Physics Model Needs an Overhaul (ASAP)

Community General Discussion
#21

I hate to say this to start but I fly in real life. The original post is quite accurate. I will say this, out of the box I think the default aircraft are better than I have seen in any other Microsoft Sim (Never used X plane recreationally).

One major annoyance and a big miss here is crosswinds, and wind in general on take off and landing. If there is any sort of crosswind, in the sim the airplane turns into the wind in a VERY excessive way. To the point where you can easily go off the side of the runway. Also, landing in crosswinds feel very unrealistic. It generally feels as though at a certain speed the airplanes lack any ā€œweightā€ and the wind takes hold. They need to fix this.

7 Likes
#22

Agreed.

2 Likes
#23

Incredibly realistic? You need zero rudder to fly coordinated in flight, I donā€™t call that realistic. On the ground some rudder is required but this disappears when airborne. The biggest problem is the lack of propeller effects, it makes all planes essentially behave like jets, no rudder required and slow deceleration when you chop the power. I have flown the Kingair in real life, that plane is the biggest joke of them allā€¦

Also, try to stall the Cessna with power off, keep the elevator full up and keep using ailerons, the aircraft stays perfectly controllable even when rocking the wings using full aileron input, its just not possible to exceed local angle of attack using ailerons and cause a wing drop (same on the TBM, didnā€™t check the rest).

I have done that manoever in real life when I was an instructor, its a fine balance to keep descending controllably, stalled with elevator full up. A little too much rudder or applied for too long, or not keeping the ailerons neutral and it will immediately drop a wing.

So no, anything but realisticā€¦

8 Likes
#24

From a basic systems and normal flying perspective with GA aircraft itā€™s more realistic then any of the other sims out thereā€¦ I agree with what you are saying, I find it much easier to fly in sim then I do in real life in a lot of waysā€¦ a lot more then just what you have pointed out lol

I guess if the bar is ā€œreal lifeā€ then sure itā€™s not real lifeā€¦ I should have been more specific ā€œincredibly realistic, for a flight simā€.

the developers also need to balance real life flying with consumer expectations too and I feel people should understand this. Letā€™s be honest, if every single person to fire up MSFS2020 needed the knowledge and skills it takes to fly an actual aircraft in real life, most of these people would shelf the sim and we would never get a good flight sim made ever again.

#25

Your last point is a good one for sure, however the sim was marketed as a simā€¦ and it was marketed to be realistic. I think there should be the option for people to turn the realism way down, and have aids in the sim to help them learn for sure. But then in a fully realistic mode it should be tough and suitable to real pilots. It is a work in progress, I am hopeful they will make the changes down the line.

3 Likes
#26

Even FSX (and FS9 and probably before)had propeller slipstream effect modeled, if you donā€™t want realism there was this autorudder function.

Oh and talking about systems the G1000 in FSX had more functionality and the flight director works. The lateral flight director mode doesnā€™t work on any MSFS aircraft with autopilot off, it keeps commanding wings level no matter the active modeā€¦

Other than graphics, FS2020 is a downgrade from FSX in the current state.

2 Likes
#27

Ya makes sense, I mean you typically do get better flight models and features from 3rd party developers. Thatā€™s what they do, Asobo will make changes, Iā€™m impressed with what they have done already. And some high quality 3rd party content will come out eventually and hopefully some people can chill out a bit.

Iā€™d hardly call it false advertising, all things considered, if I couldnā€™t fly a 172 and I had to pick between two passengers to land the thing. one passenger has 100+ hours on MSFS2020 in the 172 and the other has zero experience. Iā€™m picking the sim guy and chances are heā€™ll get that plane on the ground given his understanding from the sim.

3 Likes
#28

Iā€™m sorry but I doubt youā€™re a pilot in real life otherwise you wouldnā€™t make these comments. If you think that this game is the closest you can get to simulate the physics of flight in real life then you never used xplane or dcs.

3 Likes
#29

You are entitled to your opinion. :man_shrugging:

Also ya I have never played Xplane. maybe itā€™s super good I donā€™t know. came straight from FSX.

1 Like
#30

in FSX your plane flyā€™s around like itā€™s on elevated train tracks you canā€™t be serious.

3 Likes
#31

Yes Iā€™m not saying the FSX model is any good, just better than MSFS in the current state.

X-plane is indeed 1000 times better physics wise, its unfortunate we got spoiled with the nice MSFS graphics now so it is hard to start-up X-plane but for anything else than graphics Iā€™ll choose X-plane.

1 Like
#32

fair enough, well Iā€™m sure improvements will keep rolling out and hopefully it gets to a state everyone is more or less happy with.

2 Likes
#33

If I remember well Asobo had a position open for a flight model programmer or developer on their careers page, that is now gone so hopefully soon we will start to see some improvements.
They also posted some new positions today.
https://www.asobostudio.com/careers

3 Likes
#34

Haha, sorryā€¦

but you should read up on Njntje91 credentials. He is certainly fully qualified to comment on the flight dynamics and to be honest it does not need an expert to notice that the physics is off and nowhere near what was promised.

The yaw damper on the GA planes INOP but you donā€™t even notice, because there is almost no rudder input required to stay coordinated, just as was stated. So much wasted potential to improve on the weaknesses of earlier sims. But we already discussed this ad nauseam.

6 Likes
#35

That is the function reserved for the add on ā€œstudy levelā€ aircraft. It takes a team of dedicated aircraft development specialists many months, sometimes years to produce that level of realism. WAY outside the scope of the Asobo development team.

1 Like
#36

Its not about the airplanes thoughā€¦ it is about the simulated environment as well. I agree though, study level airplanes will help tremendously. Canā€™t wait.

#37

I donā€™t know that MS or Asobo are thinking this is a realistic flight simulator. I think that they think they have provided a platform for 3rd party vendors to provide the realistic flight models etc. If that were not the case then 5 months later why has there not been work to correct the flight models?

1 Like
#38

yep. I agree, itā€™s not real lifeā€¦ I never said it was, I also never said Njnje91 wasnā€™t qualified to comment or anything derogatory about anyoneā€¦ we were having a conversation.

#39

In most cases, the way the aircraft interacts with the environment is controlled by the aircraft physics, not the environment physics. The environment is nothing more than a bunch of data points. What we see is not what the aircraft see. The aircraft physics is nothing more than whatever the designer programs the data manipulators to do when it encounter environment data. Realism is had when that designer adjusts his algorithms to react to the environment data in a specific manner. Knowing what a real reaction (manipulation) is, is where the magic happens.

3 Likes
#40

ā€œso many people on these forums complaining and I would wager 90%+ have never operated an aircraft.ā€

Could be interpreted as borderline derogatory but I acknowledge that it is a factual statement.

I am also not attacking you. Just a little baffled by your opinion about the flight dynamics. No bad blood :slight_smile:

5 Likes