Oh yes your right. i get influenced by some post and meenings over the flight model here. And also i got influenced by birdsee007s meaning over xp11 and msfs 2020. So changed my meaning a bit taht xp11 is better. but i overthinked this and i regonized that isnt my meanig its only a meanig which i got trought the influencing. But when i completly ask me self and forgot the influecing meaning. Then is my meaning about the msfs 2020 that is the realistic and beautifulst simulator that i ever had.
It is very well, I hope and I wish it, do not be mistaken, I find fantastic mfs, it has an immense potential, little to be I am too pressed, and little to be too pessimistic, but I remain on my guard with the portance on Xbox, that the copy of pc is the same ones as on Xbox, even if the base of Xbox is a pc in a mini box, the console will be quickly limited and I presume, that they limit voluntarily not disadvantaged the Xbox which has much more interest for Microsoft For ms their only goal is to be at the top of sales and exceeded ps, but it is not yet won, and I am afraid that it is a limitation for many years like fsx, p3d, and x plane. We’ll see.
what does a terrain api? can some one tell me it?
That’s not what @ImDrako2132 was asking for. What you quoted in the screenshot is related to the weather and terrain radar. Please see Implement weather and terrain API’s for aircraft developers to implement accurate radar, predictive windshear, EGPWS, and METAR/wind uplink
What he was asking for is this:
What are you talking about?
Weather and Terrain API’s are a big step forward in that regard, are you disputing that?
definitely not. a proper, built-in weather and terrain api will take the weather radar aspect of MSFS to the next level, but it’s not what @ImDrako2132 was talking about.
It’s what I meant though and what I replied to. I’m aware that the weather is not open to 3rd parties, this was announced long ago, and while it’s not what we want, it doesn’t mean that the weather can’t be done properly. I admit, though, not having Hifisim/Active sky is a loss, and it would be nice to see a change in the future regarding this. My guess is that they are contractually bound to meteoblue, and this being part of the reason, but thats pure speculation on my part, I have no data supporting this.
As the current owner of two of the aircraft available in the sim (one stock and one third party), I will tell that aside from ground handling to an extent (crosswinds specifically), the flight model of the sim is very good. Very good. And most of the people telling you it isn’t aren’t real-world pilots, but they did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Sorry if I misunderstood, English and I are one and a half
Nothing to apologize whatsoever, I’m also no native english speaker
You are right, as I said above, I rely on the feedback of real pilots to judge the veracity of the flight model, not being a pilot. But I can still judge some of my experience in comparison to other opus. I like the 152 and the dr400 asobo and my dc 6 with which I enjoy, I like to stall by taking off in saint marteen by shaving too close the mountain and crashed it was a fantastic experience, even if I died! but going through, thunderstorms with the plane having a few air holes of 1000 feet per minute max according to the VS needle and flying crosswind with turning winds making the tail of the plane wiggle from left to right but really weakly, or doing a complete straight flight with a crosswind, for the moment I didn’t have the feeling of flying in a crab like x-plane makes me feel, except on landing, indeed it happens several times to be obliged to compensate with the rudder before touching the wheels on the ground . So effectively the management of the winds near a relief or runway must be better managed when altitude.
I do have some centerline correction to do and SU5 did offer some nice updates. But I’m still not convinced this is truly modeled accurately, especially in multi engine.
Interesting discussion. IRL former lead aircraft engineer at a major OEM and pilot, I’m not sure whether it doesn’t exist in msfs flight dynamics or insufficiently modeled. What I expect out of the sim: regardless of whether flight characteristic is “good” or not, if the real plane flies a certain way, I expect the simulator to model it, especially if within the normal flight envelope.
Another thing that’s missing: downwash.
In calm weather, if performing a turn about a point, 360deg, you should feel a bump as you roll level from hitting your own wake turbulence exiting the maneuver. This is a very small thing, but I was taught to look for it during my flight training.
