I am not brown-nosing for a discount either. It’s just nice to see some of the long term devs lurking around here.
I don’t think I can finish reading this thread, but I was laughing pretty hard in the discussion about configs vs. xplane.
At least you can read msfs’s configs and you don’t need a complicated editor to change a single value/table. Xplane uses tables too, trust me, I’ve had to make changes to those tables. It’s just saved in a format you can’t easily read without their editor.
Again, Here I am reading these quest for massive wind effects threads. The real world, that I live in, where I with a small brain have observed real planes, and in real wind land. I have never seen one wobble so bad. I have no problem with Asobo making a real windy choice for those wanting to hone their skills at flying like they see in all those really windy youtube videos. Those conditions, are not normal, and/ or regular, they are very rare. When you say they have dumbed it down, for people who they don’t want to confuse coming into the game. I have to wonder…Because I had X plane back in the early 2000’s, and the support was just as small, and arrogant as this can be. I left that sim, and went and bought MS-FSX! I want to know. Did I spend 16 years learning to fly a faulty simulator program? That was nothing, and I am going on what you are all trying to tell me here. It was absolute garbage, and no where near like flying a real plane? A program that maybe only because it’s 32 bit, it still taxes the best computers to this day. One that has a slew of programmers making money still? It shouldn’t even be considered as an antique relic? Really? How is it that it has only been within the last 4 years, that DSC has finally stolen away the people who were religiously flying formation in FSX? People who are real pilots? Real pilots I have flown with, and I still with my 10th grade education could not fly it like they could? That is realistic to me. This stuff they say about control surfaces, and how the tires react to surfaces. It’s good don’t get me wrong, but I could go tomorrow to my local airport, and watch airplanes fly strait in, and land on the center line all day long with substantial normal winds. (Not bouncing and wobbling through the air), I could ask them to fly one of these planes, and they would struggle. Have I crawled out from under a rock? am I from the land of three name people? Is there a bugger hanging off my nose? Because I can’t get anybody to look me strait in the eye, and explain this stuff away, as if it has a scientific answer to why it does what it does. I watch the Modder’s, they have these great mods out. In the middle of their demonstration, they too suddenly say whoa, why is this doing what it’s doing? This is crazy, and after fighting it for a few, they suddenly flip a few things, say it was just something they missed. (ON there own Mod) and act as if there is nothing wrong. Tell me how you can completely restructure a program, not using any of the pre debugged loops, and say there is a solid program no bugs at all. Yet there are page after page of people that seem to be just as dumb as me. They though certainly they would use the best of FSX , and then supersize it. Fixing what was wrong with that monster. How horrible it must have been, to have to fly that non realistic program for 16 year! And never have a clue, that it was so that, horrible. I feel like I just woke up from a sweet dream, and rolled back over into a night mare. Going back to close my eyes again, I can’t see any more of this.
I do understand the difference between thrust and power. And the only reason I used the term power, because in general physics the term power is equivalent to force, as in vector force, I am sorry I embarrassed myself, and I am not full of ego to stand up to your conditions, I think after you become a real 737/320 pilot. I will be very happy for you.
Thank you for correcting me.
Thank you Capntendy, for your accurate understanding even without being an Airbus/Boeing pilot.
Here is a video for all those who can’t see the real physics in MSFS.
And for those who seek to improve MSFS.
Real pilots, who are confident of their knowledge, don’t need to compete with their ego, or even think they can’t learn from others. By the way, that kind of behavior leads to serious problems. Not able to see mistakes, or thinking what you know is the only truth.
As for learning to fly, get some real flying, before you try to understand what you are seeing in the videos, may be after spending 500 or 1000 USD, you will understand.
Now Compare those landings to the landings in the video :
See if you can produce these kind of landings in fs2020
All I got from reading the initial post and a few replies, seems to me OP wants MSFS to fly like Xplane. Which seems kinda whack to me… but hey who knows how people think.
Dear person,
I would recommend that you reconsider the way you are communicating in this thread.
