Good points. Just because code is old, doesn’t mean that it should not be used. For instance describing a curve today is the same as it was, well, forever. What I think the OP is talking about is really that there may be some old code, with some “short cuts” that were used due to processor/memory/time constraints that no longer exist. Those are the code elements that can be reworked/optimized for use with modern CPU/GPU/Memory/Latencies.
What would be cool to see is if some AI could be thrown at the code to optimize the performance of any plane in any conditions. Kind of like what happens with Chess engines today to make them continuously stronger. We could likely find that some code we use today is bloated, some too small, and some totally not invented yet, but important. I just depends on how sophisticated they want to get to implement the AI.
You might want to check this and that thread that already discuss this topic. In addition, check the SDK documentation.
My take away after reading it all: msfs engine is as good or even more advanced as x-Plane. But it’s about how a certain aircraft leverages that via it’s own flight model configuration.
IRL pilot with a couple hundred hours flight time mostly in a C172. Once I read about a scientific experiment where they tested how accurate were expert wine tasters. Sometimes they would present the same wine in an expensive bottle and later in a cheap one, or serve the same wine in successive glasses for the judges to evaluate them. The results were basically that the evaluation was highly subjective and influenced by preconceptions, and the same exactly wine was rated both as “weak” and “balanced” by the same judge over different tests.
I like to apply this analogy to this discussion about the flight model in different sims. I’ve flown the 172 in FSX, XP11 and MSFS 2020, default and payware options. There’s a difference in systems depth, and maybe with better paywares there’s stuff like vibrations which adds to immersion. But when it comes to how the airplane flies, to be honest I’ve never felt a big difference between all of them. And I would say none of them are “realistic” once you have flown in real life. It’s totally different than the real thing. Of course if you have a flight model in which the 172 is able to do a 5000 ft/min vertical climb with full flaps that’s objectivelly a bad flight model. But once it has the performance close enough to the numbers, for me that’s good enough, and all of those sims deliver that. Sometimes adjusting control sensitivity will change the way the airplane flies and i can change it to match what I prefer. But i wouldn’t say any of them feels like flying a real 172. They are close enough and fun enough.
So my guess is that if we could export XP11 and MSFS 2020 flight models to a visually identical platform, and perform blind tests to judge which one is better, we would have similar results to the wine taste experiment. It is all very subjective once it gets to that “believable enough” level.
Think of your car when it’s new it goes like a rocket but things wear and while the powercurve may be dropping wheel bearings might be loosening up making it if anything quicker until your plugs start misfireing which you then change only to find the bearings are now too worn and the timing belt’s gone slack so you put it in for repair and so the cycle continues.
I’m not so sure @ExpertBeatle769. You are correct - obviously - in stating that no desktop simulator / control set up can mimic the actual flying experience. But I’m sure I would be able to select the “more accurate” C172 flight model using one approach in moderate cross-wind conditions.
I am a real world pilot,
I dont fly the big jets, but do fly light aircraft, as a PPL/IR
For what its worth I can honestly say having flown the C152/C172, Piper Seminole and Seneca, the flight models are indeed very accurate. The cessna’s in particular react exactly as they should. The speeds are correct. Simple things, like having the nose kick up when you drop the flaps on base, having the aircraft stall warning go off exactly as it should just as you are about to land, when it “feels” right. Climbing, turning, performance is exactly as I would expect in the real aeroplane.
I think MS/Asobo have done a fantastic job with FS2020, and Its my “go to” flight sim. Sure i have some issues with it , but overall, its a fantastic piece of software. I have also used FS from FS2 - through 3, 4, 5, ACOF, and X.
To be honest, after X, I moved to X-plane, which is also incredibly good. I switched back to FS2020 though as I feel it is a better overall package.
I read where Microsoft was stunned when MSFS 2020 sold over 2 million copies to PC simmers within 6 months of its release, because everybody knows PC gaming is dead…lol
And it will depend on the behavior of XBox simmers as to where the long term money is going to come from. When Xbox flight simmers get bored with the vanilla MSFS 2020, will they go to the Market Place to buy more destinations to fly out of and new aircraft. Or will they move on to the next Xbox game of the month.
2 million PC flight simmers is a huge customer base for Microsoft to make money from through the Market Place and initial sales. Not sure how much XBox players are paying to get MSFS 2020, but a huge number of PC flight simmers have invested in MSFS 2020, and are buying products from the Market Place, so it could be it turns out the largest customer base for MSFS 2020 are the PC flight simmers in the long run.
The Metaverse is coming and guess who will play a leading role? … 2 million sales is nothing but a drop in the ocean once it becomes a facebook must have.
Hello, I would like to purchase an argument, please. LOL! Just want to keep this light. I’m also a RW pilot (not current, hence my tag) with about 600 hours most of it in a C182. I am really enjoying MSFS in GA for the visuals. “Exactly as I would expect in the real airplane” is a stretch as far as flight modeling is concerned. However, I get your point about the overall package. I’m not there but I am enjoying both sims immensely for what each one offers.
I do not think the flight model needs a re-write, but I do not think MSFS2020 flight model is great. Real pilots I have seen try it end up calling the controls “squirrelly”. This sim leans more towards the “game” end of the spectrum than the “realism” side.
It shouldn’t be possible to fly without using rudder and still have the turn coordinator ball remain centered. Yes, I have settings on full realism.
I highly doubt we will ever see MSFS2020 as part of an FAA approved flight sim trainer. I would love to be wrong on that.
That was so well said and formulated with all there is to say regarding the matter. Honestly, that’s the perfect closing statement to that topic. And you’re an actual PILOT, knowing exactly what you’re talking about, having felt the real thing and the “real” physics. Thank you for this. It just shows that armchair pilots (like me for instance) shouldn’t really make any absolute statements regarding “flightmodels” and judging “physics”, because we’re simply not qualified to do so. Whenever REAL pilots talk, I listen. Amateurs like me can at best discuss things that actual professionals have said, but of course in a very limited way and regarding general topics that don’t require real and advanced expertise. Doing the opposite would be highly disrespectful towards the actual professionals that have taken risks, invested money and busted their butts off studying. My respect to you, sir.
For me, the flight model of the 172 is superior compare to the other planes.
Actually that bother me the most are ground/crosswind handling and ground friction. Also controls have too much authority especially the elevator and the trim.
Hopefully the next sim update will focus on these issues.
“Dumpster fire”? And then he goes on to say (paraphrased) “if you use the sim for normal flying practices, you will not have any issues [with the flight model]”. That was enough for me of that video.
You came to the wrong room for an Argument, thats the next one on the left (no it isn’t… yes it is , no it … )
Yeah, I think for the limitations of a home PC, its doing great. I fly the circuit at my old airfield, and I literally fly it by the numbers, and everything “feels” about right. That said there are times whe things go completely wrong for no reason, and dont get me wrong there are issues, but overall I think its pretty much what I expect, and tbh feels like im flying my old 172 …