Just a couple of caveats to anyone reading what this user posts and thinking they speak with any authority: this user 1) misunderstands vital concepts of flight dynamics (e.g. has demonstrated they think adverse yaw affects all phases of a turn (it does not)), 2) often misinterprets professionals’ comments on flight dynamics based on their misunderstandings, and 3) has openly said they have long since uninstalled MSFS and would never recommend it to anyone as a flight simulator.
dont be angry, this user will only attention. and he doesn’t can anything for that. Because his knowlege is only half knowlege how so much here in this forum from non real world pilots. And by the way maybe some user write that they are real world pilots are. only so they feel better in order to push her egos. only my oppinion abut this forum. the important thing is what you think abouot the flightmodel. and the only thing to what you should keep attention is your oppinion about msfs 2020 and his flightmodel. and dont get influenced by the oppinions of the users here. Because of it can destroy your whole experience in msfs 2020. And i think its difficult for some user here to differentiate half knowlage from real knowlege. Becasue of some from us arent real world pilots or engineers int the airplane industri.
Re: adverse yaw in MSFS 2020
It has always existed in this game, but is incorrectly modelled. there are all sorts of things wrong with it. With the latest SU5 update they added a blunt, band-aid kind of a solution for it which doesn’t solve the issue and it also adds more issues for developers. Here’s a recent statement about it from a developer of Just Flight PA-28R Arrow III:
SU5 introduced the ability to mimic adverse yaw. This is probably where the lack of stability on the approach has come from - it’s a very blunt implementation of it, and with the inability to adjust for speed (the sim ‘takes care of it for you’) it can only be seen as a starting point. As a developer, we have very little control over it, certainly less than in FSX!
Smoothness of the rudder appears also to be an issue, as the ability to fly a coordinated turn is nowhere near as easy in this sim as in real life.
Adverse yaw was one of the most-requested flight dynamic improvements, yet it appears little thought has been given to correct implementation or other aspects of the flight dynamics which are tied in with it.
Wake turbulence is entirely missing from this game.
It does, depending on how the aircraft was designed and whether it is properly rigged. In an improperly rigged aircraft, during a medium-banked turn (20 to 45 degrees of bank angle) some amount of rudder would still be needed, because some amount of adverse yaw, however little, would still be generated even after the said turn is established. Steep turns would also require a small amount of top rudder to keep the turn coordinated.
I can quote several subject matter experts on this, including Wally Moran (and provide more sources, if requested, from other CFIs including the one at my nearest flight school). He is a retired airline captain, Designated Pilot Examiner, Master CFI and was elected NAFI Flight Instructor’s Hall of Fame in 2017.
That is a complete misunderstanding (intentional or not) of a post I wrote and a question I asked about Carenado’s M20R Ovation for MSFS over a year ago in a different forum. That aircraft was showing absolutely no signs of any adverse yaw while entering a medium-banked turn in all of the review videos I was watching. That’s why I was asking if it exhibited any adverse yaw during a constant and already established medium-banked turn. Because if it did, that would mean Carenado probably modelled it based on an incorrectly rigged plane but forgot or were unable to model the adverse yaw that is needed to be simulated while entering a turn.
I also mentioned in the second part of the question how all of the default GA planes in MSFS showed little to no adverse yaw and no rudder input was ever required while entering a turn, which goes to show how bad MSFS 2020’s game-physics model was (and it still is. With SU5 they added parameters for adverse yaw but it’s implemented incorrectly), which was also why I was hesitant about buying Carenado’s M20R for MSFS in the first place and hence asking the question.
That is entirely my choice. I don’t see what’s wrong with that. I might reinstall and recommend it again if and when things improve in future.
That’s what I mean, you add specific parameters to general statements. This is misleading. You’ve demonstrated it again here, and I was in no way aware of the thread you just posted, it was another more recent one.
Naturally what software you choose to install or uninstall is up to you. But you shouldn’t be surprised when others notice you have been spending a LOT of time over the last few months making often misleading accusations here, Avsim, Reddit and God knows where else about this ONE sim, aiming to damage the credibility of its flight model. None of the other sims have impeccable flight models so why are you spending so much time talking down this one?