To begin with, in the video, he is dividing his attention between doing the video, chatting, and flying. It has been a while since we had open access to the cockpit and carried on a conversation during critical phases of flight. There is a reason that pilots tend to focus on the task at hand.
I am sure that if he actually concentrated on the task, after familiarizing himself with the aircraft, (he said he had never flown it before), I am sure his proficiency would show through.
While I consider myself a pilot and not a software developer, my understanding of MSFS is that we have three primary models.
The Environmental Model - includes weather, winds, pressure, temp models, etc.
The Aircraft Models - specific to each aircraft, some of it hard coded and some managed by config files.
The Flight Model - the hard math that determines how the various aircraft parameters interact with the environment.
Think of the flight model as the fundamental physics behind all flight in the simulator. The aircraft models simply define the individual aircraft parameters and allow the developer to tune the aircraft within the rules of the flight model.
The environment model governs the rules surrounding how the air moves and places limitations of the the effects imparted by terrain and weather.
I could be completely out to lunch and maybe the whole sim operates on the same principal as a TI calculator. After all, I am not a developer IRL although I have written programs that made my TRS-80 say “Hello”.
I think it should be written as a statement in the splash screen of every PC Flight Sim
“this is a generic entertainment oriented flight simulator”
You can’t have a detailed and precise flight model in a generic sim meant to reproduce flying objects of all kind… it will always be generic with compromises.
And if you use them on a huge variety of PC hardware + controllers + calibration combinations, then this make them even more subjective and generic…
Professional flight simulators are (and I am not talking about Level D ones):
1 Flight Model (physics and code) Dedicated to 1 aircraft (type / model)
Shipped on the Machine that run on them
Coupled with the Controllers that should be used with them.
Everything (Software and Hardware) calibrated to work all together as intended by the manufacturer.
It’s more or less like how the Arcade machines are bundled and sold… And used…
So any of the sims we use on our PC, are obviously Software only coupled with our favorite everything, they are meant to have fun and their flight model is a wide and generic one (Ultralights to supersonics and everything in between).
Please read my comments above. This is why each aircraft has its own ‘model’ and config. IRL there is only one flight model that governs everything from baseballs to butterflies. As long as the proper tuning is built into the butterfly it will fly as predicted.
interesting,
thanks.
Personally, being a couch pilot, I could never judge and say that a plane flies like in reality or not. Just to give feedback on an aircraft that I have a feeling for, that gives me a good feeling when maneuvering my yoke and pedals, as poor as the quality of my equipment is. I think that the bottom of MFS is full of promise to bring us the best, but that today it is not there, little be tomorrow, but only Microsoft to the key of the door closed in triple turn. Now for my feedback ’ on the feeling of piloting), in terms of handling and feeling of the planes, there is only the DR400, the C152 and the DC6 with which I like to fly.
I agree ,I thought msfs would be great from all the hoopla before coming out,but I have never been so disappointed in it .I don’t like any of the cockpots.For one thing I get tired of zooming it in so I can read it.,no actual radio.I know there are a couple panels you can actually set,the ILS or com frequencies and I’m still having problems with the control panels.I might be wrong,but the panels in the 320 looks like a take off from the A321 panel ,but in fsx every thing was workable,I have a problem now,when I’m in the cockpit and I get it fixed like I want it,the mouse the cockpit appearance, good luck to you
I didn’t say that right when I get the cockpit like I want it ,moving the mouse to set something on the panel,my panel goes crazy and goes into a different configuration than I fixed it in
Maybe you are right, but this is not what I heard from those who work in professional flight simulation development (for training) at one of the known flight sim development companies…
Edit: And by the way, still, the accuracy of these pro dedicated 1 type flight models is debatable… According to that person…
I guess the question is, “What are you trying to achieve?”.
Procedural trainer?
Nearly every commercial sim I ever sat in was to familiarize the trainee with the cockpit. Learn where all the buttons and knobs are. Go through proper cockpit flow. Practice both normal and emergency procedures. In short, “how to get’er fired up and what to do when she breaks.” Commercial procedural sims suck at flying.
Airmanship trainer?
