show me something more realistic please.
Yes, not realistic. As said before even when flying fully cross controlled there won’t be a complete lack of roll authority. Not realistic at all. I have made plenty of crosswind landings in all kind of planes over the last 10 years, if I would be sitting like that in the cockpit with the yoke fully to one side without roll response it would be 50 shades of brown. Imagine full aileron and roll spoiler deflection during a crosswind landing with no response, sorry but you can’t call that realistic.
1 Like
I am a real pilot of a 737. Mind you, show me something more real. If you can. I am open to new ideas.
I fly a Citabria. Awesome aircraft!
If you are a real 737 pilot please don’t tell me that it was you who did all these horrible xwnd landing videos!!!
2 Likes
Learning is part of the lesson, instead of typing, show me. Record a video, and I will learn from you.
90 degrees cross winds gusting from 23 knots to 43 knots.
You are gonna learn us to land on the centerline? If you are a real world pilot as you claim, you are not using the right technique with such a crosswind. Who tries to land cross-controlled - wing low on a jet with underwing mounted engines in heavy crosswind?
2 Likes
A truly great aircraft and and due to the rather flat pitch attitude on ground, one of the easy to handle taildraggers 
1 Like
If you please, you land in FS2020 and I will learn from you. Care to teach?
As an active 737 pilot you still haven’t learned how to control your aircraft in a crosswind? Seriously? 
May I ask which airline you are flying for?
A VERY embarrassing statement from a RW 737 pilot.
4 Likes
I remember a discussion a few days ago, confusing N1 for thrust, TPR for N1. Claiming weight has no effect on performance in MSFS, not knowing the difference between thrust and power etc. Embarrassing for a real world 737 pilot indeed 
.
I do agree X-plane feels more realistic in a lot of situations compared to MSFS, but those X-wind landings are far from realistic. Although he is also not using the right technique, trying to land wing-low on the crosswind limits is probably not making things better.
4 Likes
As Asobo showed in their trailer, they should use Finite Element Analysis methods to compute aircraft dynamics, the same method with X-Plane.
Given the same aircraft model (airfoil profile, weight distribution etc) and same Computational Fluid Dynamics parameters, they should yield output the same more or less. But they are not.
Maybe Asobo didn’t get the CFD parameters right? (Aircraft static models are easy to get right)
1 Like
There is no fluid simulation in FS2020 - unless you mean the rain (although that also seems not fully simulated).
1 Like
I was referring to the fact, that Asobos devs said themselves, that they have tuned down some effects of the flight model to not confuse people who are new to aviation or flight simulators. This was already brought up in this thread.
Watching some of the other dev videos they also use terms like “more realistic” instead of “realistic” or “closer to what you would see on a real airplane”, for example when they talk about braking distance on wet runways etc…
I am fine If the default airplanes don’t match the numbers in the POH with 100% accuracy. But I feel like the friction model should be able to recreate very accurate results on its own, without exotic hacks by third party devs.
For me, the takeaway of this thread is:
FS2020 uses aircraft geometry more than I previously realized. So the thesis “it only uses LUT” is not entirely correct. Even though it seems that it still uses less of the actual shape of the airfoil even if it has more data points than XP.
1 Like
I am no mechanics pro, and I think CFD, which is used in fluid dynamics analysis, is one branch of FEA. Isn’t it?
I am pretty sure both MFS and X-Plane use FEA, not sure if it is CFD.
Don’t take my word for it. Asobo said they don’t simulate a fluid moving around the airfoil.
I have no higher education on the matter and try to puzzle together whatever I can get my hands on and self-teach. Sure, I can reasonably understand math, principles, and some of the formulae but not all of them.
So people like CptLucky, Nintje or FlyingscCool are pretty awesome to chip-in in these threads to share their insights.
4 Likes
I am both amazed and humbled at the wealth of knowledge available to us on the forum. This thread in particular is the reason I so enjoy browsing our forum: it’s like a virtual “pilot’s lounge.”
As a math major, I can claim to have some higher education with regard to the principles discussed here… but wow am I rusty!
I have not taken the time to read the SDK documentation, but when I did take a precursory look I found quite a few “TBD” pages. I figured I’d wait for a more developed document.
Thanks to those who have shared their in-depth knowledge with us. It’s a great thread!
I thank you for your kind words!
Don’t take mine either! Honestly I’m not an expert on flight dynamics but I’ve been in this industry for nearly 2 decades and I just realize from time to time, depending on the subject, it rings a bell and reminds me information I know from XP11 devs themselves for example, or other peers accustomed to these questions. My post above regarding FS vs XP flight model is just the expression of my current understanding of their inner design goals and shortcomings, from a pure logical reasoning, and this might be entirely wrong too. The point is not being right, but to raise the level of knowledge and understanding because the more are sharing their thoughts and knowledge, the more we all benefit from it.
1 Like
Thank you for RXP! Without people like you, the hobby would not be the same.
So much this!
3 Likes