Thank you for your feedback… I hoped there is some improvement… But I guess your measurements are more Numerical, So Let’s keep on hoping…
1 Like
The issue might not be fps, but just lack of available CPU resources. I’m not sure how the sim would handle the physics thread(s) being 100% used
2 Likes
the people that configure the aircrafts are very different than the people that made the system
2 Likes
Very right! I hope we will have improvements also on the 787, 747, As they don’t work and some of the systems are modeled partly.
1 Like
Yes, we are all focused on different attributes that surmise our mission.
I put this in the “would have been nice” category, and forget about it.
Personally, am more concerned with at least ONE plane getting an accurate treatment from A2A.
1 Like
I’m also starting to think A2A may be the last holdout hope for more realistic aerodynamics/physics for MSFS.
4 Likes
Hopefully the Comanche will drop this year. It’s killing me.
3 Likes
One thing we know for sure: if A2A releases the Comanche, it will have realistic handling. If they can’t get it to fly well, they won’t release it.
2 Likes
Considering the pace of SDK development, i think A2A are thinking the exact same thing 
3 Likes
Thank you very much for your contribution, Please help increase community awareness of how important it is for us to have real flight models and real physics.
How did you measure the elevator trim tabs? And how do you see the loss of hydraulics?
Thank you for sharing your ideas…
What on earth are you talking about (again)?
3 Likes
Not sure about everyone else but I am still able to land the FBW A320 with winds of around 20-30 knots without ever having to move the joystick except for the flare. I’m not a pilot but something doesn’t look right? I have seen hundreds of landings on YouTube and the joystick movement is crazy IRL.
More and more reasons why an external flight model looks like a good idea…
1 Like
You get 30 knots near the ground? For me the windspeed still gets halved during final approach.
Had this just yesterday. 30 headwind during approach to KRDU, come 1000 ft AAL or so, 12 knots of headwind. So no big inputs needed.
… for one or two airplanes like the DR400 and the nobody-flies-it
1 Like
How do you know? It’s e.g. one of my favourites.
1 Like
Well, you should write a Zendesk bug report. I assume the following is happening in MSFS2020:
user_input_elevator = input_device limited to maximum elevator angle from cfg files
trim_elevator = trim_value limited to maximum elevator_trim angle from cfg files
elevator_value_to_sim = user_input_elevator + trim_elevator
The realistic calculation is:
elevator_value_to_sim = (user_input_elevator + trim_elevator) limited to maximum elevator angle from cfg files
I assume one Asobo programmer is responsible for (all) user input, the other is responsible for (all) trim and both hate each other …
By the way, I never understood the reason for the elevator_trim_limit parameter - specially if elevator_up_limit is different from elevator_down_limit like in C152, see:
elevator_up_limit = 25 ; Elevator max deflection up angle (DEGREES)
elevator_down_limit = 18 ; Elevator max deflection down angle (absolute value) (DEGREES)
elevator_trim_limit = 19.5 ; Elevator trim max angle (absolute value) (DEGREES)
1 Like
Don’t understand. The elevator trim tab deflection has nothing to do with elevator deflection.
The whole discussion about elevator trimming doesn’t make sense since the neutral point of the elevator doesn’t change on a joystick.