That’s a good one! Although AbhorrentBiscuit can probably Google the right answer. If he takes more than 3 minutes to answer, that’s probably the reason.
Does it matter? I get bored from autopilot. autopilot is for lazy pilots who don’t like challenges.
I think I know MSFS 2020 flight model internals even better than Asobo does. And I say that MSFS 2020 is based on tables AND on 3D model. My work for the last few months was to fight back the influence of the tables to bring out the realistic feel of the 3D model driven aerodynamics behavior. And I think I succeeded with sailplanes like DG-808S, Ka6E, aerobatics airplanes like Extra 330LT, turboprops like TBM930 and more.
1 Like
This one probably:
1 Like
This is also described in the documentation I believe. There is something there about how MS wanted the tables there in addition to the new simulation for compatibility reasons. Makes sense I guess, luckily we have people like you to help really bring out the new 3D model-based simulation. Hopefully 3rd party developers will do the same.
1 Like
Did I miss something? All these landings where manual landings without AP.
Case in point:
In the right hands, the MSFS modern engine is going to produce some seriously accurate aircraft. How do I know that? Because our Working Title CJ4 does actually hit those book values at all regimes, with correct N1s, fuel flow, climb rates, over various altitudes and ambient pressures. Not only that but we have stall speeds within a knot of two of book, proper approach angles, correct bank rates, etc.
1 Like
Artificial Intelligence I guess 
All the above doesn’t match at all, but not at all, to me (and maybe only to me though):
4 Likes
Interesting how that point is supported by developers who have actually worked with the engine in MSFS. I wonder why that might be? (that is sarcasm by the way lol, hard to communicate that over the internet)
1 Like
True, But look at this video, and tell me if you can achieve it in FS2020… I wish you can, I would gladly want to know how you did it…
I am sorry to say that. It seems you are not a pilot IRL, at least not for living.
If you fly hours a day, and day after day, you must be very thankful to AP.
2 Likes
Surely you must know it for the 737? Anyway I would assume it is the manufacturers preferred technique of landing in crosswind?
1 Like
I agree, you can forget I ever said I am a pilot… It is not important what you believe or not. 
Interesting. Im currently porting one of my models from x-plane to msfs. Modeling stuff and animations are straight forward, no problem. But getting the flight-chracteristics right is very different to the x.plane way. I cant model a wing and attach a profile to it as an example. I dont think this is calculated from the 3d-model, otherwise a flying donut would not be possible. All I see are tables and numbers. So how t do a planemaker-like invisible model for flight calculations?
Do you know how much ware and tear costs for the airlines with a slide slip technique on 100 Tons aircraft? What do you think that manufactures want economically?
Okay, these are the prophets own words: "First of all, a new surface elements model has been created to better account for the distribution of lift, drag and side forces over the entire aircraft geometry. Compared to XPlane11, our geometrical discretization is more precise. Indeed our model uses 640 surfaces where XPlane11 web site states that « ten elements per side per wing or stabilizer is the maximum ». Our surface elements are spread as follows:
40x3 for the fuselage, assimilated to an elongated rectangular box
1x3 for the gears, a box
1x3 for each external fuel tank, box
20x3 vertical tail and rudder
20x3 for horizontal tail and elevators
80x5 for each wing
As depicted in the above figure, all geometrical elements of the aircraft are taken into account whereas in XPlane11, only the wings, vertical stabilizer, horizontal stabilizer, and propellers are discretized. This means, for instance, that additional drag and pitch due to gears for instance cannot be accounted for in their model."
This is from file:///C:/MSFS%20SDK/Documentation/03-Content_Configuration/SimObjects/00-Aircraft/Flight_Model.html#microsoft-flight-simulator-new-flight-model
You can believe in the “Microsoft Flight Simulator new flight model” - as I do, or you can say this is only a lot of marketing b*llshit. You decide.
2 Likes
Of course it matters. It’s about credit and whether take the discuss seriously.
We don’t want to turn this discussion into a talkshow.
1 Like
How much does landing without de-crabbing cost compared to landing in a side-slip? I don’t have the answer other than it costs money for both. But do you know which technique the 737 autoland uses? I know which one my aircraft uses.
Really? You fly those CAT II and III approaches and P-RNAV and not to forget RVSM airspace all by hand? Also not very good airmanship to not use automation in busy airspace and have the PM overloaded by doing all the work.
5 Likes
The discussion was trying to further the knowledge and understanding this, until the endless injunctions from a single individual (about 1/3 of the posts in this discussion) requiring others to prove he/she’d be right and all others are wrong, which somewhat is derailing the whole point of the discussion to me, although it gives the chance for some others to post very interesting knowledge about these questions in the middle.
I’ve tried to synthetize some of the differences between XP11 and FS2020 in this post. It is a mere attempt at it from a programming standpoint, not a physics one, in case this helps:
More Physics, More Real Winds - #254 by CptLucky8
3 Likes