverse yaw is extreme, you need a lot of rudder for coordinated turns. On the other hand, you can almost fly them with rudder only, a slip requires a lot of control crossing.

1 Like

Sorry, I thought you meant that deflecting ailerons creates essentially a thicker aerofoil, but you are correct a thicker (larger thickness to chord ratio) aerofoil does produces more drag.

1 Like

My english capabilities have reduced quite a bit since school 😵‍💫 lack of practice.

1 Like

I’m using the honeycomb yoke with defaults. With xplane it feels like you need to keep pulling the yoke to maintain pitch attitude, but with MSFS it feels like the airplane is on a spring and can bounce a bit.

It takes 1 minute for xplane to load on my PC. But I use reasonably powerful machine (128GB RAM, 32 Cores, and NVidia TITAN RTX). I never been in real Cessna, so can’t tell exactly, but I’m not able to make any sense of the ball movement :slight_smile: