I’m talking about essential training items which are within the envelope, e.g. windshear recovery.
(post deleted by author)
I will try to add something of value to the discussion.
There are MANY kinds of tests you could do on your piece of software. Each of them requires qualified people to create the test, manage them and run them. You also need lots of man-hours and lots of money. When I say lots of, I mean it. Testing is an expensive procedure, so it is one of the few things dev teams try to minimize and apply the most convenient kind of test in the most convenient way. At the end of the day, this piece of software is just a game, nobody is going to die if the game breaks in the middle of a flight, so, in terms of capitalism, and money, you can cut down resources spent in testing, BUT, they still have to test it, it is intrinsic to software development, not a single developer can write code clean of bugs and problems. So, they ARE testing it, but finding ALL the bugs is virtually impossible, even for Microsoft. We will keep seeing bugs, the good news is while the software gets more mature, the curve of bugs will start to diminish. The bad news is, MSFS is still too young and new, so it is not at that stage, just yet.
5 Likes
That’s exactly my point, wrong training!
If the aerodynamics are incorrectly simulated, the windshear recovery procedure/training will be wrong. (E.g. in a well known 20t twin engined turboprop)
(post deleted by author)
Thanks everyone for the great inputs and insights. Given Dev Team does not generally respond directly to the Board on questions, our strong recommendation is to submit this as a question for consideration in the next Dev Q&A. Thanks.
4 Likes