Personally disappointed by the flight model

Discussion Hub General Discussion
1

Title says it all, coming from Xplane I was expecting an improvement not a step back to FSX, as an example the CTLS which is one of the various I have flown in a decade of flying has a crazy gliding ratio reason which even on long (for ga in UK) runways one has to either do larger patterns or be lower on final and do a powered approach, the version in the sim as soon as power is cut is like pulling an handbrake, not the way that aircraft works really. The look is spot on not the simulation.

That is one example as it is quite peculiar the way she flies, however not sure if it is the default aircrafts because the team was too busy due of the number to attract more gamers than simmers but definitely not the “ultra realistic”, the only ultra realistic thing so far is the weather look, not too sure about the bumpiness as often seems scripted instead of being based on thermals, but did not try to fly in too many conditions.

I know it is new but there are very much disappointing things, listed in other topics.

3 Likes
2

well who ever played default planes in xplane or fsx/p3d… guess we need to wait for 3rd party sim study mods

1 Like
3

Hmm. I don’t find this to be the case at all. Now, I’ve never flown any variety of the CT series in real life but to me, in the game, the little beast doesn’t want to slow down. Which is what the AVweb review said of it, so I figure it’s OK.

Where I do find fault with the flight model is that nothing spins without a lot of hard work, and sideslips don’t really work at all.

1 Like
4

I really disagree with you actually. I have never flown your mentioned aircraft in real life, do you write your review based on real life flying experience or sim experience? I fly DV20 & C172 and all I can say is that they feel like the real plane! I am blown away by how realistic they feel. Coming from fsx & p3d this is day & night difference and not a step back. Aerodynamics vise this sim is top notch, I did a lot of testing the last days and really everything was as aspected and experienced in real life.

Also it could be, that your aircraft is bad modeled of course. I have never flown a A320, but a friend of mine who flies this thing for a living (well before corona) tested the default and also finds it very unrealistic in its flight mechanics. But as always, thats default planes. The potential is there to great as real as it gets addons in my opinion

9 Likes
5

https://youtu.be/42efA9WlHbA so you are saying this is realistic?

We are talking about principles of flight, if you claim to be a pilot you studied them as party of your PPL as I did, so tell me:

Adverse yaw?
Flaps pitch momentum? Flaps speed limit, you can put them down at 200kts ffs!
Realism in use of rudder? You can do perfect turn without adverse yaw without using the rudder…
Glide ratio of aircraft like CT which when landing them here in London we had to do bomber approach at Damyns Hall for how much they glide?

Come on…I mean having to argue with fanboys is pointless even more so distressing when they claim to be “pilots”, probably the kind I find in airfield flying wrong patterns, entering active when you call final in uncontrolled fields… and so on…

Physics guys, isn’t a matter of opinion… not saying is a all bad just saying what they are showing is not up for a simulator but a game, then if it is the default aircrafts that look cool but fly bad then is a different matter, but really except fanboys look online and the line is the same, this is NOT a simulator then by all means you are going against some basics of aerodynamics, available on other products, so what’s the point of arguing? :smiley:

6 Likes
6

Soo…I feel there is a lot of tension going on here. First of all there is no need to kind of attack me just because I have an opinion and like the new sim. I am always open for a discussion regardless if I am a fanboy or not.

And just to keep things clean, I am not claiming to be a pilot, I do fly in real life AND I study aerospace engineering so I am very well familiar with principles of flight, and other topics, even deeper than what the PPL theory is teaching.

I have never flown CTs (or ultra light airplanes) but as I mentioned I fly DV20, C172 and I did fly sailplanes and my comment was based on the experience I have in these planes. I also watched the video you linked and I agree that just watching this looks strange. BUT I have never flown a DA40 so far (I would wish to tho), so just watching this without real life knowledge of this planes behavior isnt a good comparison.

