Hi all,
Pleasure to be here! And loving the new sim on my 49". Running beautifully at 50fps+ all the time.
I came across a video from some guys I like who got me into simming (Pilot Workshops) and they’re really hating on MSFS. I’m not a serious simmer so hard to know if what they’re saying is right or wrong. What do you guys think of their comp video?
Really doesn’t matter, it all comes down to user preference.
It’s 11 months old. Would take it with a grain of salt at this stage. Also bear in mind their approach to the comparison, what might be important to them might not be for the next person…
Not sure why you said they were hating on MSFS. I just watched the video and all I saw was they were telling the absolute truth about MSFS 2020 and X-Plane 11. It’s a comparison review video for both. Pilot Workshops is a company that delivers online pilot proficiency training. They are not a video-gaming or entertainment company. The guy (Ryan Koch) who made this video in your link is an active CFII (real world flight instructor) currently working for Pilot WorkShops. Pilot Workshops recruits world famous CFIs, ATPs, US Airforce pilots, meteorologists, corporate pilots and FAA representatives. Even the famous Rod Machado is one of their employees.
MSFS 2020 is an entertainment product. Read the terms/eula etc for more info. It can’t be used for the things Pilot Workshops uses X-Plane 11 for.
For example:
And here’s A2A Simulation’s Business Manager Lewis agreeing with CFII Ryan in your video:
It’s [MSFS 2020] more a game than a platform, you can’t have custom programming, very limited SDK etc. that’s ok for consumer products but MSFS as it stands is just wholly unsuited to a sim platform used for training and simulation work. Work that often involves multiple companies software and hardware working on top of a platform to delivery bespoke solutions.
So basically, what you bought is a game. MSFS 2020 is like a Goat Simulator or Surgery Simulator 2013. The publisher calls and sells it as a ‘simulator’ without revealing more details but decided to leave its functionalities at ‘entertainment’ and ‘video-game’ level just like Goat and Surgery Simulator’s publishers did. Surgery Simulator 2013 doesn’t simulate surgery like Forsslund System’s Kobra Oral surgery simulator does.
Similarly, MSFS 2020 simulates ‘flight’ and ‘aviation’ in a video-gamey, entertainment way (just like Goat and Surgery Simulator 2013) while X-Plane 11 does it in a highly accurate and professional way to the extent that you can buy the professional version of X-Plane 11 tomorrow, buy the required hardware and get it FAA-approved for flight training.
Keep in mind nowadays many game developers call their products ‘simulators’ but what they actually develop and sell is a game. MS and Asobo have done exactly that, and they have done a wonderful job at it!
Just because it can be used as an FAA approved training, it doesn’t mean that its ‘highly accurate’.
Like most multimillion dollar Level-D sims, it’s an expensive procedure trainer.
Apart from the FAA approval you can use MSFS as a procedure trainer as well.
Thanks for the info. Although I’m not too sure if what you just said is your own opinion or a fact. Either way, if X-Plane 11 is ‘highly accurate’ for NASA and their X-59 QueSST test pilot Nils Larson, it’s ‘highly accurate’ for me too I guess.
Instructions for Downloading and Flying all Three X-59 Laptop Flight S | NASA
NASA Interns Compete Against Clock to Develop X-59 Simulation | NASA
That’s from Oct 19. Basic items like the ground effect have been significantly changed since then.
X-plane is and always was a moving target.
If the X-59 was highly accurate 2 years ago, chances are that it isn’t anymore 
Btw. neither the ARC, LaRC or AFRC model state that the flight model is highly accurate.
That’s correct. The training Xplane version is 500 dollars + though, and can only be certified together with specific hardware as a package. And all this means, is that it can be used for official procedure training, it says nothing about the flight characteristics or physics. Out of the box, Xplane isn’t FAA certified and just as much an entertainment product as FSX was. P3D is the only commercial simulator, without an entertainment offering, and is used by many flight schools.
Interestingly enough, Jörg mentioned something about being approached by real world flight instructors asking him to make fs2020 usable for flight training. He said that he needs to look at that as well and what the possibilities are. I guess, for absolute comparisons it’s too early to draw conclusions what msfs2020 will be able to, or wont be able to do in the future. Where we stand right now, however, is exactly as you said. P3D and Xplane offer a lot more in terms of add-on capability and various simulation aspects, Msfs2020 is an immature/incomplete platform yet. Cheers
“They” are NOT hating on MSFS…
I’ve seen the video, have you?
Please refer to FAA advisory circular 61-136B and scroll down to B.3.5 (page B-7 and B-8) where under Flight Dynamics Requirements it states: " Flight dynamics of the ATD should be comparable to the way the represented training aircraft performs and handles.".
Keep reading from B.3.5.1 to B.3.5.5 and you will find all the flight model requirements. AC 61-136B (faa.gov)
That’s a pretty elastic definition and you left out the even more interesting part:
However, there is no requirement for an ATD to have control loading to exactly replicate any particular aircraft.
Again, expensive procedure trainers.
I wouldn’t use MSFS as the sole basis for learning fly,
just as I wouldn’t use Goat Simulator as the sole basis for looking after goats.
(I don’t plan to do either as it happens)
MSFS strikes me as an entertainment product that could could reach the highest levels of fidelity but is that small population (compared to everyone else) really a market that Microsoft has a priority to chase? I suspect not. 
You can’t do that with x-plane either.
Well yes. It doesn’t mean the base sim is accurate by any means. To illustrate my point: try any default p3d aircraft and then fly the A2A cessna. Aircraft aren’t automatically accurate in any sim. The add-on quality is what matters here. Has that ever been any different though?
Yeah, sure, but any of the sims is good enough in that aspect. It doesn’t tell anything about the quality of the base sim in absolute terms. The sim just needs to allow for a digital environment where the approximation is good enough to fulfill the regulations. It doesn’t mean Xplane is better than anything else in that regard, else P3D wouldn’t be certifiable, yet it is. Msfs2020 maybe isn’t quite there yet because of some features missing, but in terms of aerodynamics modelling potential, it surely can get there.
That made my day!
I hadn’t seen the video before and actually think it’s a reasonably positive and fair appraisal of MSFS. A little disappointing that a year on down the line and most of it is still completely valid; although we are starting to see some really good addons appearing now.
I think X-Goat is better… 
X-Plane has what MSFS really, really, really needs, and MSFS has what X-Plane really, really needs.
There is no point getting into it, X-Plane as True simulator of flight is more advanced for now, as another person has pointed out, it is pretty tragic that all of the points in the video are mostly still valid a year on, but lets see in another year.
Nothing here yet though unfortunately from A2A.
Default aircraft are less-than-accurate (to say the least) in any product, whether it’s called XPlane, MSFS or P3D.
But a highly accurate, study-level airplane needs a highly accurate environment to fly in…. Otherwise it’s like testing a real life aircraft on Mars… it won’t fly the way it was design to just because the physics are simply not there
