Evident by certain design decisions, bugs and flaws, it seems Asobo does not rely on real-world aviation experts as much as one could have hoped. It’s difficult to understand how many of the current bugs and flaws could have made it into the release of the simulator if pilots and aviation experts had been closely involved in the development and testing. To illustrate this; some examples listed below most of which I summarized in a different thread and something which came to my attention today as a flaw in the atmospheric model:
- ATC phraseology,
- US altimeter settings system used world wide,
- Lack of low visibility / RVR simulation,
- Lack of missed-approach procedures, holdings etc.
- Wrong taxiway numbering,
- Icing effect,
- Airliner flight dynamics,
- Turboprop engine model,
- Missing propeller effects,
- Multi-monitor support,
- Absence of offset approaches,
- Flight director and autopilot logics.
To add to this there are many tiny “nit-picks” which show a lack of technical understanding. Things like the baro-set knob setting current QNH instead of switching the altimeter to STD when pressed, the transponder not showing pressure altitude, the ISA indication on the Garmin not showing ISA deviation, being able to steer the aircraft with the autopilot servos engaged, the autopilot not disconnecting when using manual trim or at stall warning activation, RMI needles / bearing pointers able to point to ILS antennas etc.
It seems like temperature is not taken into account in altimetry. In the real world we need to correct the indicated altitude for cold temperature (below 0C at ground level). In MSFS temperature has absolutely no effect on the true altitude. I flew an ILS approach at my local airport down to baro-minima of 330 ft (200 ft DH) with -50C, the radio altitude was indicating 200 ft, I paused the sim and changed the temperature to +45C, the indicated altitude does not change at all! In my opinion this should have been an area of focus for the previous update together with improving the icing effects instead of visual goodies like snow and frozen lakes (although nice, preferably I want both).
Btw: when looking closely you can spot the (blue) bearing pointer overlapping with the (green) CDI needle, pointing to the localizer antenna. In real life it is not possible to receive a bearing to / from a localizer antenna. Also the “ISA” is not showing ISA deviation as it should on the real G3000.
As a disclaimer, I’m not trying to discredit Asobo or the developers of this simulator, they did a truly fantastic job. But I do think it is time for Asobo to tip the scale a little bit, consult aviation experts and start to deliver on the “simulator” promise. Personally I couldn’t care less about World Updates or more “eye-candy”. Yes the simulator looks FANTASTIC but it is still lacks functionality and has some flaws which prevents it from being a fantastic flight simulator. Although somewhat more true for the IFR pilots compared to the VFR pilots amongst us. Just as many others I’m also addicted to the nice visuals MSFS has to offer which makes it difficult to move back to other platforms. I just wished the rest of the sim was as big of a leap forward as the graphics.
There is an enormous potential with this simulator, and I’m sure we all have the same goal, which is the most realistic simulator possible on a home PC (no I don’t mean study level aircraft out of the box). Apart from the many positive effects of having such a broad audience, one drawback is that hardcore flight simmers with the experience and technical knowledge required to identify such bugs and flaws are no longer the majority. Important bugs / wishes required for accurate flight simulation are therefore not receiving sufficient attention and are not ending up in the “top bugs” or “top wishes”. I sincerely hope that in the end “no pilot will be left behind”.
So please elaborate on how you are planning to bring the simulator up to a reasonable standard for those of us interested in accurate flight simulation. Consult more real world professionals? Or are those conscious decisions in order to be more appealing to the casual user perhaps? Apart from the 6000 combined flight hours, what level of (professional) experience is there within the Asobo team? IFR, CPL, ATPL?