Maybe I can stream on discord for you what my flying looks like, because when taking the DV20, C172 or even C152 I experience all forces and counterforces that a plane is experiencing. Prop wash, P-Factor, wind influence at takeoff, also wind influcene when turning, adverse yaw is definetly there and I have to compensate for a clean turn but it agree that it needs upscaling bc its to lush, flaps momentum is completely real compared to DV20/C172 also Pitch&Power settings match real life. Also I did a lot of testing stall behavior of these two planes and its exactly the same in real life (Power on/off stalls, Turning stalls, clean stall, stalls in various configurations). Also a friend of mine who is a flight instructor mentioned that for these planes its like real life. I did not try flaps setting at higher speeds yet, but I will try. Glide ration is also similiar to the real planes, I tried several of them at my home field, since I am always tending to be a bit to high the “bomber approach” is also present in the sim as it is in my real life.
Another thing that isnt perfect is the stall behavior in ground affect, because the pitch you have to achieve to get a stall without doing a tail strike is higher than in real life. Its not that bad, but I can see the difference after all the landings now in the sim, maybe a little tweak and its perfect (zendsk allready knows).

What I mentioned is that the sensitvitiy of the elevator and ruders are completely off - I configured my yoke/joystick and pedals so that they nearly match real life in-/outputs. Maybe thats a big difference there! I can share them any time too!

Conclusion:
For the given planes I have fly, the new sim gives a nearly exact representation at day one with default planes. I am not saying that you are wrong, I am saying that the C172 and DV20 is the same in real life. Maybe the DA40, CT or whatever plane isnt that well modeled. Since ultra-light aircrafts tend to be more aerodynamic than most echo class planes, that could be a problem for default planes. Just take the A320, its basically trash in the sim, could be the same with the CTs and DA40. But good thing is, over decades there have been great 3D Party developer that can provide more realisitc airplanes. Also check your settings, check your hardware configuration so they match real life input, check your flight model settings (mine are set to the modern which was preselected) so that we have the same fundation.

Also have you flown C172 or DV20?

I know a lot of people tend to say its not a sim its a game. For me it doesnt matter, I am not that fanatic simmer who makes a cut only by a word. For my planes, this is more a sim than a decade of simming before. I have flown through germany the last day only using my IVAO VFR Chart as orientation without any problems. Also ifr procedures work fine when the navdata is present (there are airports where some procedures are missing). In the previouse sims the flight model was made like driving a train, there is very slight adverse yaw even with A2A planes, no turbulences or up/downdrafts due to thermic, so why should this dont be a sim? Only because its new and a lot of money will be wasted or needed to get new addons? I hope your comment is not a product because of the last two points I made. If not, I am very happy to talk to you about anything.

And instead arguing who is a better pilot, we could fly together, share experience and report issue so that this sim and potential can be used!

Cheers,
Jacob

8 Likes
7

Seems like there are just as many X-Plane fan boys looking to go on the attack or defense.

At the end of the day I’m not flying MS FS 2020 to test the physics of an aircraft or its engine. If you are, I’m guessing even X-Plane is going to dissapoint. I’ve owned every flight simulator since the late 80’s and currently am only invested in DCS heavily (for fun) and now MSFS has re-engaged me for GA practice.

The best part of this sim is it allows me to fly local routes and familiarize myself with visuals around smaller areas of ontario in cottage country that I could never do with x-plane. This is actually useful. Within the parameters that you would fly an actual aircraft in real life (translation: I would never attempt to do what you see in the video you posted) I find MS FS practical and well within realistic. Again, its not the feel of the aircraft or my flying that I’m trying to practice here. The lack of actual feedback from the cotnrols or environment already removes the realism enough to prevent someone practicing flying at the level you seem to think X-Plane provides.

The real gift here is practicing VFR/IFR flights and paths to actual destinations and familiarizing yourself with a flight and its route before going to new destinations or existing unfamiliar routes.

3 Likes
9

I absolutely disagree. I think the flight model on many of the GA aircraft is fantastic and in fact better than Xplane stock. The jets have issues. But it’s far too early to properly judge the flight model anyway, 3rd parties will show what this new engine can do and it looks promising, to say the least. I think those Xplane comparisons are useless right now.

1 Like
10

Shall we say it to be “some things just don’t feel right”?
For now…

2 Likes
11

Remember when they said Real Time Ray Tracing in PC gaming was impossible but now we have it?

We need to strive for something like this:

1 Like
12

In my view, I find the flight model to be below expectations mainly because (I mainly fly the C172) I am able to fly the aircraft 100% without having to use rudder. And yes, I have the settings set to “Real World” and that specifically sets auto-coordinated turns to “off”.