Frankly, any simulator that responds to normal control inputs in a predictable manner and has a stick and rudder can be used to teach basic airmanship, but I believe true airmanship can ONLY be learned in a real cockpit in the real environment. It is not airframe specific and has nothing to do with what is on the checklist or what tech is on board.
Stick and rudder trainer?
Only VERY expensive, military trainers, built for a specific aircraft, can hope to actually teach or tune stick and rudder flying skills. The rest of us will have to learn in the air.
A quality simulation of the experience of flight?
Every pilot has their “perfect” plane. From a WW2 fighter to a 2 seat bush plane. Airliners of yesteryear or maybe even the space shuttle. To be able to offer that kind of experience, we need a simulator that starts with a photo-real environment to fly in. A comprehensive simulation of how air moves and interacts with the world it moves through. We need a base flight model that determines how objects interact with the moving air. Something that can simulate basic aerodynamics of everything from a sheet of plywood to a bird with model rocket motor strapped to its back. This can be done by building in the rules that govern basic flight.
Now you can start creating your sheet of plywood because it will behave correctly when pitched off a hillside. Add some stabilizers and propulsion and a seat and now you are the Wright brothers. Some people are really good at making very accurate models. When you have one of those and go flying in a well modelled environment and see the world out the window, there is only one step left that makes the simulation work. Suspension of disbelief. If you fired up your sim hoping to relive what flight really feels like, you will be very disappointed. If you sat down with awe and an open mind, you might forget you are in a sim. Probably not. But I bet you have lots of enjoyment.
Don’t overthink it. A couple hundred bucks worth of software will never replace the smells, sensations and adrenalin of real flight. But a good imagination and a desire to believe can come mighty close.
I believe that’s not how it should be done. The flight model creation should remain with Asobo and they should improve it. I think this is at least as important for the sim as the visuals.
Ever heard about Red Bull Flugtag?
If we can parameterize flying machines like those in the .cfg files and they then fly similar to irl, then the sim has reached a pretty advanced state.
With developers creating their own flight model we have the problem that two identical C172 aircraft behave totally different.
Another issue is .. If a 3rd party modifies the flight model, it potentially modifies the flight model for ALL aircraft, which could really cause chaos, with everyone complaining that now their planes do not fly correctly !!!
Same applies if the Weather system is Modded, and messed up.
I recently bought a new joystick (TM Airbus edition - sidestick) since my aging Logitech has been showing signs of wear with large dead-zones to make it even remotely useable.
I have therefore always blamed part of the twitchiness on my old Logitech ■■■■. I have to say I’m really not impressed about the flight model, I was hoping MSFS would be more flyable using the proper equipment, I was wrong. I know its subjective but I find the MSFS flight model to be a complete failure. It borders to be unflyable, at the very least its a big pain in the behind to fly, not pleasurable at all and has absolutely nothing to do with reality.
The controls are incredibly sensitive, even with sensitivity turned down to 50% on all axis. Its just unbelievably twitchy and responsive with no real feeling of inertia. In real life everything is much more “fluid”, it takes time for the aircraft to respond to disturbances in the atmosphere, flight control inputs take time to take effect, its not as direct. Roll on most aircraft is completely unrealistic, the aircraft doesn’t roll out after disturbance, neither does it continue to roll into a spiral dive, its like flying an Airbus with the fly-by-wire maintaining bank angle.
The atmosphere is way too stable, there is absolutely no turbulence present anymore in clouds, only when flying really close to obstructions with high windspeed are you able to observe some turbulence. Wind at ground level is 50% of the actual windspeed. The elevator trim is way to effective, its really hard to properly trim the aircraft.
I think I can go on and on, and I will when I have the time, bottom-line is: there is absolutely nothing realistic about the current flight model. My feeling is that it got worse over time, I don’t remember it was like this during release. I didn’t even check-out stalls, spins and any of the more advanced stuff recently. This needs to be fixed, the flight model in its current state is a joke.
Wait its only my feeling. Or do they limit the realsim of the simulation to give the xbox user a better experience. When it so is i have to say the msfs 2020 is a completly game/arcade game.
