Can we focus on flight physics now?


Please, don’t take this as raw criticism, but as a constructive one.
I hadn’t flown a C172 IRL for 7 years until last week, as I’ve been flying jets since then. I was astonished with how off the flight dynamics of the C172 are on MSFS in comparison to the real thing. This is specifically true during takeoffs and landings. Other times, physics are ok, as aerodynamic damping is stronger as IAS increases. But the lack of left turning tendencies, lack of adverse yaw and last but not least the absolutely unrealistic stability at low speeds during takeoffs and landings make this sim a game, very arcade. I love the graphics, beautiful, but the sim is still a game in relation to flight dynamics. As I’ve said before in other topics, you can approach the C172 on MSFS without touching the rudder and ailerons in basically any winds condition, especially with no mountains nearby. This is impossible IRL if the wind is anything but calm.
I have over 1000h on the RL C172 and MSFS did not help me retain the handling for it at all after 7 years away from the 172.
I dream of having a sim with MSFS’s graphics and XP11 dynamics. Asobo, scenery is already fine! Focus on dynamics a bit!

Note: I do have saitek rudder pedals and a CH yoke.


Or, you could look up the multitude of existing threads right now.


You will be happy to hear then they’re doing exactly this. Look up the VOD of the last Q&A session. They showed a lot of improvements coming to the sim soon (the C172 being among the first 7 planes I believe).

Have you made sure that you’re on modern flight model, and set all assists to hard/true to life?

1 Like

Yes I did. Still miles away from the real thing


It’s not a matter of tweaking a specific plane’s flight model. The whole physics engine makes the air way too stable.


I did, and commented in most of them. But no changes so far! I only see eye candy updates. The sim needs a big physics overhaul, it’s not a matter of tweaking the 172’s adverse yaw or small other changes. The air mass doesn’t seem right and the way ALL aircraft behave in windy conditions is just plain wrong.


You’ve started a whole new thread for this old chestnut!
I suggest we all stop dividing our armies.


Reading your posts it looks more like you dislike the wind/turbulence simulation, not so much the basic aerodynamics, correct?

That said, it’s so tiring to read these constant ‘this is only a game’ complaints.
You aren’t the only one who complains and I really don’t understand why feel the need to open another thread.
Do you really believe that Asobo will react different after reading your game complaint?


Tiring is sitting here waiting for months a flight physics change that hasn’t come while 99% of topics in this forum aim at graphics. I’m pointing out the that the sim is so wrong that after 7 years away from the airplane the sim couldn’t make me remember how to fly it as before, while xplane has done a good job with jets in that sense.
Anyway, I see I’m not talking to pilots who are worried about dynamics here. Car racing sims like iRacing, RFactor do an excellent job focusing on dynamics. I can’t get why the same is not being done here.
Nevermind then, close the topic and happy gaming.


Wrong assumption and you really consider the default 172 in x-plane realistic?

99% of the users don’t know if a flight model is realistic or not, so obviously Asobo fixes the most noticeable things first.


With REP installed, yes. At least you gotta work when approaching in a gusty wind.


What is REP?

And again you are talking about wind & turbulence and not the basic aerodynamics.

Reality expansion pack.

This improves x-planes aerodynamics?

Kinda hard to say they are not working on flight dynamics seen the Q&As and the last couple of sim updates?

Perhaps the thing you want fixed hasn’t been fixed yet, but they definitely are working on it.

1 Like

Xplane’s dynamics are well modeled already. It just improves the aircraft peculiarities. My point is, any aircraft on xplane requires you to actually work to keep your wings from banking if there is turbulence. On MSFS, you don’t. It’s not an aircraft-specific issue, but a physics engine one.


Looks like you are fixated on the wind and turbulence part of the simulation because you get tossed around in your tiny 172 in turbulence.
That’s just a small part of the MSFS simulation.
I hope Asobo fixes the major bugs which appear even without any wind first :wink:

Ah. I really didn’t intend bursting anyone’s bubble here.
I actually completely agree with everything you said.
I am just overcome with all the thread duplicity that goes on here in the forum.


1 Like

Not a problem mate. I’m just really frustrated ‘cause I’m not flying much with the pandemic and needed something to actually stay proficient. Every time I go up and fly I find this difference regarding stability/turbulence very pronounced.

1 Like