Improvements to flight model and systems behaviour and their impact on existing aircraft

What really concerns me is the range of bugs that affect system modelling and flight dynamics and whether they can be fixed at all if they’re not fixed right away.

I’m talking about issues affecting fuel mixture, prop feather, turbine engine simulation, flight dynamics during slow flight, behaviour of aircraft on the ground, AP, adverse yaw, propwash – all the stuff that community devs either can at best mitigate, or that they have to work around in some unusual way (often causing side effects).

The longer it takes to fix issues like these, the more 3rd party aircraft will be out there that are affected by the fixes. We’ve seen with other flightsims that this can become a real pain, and I imagine it’s gonna be worse with a flightsim that forces mandatory updates – as a MFS user, I can’t just stick with the previous release until the planes I want to fly are “fixed”, ie. adapted to the changes in the sim.

I fear that changes that would lead to more realistic behaviour might even not happen at all, when the number of affected aircraft has become so large that someone decides that, let’s say, changes to the turbine simulation would “break” too many of them to be worth the “extra bit” of realism. We might be stuck forever with certain… erm… MFS idiosyncrasies.

Is this something you’re considering when deciding priorities?

Completely agree. I think between this, the performance issues, and terrain textures this is absolutely one of the most important fixes that needs to happen ASAP.

100% agree. The least " involved" time to correct these issues is to catch them is in design, coding, and testing, BEFORE release.
One the product is released, the whole process of fixing bugs take on a magnitude higher complexity and difficulty.
A premature release, only makes the situation more complex (and costly).

Submitting Bug reports to ZenDesk does not seem to have any positive effects in my experience, apart from severely Rissng me off with their irrelevant responses.

I think I might have more success just Praying … at least that may induce a calmer state of mind.

1 Like

The third party dev’s must know this by now!
So apart from the obvious, why are they still selling products that they know, in all likelihood, will break with the next patch?

And, of course, this works both ways!
Why do we keep parting with our hard earned, when we too all know that this is going to happen?

I, for one will wait until the sim has had a chance to develop and ‘settle down’ a little before even
considering third party purchases.
Does this make me a genius? No, of course not. Just sensible!


This thread is related:

As far as I’m aware, no reputable dev has announced a release date for their first MFS aircraft. I’m not holding my breath for the first release from my favorite devs, like A2A, MilViz or Xtreme Prototypes.

1 Like


Good information.
Good point. Well made and well taken.


There are 3rd party devs holding back. By no means all, but some are because they are concerned about this specific situation.

Personally, I am not prepared to develop flight models for this sim as it stands. I cannot speak for others, but I know I am not alone in this attitude - I don’t intend to repeat work multiple times until the sim finally gets its act together!


Good question

I’m reminded of the time when the X-Plane 11 Devs changed the way jet engines worked in one of their earlier updates from back when. It was just one thing that they deemed essential, and it ended up breaking every add-on that depended it on it! Once the add-ons got fixed, it was great, but I can see problems like these escalate here in MSFS


Well, it’s good to know that perhaps an ‘old fashioned value’ like integrity is, for some, still alive
and kicking!
'Course I am exaggerating for effect here, but sometimes it’s nice to be reminded.

It’s just a pity that you cannot mention what ‘name’ you Dev under.


Yes, agreed.
As a long time Mooney Bravo user myself [FSX and P3d], and for those self same reasons, I have decided to wait for the time being. To be honest I am not a big Coronado fan anyway!

This ‘new born child’ of a sim just needs to get beyond that pesky ‘teething’ stage.
Besides the longer we wait, hopefully, the bigger the choice.


I almost jumped at getting the Mooney myself, until I saw all the issues people were having.

MSFS definitely needs to focus on getting the core modelling and bugs sorted out first, as well as it’s SDK, so that it is stable enough for 3rd party Devs to touch it.


Happy to do so via PM as long as it remains private, but as I work for a couple of companies I would not wish my personal views to be either taken as the view of both or the view of one to be taken as the view of the other. My views are my own, they are quite strong but are aimed at trying to help Asobo see / fix what I believe is a fundamental failure of this program to get anywhere near being a simulator and obviously I cannot involve the companies I work for in that.

You have my absolute word on this matter.
Knowing this would certainly guide my purchasing choices.
Can I also then ask, do you know if a Mooney Bravo is, at all, in the pipeline?


By the way, your other remarks read a little like a mini mission statement!
A statement I fully endorse.

well, thanks OP. Your post has attracted some balanced views.

Tonight has been very pleasant! Chewing the cud with you all here and in a couple or three other threads. If only the forums were like this all the time.
However it’s Saturday so I am now off, first for a brew and then on to Appalachia [FO '76] to kill something.


1 Like

This is from the PMDG forum:

Development for MSFS is not going badly- but it isn’t going fast, either:
There is more work than we can shoulder, but also a bit more dynamism in the simming community than we are used to as nobody can really predict how much longer it will be before we can bring you our high-end simulations in Asobo’s absolutely beautiful simulation environment. I would be lying to you if I tried to distract attention away from the fact that our MSFS development process is painfully slow. Far, far slower than we would like. We continue to chip away at the barriers and Asobo has been doing yeoman’s work fixing things that we find, correcting things that we squawk, and moving mountains to implement things that we ask for, but at this point we just keep sliding the potential release timeline for any PMDG products in MSFS further and further out on the calendar.

As we watch 2020 dwindle, the planning scope for PMDG 737NG3, our first release for MSFS begins to look more and more like it is still more than a year over the horizon- and while this is frustrating to us, it is simply the reality we deal with in trying to work with a new platform that is still growing into what it ultimately wishes to become. There are many challenges ahead- and the road is difficult from a development standpoint- but work continues.

I guess that’s a very polite way of saying that MFS as a platform is not ready yet for study-level aircraft.

All very good points !

Also relevant, please consider voting for this:

1 Like

Related, please consider upvoting: (post removed, link dead)

The author of this ^ question to the devs decided to have his post deleted (for all the wrong reasons, imho).

1 Like

Just for reference, regarding reputable aircraft developers holding back their releases, this is from the Fly The Maddog forum:

Well before it’s official release, we’ve been asked to join the MSFS2020 beta team and we’ve been studying and experimenting with the new simulator; but unfortunately (as you might have read from other developers), the SDK at the moment is still missing important parts for a complex addon like ours to be successfully ported over.
Anyway, for what can be done now, the Maddog looks phenomenal in FS2020: rest assured we will bring it to the new platform whenever it’ll be possible. Until then, we are going to keep our focus very strongly on the P3D ecosystem!

Yes, all good [and worrying] points.

Asobo must, and with some alacrity, address these and ANY and ALL issues that endanger the long
term viability of this wonderful simulator.