Also, I never have to trim rudder. Never.

It could be a bug in terms of that setting not taking effect.

It could be a bug related to the fact that the flight stick settings don’t allow me to map an axis to the rudder trim. All other axis were mappable, but not rudder trim.

Actually, I might be incorrect there – I didn’t try to map aileron trim to an axis because I don’t want it on an analog axis and I do want it as a button.

I ma thinking that perhaps since there is no rudder trim axis assigned, the sim might be overriding the realism setting and giving me auto-coordination.

Or it could be a poor flight model.

I also don’t care for the sensitivity on the stick – and yes I have adjusted it within the simulator, and I have defined a little bit of a dead zone. That doesn’t solve the problem though.

Yesterday, I made a landing tin the A320 which should have collapsed the gear and maybe even split the hull in two.

Regarding other sims and the default aircraft never being flown, that doesn’t apply to me. When I compare an aircraft in this sim to another in another sim, I am comparing default to default. Not default here against a $50 study level payware.

2 Likes
13

MS In a few months: Partnership announced with Simulia…
Xplane fans: Flightmodel sUcKs!
:rofl: :rofl:

4 Likes
14

Again I am not arguing about physics. I am saying that some aircrafts arent molded well.
I did all the test and physics are correct. Of course there is no force feedback and things like a good break when putting the prop pull forward at idle power, but the flight mechanics are real for the planes I tried in the sim. There needs to be adjustment in terms of sensivity and scaling of aerodynamics effect. But you cant say the fm are â– â– â– â–  when there are planes correctly modeld.

Also I dont really know what you are implying to say with “same people probably I find flying c**p in real life if they do fly in real life”. I tried to give an detailed explanation how I feel about the sim, since you started this thread. Neither do I need to swagger with my flying skills (or criticize any other pilots skills I never flown with) only to make my argument morea valuable - that would be pathetic.

15

Haha I would really love to see this cfd in the sim, but therefore we all would need a NASA PC at least :smiley:

1 Like
16

Check your settings and assignments. I got the honeycomb yoke and Thrustmaster pedals, changed the sensitivity on elev. & ruder. But I really need to trim the 172, otherwise I would have arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger if that yoke got force feedback :muscle:

17

Well I’m going for another round in this gorgeous map exploring tool that actually manages to give me an experience pretty close to flying a real airplane for the first time in history. I don’t really care if the edges of the flight envelope aren’t modeled correctly, I’m pretty sure that will be taken care of somewhere down the line. Just try to enjoy life, if MSFS doesn’t give you joy, FSX/P3D/X-Plane/DCS is/are still there.

18

The good thing about the latest CFD using the LBM method is that it can be parallelized, aka can run on GPU… so it can get orders of magnitude more performance increase.

They can start by doing a “lite” version of this, much like how half a decade before Nvidia came olut with the real time ray tracing RTX stuff they already had voxel-based global illumination (VXGI) tech and demo it in apollo 11 demo… . this was back in 2014 and debut with the GTX 980 card. Now they redid the demo Apollo 11 in true/real real-time ray tracing (RTX) on the latest DIRECTX12

Likewise I foresee a crude “lite” version of this CFD stuff coming out in the future where its not going to be super accurate like what is done for the likes of wind tunnel testing for airplanes by Boeing, Airbus, but still way more accurate than XPlane’s Blade Element stuff and whatever 1000 surfaces stuff that FS2020 currently claims to be doing

1 Like
19

Yep. In case of superdurabable immuned to damage materials with near zero flexibility. All you mentioned as physics problem are not a problem of flight model, such as flaps speed limit. The limit exist because of possibility of damage, but here is no model of structural damage. In Aerosoft Diamond DA20-100 for FSX as example structural damage model exist and after such hard turns as on video it falls tumbling to the ground with twisted airfoils

1 Like
20

Can the 3rd party devs change / edit / modify / the flight mode, physics, aerodynamics, for their airplanes ?

21

I test every day and the airliners just fall out of the sky while landing. This has been an issue after countless updates and still no fix. Months have gone by and I STILL have not been able to fly in this $120 simulator. Please stop waiting for major patches and release a hotfix for the airliner flight model. It is a core aspect of the game and must be fixed to even land in an airliner.

Please stop waiting on these game breaking bug fixes.