The joke is on you for talking down to people with ATPs and thousands of hours in transport category airplanes.
Maybe you are not aware of the credentials that Nintje and others bring to the table. They tried to educate you and you spite them over and over.
Please stop.
Actually crosswind landings are quite realistic and happen frequently at many airports. I have personally seen A320s thrown around like toys on approach where I live.
Don’t mind the silly title. This is just something that happened where I live and I remember that storm.
This needs Eurobeat Deja Vu music playing in the backgorund…
They cannot use too many small surface element due to FEA performance. I think in a dev video they say thunsands. So X-Plane won’t use much more surface for the same reason. And XP performs better than MFS on dynamics. I guess they Asobo didn’t get the surface grids right?
After all, LR is seasoned on this, and it’s the first time for Asobo.
I think at times with strong side winds, I land more or less something like those in your video. Winds correction, yaw nose straight with rudder and compensate with aileron input just before touch down, and keep rudder and aileron input to keep the aircraft straight and level during deceleration, sometimes have to goaround. I am no pro pilot nor pro simmer and I don’t get the difference. Can you explain it further?
My take is something like this:
XP relies on more complex/complete real time computations and can arguably better predict the aerodynamic properties of a given airfoil even in unusual states and edge cases. It also calculates fluid dynamics, even if simplified through BET. Since this requires a lot of computing power, this approach only allows so many data points. Some data is read from LUTs.
FS relies more on pre-baked calculations from LUTs, albeit with a lot more data points and thus emulating fluid dynamics. This is the logical assumption, since FS can not magically calculate 1000 more data points with the same complexity as XP does with the same available computing power.
Both arrive at similar results, which are different en detail. Each with ups and downs.
Okay I think I get you. I recall in some videos, the Asobo devs say they simulate aircraft dynamics on a 32 (maybe 64) thread computer. Since most of us don’t have a rig like that, so it is reasonable they must pre-bake the model instead of realtime calculations. Is it what you mean?
Yes, more or less.
After all the mathematical problems are the same, regardless how you approach them.
I’m not sure what you mean by this, power and force are two different things. A force vector, as the name implies shows the direction of a force and the length indicates the magnitude. Multiplying the force by the distance the object has moved = work, work divided by time = power
I will stick with Embraer E190/195 and ATR 42/72 in the real world, but thank you 
.
What I mainly see is correct crosswind techniques. The aircraft response is nowhere near what you have shown in your videos, I’m pretty sure nobody is sitting there with the controls fully crossed-over.
I see high wing turboprops using the wing low technique, completely lining-up with the runway centreline while using bank to prevent drift (as in many GA aircraft, i.e. Cessna).
All the jets are either kicking the aircraft straight just before touchdown while keeping wings level or using a combination of both techniques, kicking the aircraft somewhat straight while being cautious with the amount of bank.
Having read through a lot of the posts on this …silly thread my first thought is: Someone open a window, the heat in here is unbearable!
So rather than discuss what MS/Asobo could have done, I think it far more productive to instead focus on what MS/Asobo did do. Namely, to take their cue from ‘FlyInside’ in understanding that to store the world locally is a dead end and that the way forward was to implement streaming.
I make this my first point because by so doing, MS/Asobo has made the likes of P3d [my one time
personal favourite] and Xplane et al, frankly, obsolete. Harsh perhaps. But true!
My second point to is reiterate something that has been stated previously, but which the existence of this thread indicates is worth repeating:
When MSFS 2020 with it’s currently evolving flight model has been around as long, and has been through as many iterations as Xplane has, we can reasonably expect the fidelity of the flight model to become as good, nay, more realistic than Xplane’s is now or will be.
To make any USEFUL comparisons between any two things, a reasonable effort should be made to ensure that we are comparing like with like. By this definition then perhaps the genre would be better served if we resisted the urge to to compare MSFS 2020 with the likes of Xplane. For they are most definitely NOT the same.
MSFS 2020 is the future. Xplane is the past.
Addendum: Be civil guys [none gender specific], I am entitled to my opinions.