Finding possible malfunctions is one of the main goals of using checklists.
Do I understand correctly that MSFS2020 does not implement equipment wear (specifically for C172)? It makes no sense to check the ammeter, oil pressure, and engine idling?
It will be cool if the simulator allows switching on the equipment’s gradual wear and tear.
Your assumption is correct, unfortunately. Apart from ‘role play’ purposes, there’s no need to check anything; everything always works, unless you set it to fail with the failure options.
In previous simulatos this has been in the domain of payware aircraft. I don’t see Adobo implementing this or at least any time soon.
I do miss my REP 172 for X-Plane.
In the last dev QA they did mention possible options for persistent aircraft states that might be imemented as a part of the planned replay system.
Isn’t there a slider on the Aircraft options on the world map that you can use to adjust the amount of wear and tear?
As far as I know the default aircraft can have random failures but it is not effected by wear and tear.
Some of the Payware aircraft are starting to get more realistic in that fashion though. The status of the Just Flight Arrow persists between flights for example. It also a lot easier to break a Milviz Corsair or Fiat G91 or the Piaggio P149 then a default aircraft.
Generally speaking though an awful lot of people seem to fly with damage disabled or fly in Dev mode which automatically disables damage, not sure if the demand for these features is huge.
Realistic checklists are important even with out damage of course, as if you get in the habit of skipping checks you may start forgetting them in a real aircraft.
Yeah, different people have different needs in the sim. I always keep them disabled because I just want a perfect flight everytime. The sim has enough bugs for me to mitigate that I don’t need to add instrument failures on top of that…
The bugs “are” the instrument failures.
There is a freeware program you can use called RandfailuresFS2020 that will give a whole range of random failures, I’ve been using it for a while now, just some of the failures are brake failure on landing, asymmetrical flap retraction failure and engine fire to name just a few. The failures don’t happen every flight so it is random.
I believe this affects parasitic drag only, rather than any system failures.
You are playing Microsoft Scenery Simulator 2020, made for eye candy flights. Better to invest in Xplane 11 for realism.
Wear and tear, realistic failures etc will hinder the ability of our upcoming and honorable XBox gamers to enjoy sight-seeing and take screenshots. So nope. In the proper and actual “flight” simulator XP 11 you can add MTBF values to each default or any third party aircraft to simulate these easily, not to mention most of their third party study-level aircraft addons come with lots of realistic wear and tear, failures features built-in, and the base simulator software comes with approximately more than 500 built-in failures that you can customize to your heart’s content.
I have hopes that once companies like A2A, SimCoders and PMDG bring some or any of their addons to MSFS, I’ll stop moaning about this and happily come back to MSFS. Until then, this “game” is a no-go for me.
No need to miss it. I went back to it and I’m having a ball 
I tried, despite the current lack of a more sofisiicated 172 in MSFS currently I can’t go back to X-Plane’s graphics.
Maybe if I was more into airliners and had some great payware ones for X-Plane I’d still use those.
But I fly mostly piston props and the world created in MSFS has got me hooked despite any current shortcomings.
I hope A2A does not take long to release their 172.
This is actually not a bad idea. Whenever there are updates being downloaded the screen could display a message such as:
“Sorry chap, your plane is in the hangar for some needed repairs and you are unable to fly today. Try back tomorrow!”
For some, up at 30,000 feet and taking a nap while autopilot beats the game for them, scenery may be appear a total waste of time in a flight simulator; mere eye candy to lure the Xbox kiddies.
To many others, proper scenery is essential in navigating.
While it won’t be quite as harsh as to make you wait, A2A will definitely be providing this experience with Accu-sim. Same with SimCoders if they ever decide to bring their Reality Expansion Packs over from X-Plane.
It seems that all the attention in this issue is focused on these guys. But is there any news about this? Plans?
A2A really tend to avoid premature hype, so they don’t say much about their plans and releases until they’re ready. We do, however, know they’re bringing their Piper Comanche over to MSFS (I heard a lot about their Aerostar as well, but it looks like the Comanche will be first). As for Accu-sim, it’s the core of A2A’s existence, so we can be pretty sure that’ll be making its way over as well.
As for SimCoders, they only do X-Plane stuff, so talk of them trying out MSFS is purely speculation and finger-crossing. There’s certainly a market for them, though; a whole slew of default aircraft that many people would love to see made more realistic.
One of the aircraft I used to fly in FSX (maybe the Piaggio Avanti?) had a “maintenance log” that kept track of engine hours, and any “outside the envelope” events (like hot starts.) I thought that was pretty cool…
One thing I’d like to be able to adjust is the Hobbs meter. It would be great if performance gradually “softened” as the TBO crept upward. 
This is incorrect. SimCoders’ devs have announced in at least two separate places that together with JRollon they are making the SF260 for MSFS. There’s been demonstration of it on JRollon’s twitch channel and a screenshot+announcement of it on Simcoders’ official Facebook brand page.
Last time someone inquired about progress, Simcoders replied by saying: “work is continuing, but it’d still take many many months of work”.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.