Please analyze the A2A Comanche for its flight model, and how it can help MSFS 2024's flight model

Discussion Hub MSFS 2024
1

So the A2A Comanche has been released for MSFS and almost everyone is praising it for its flight model. Some are even calling it the best GA plane for MSFS that they have flown. I understand that Petrovich (who Asobo hired from IL-2) and Seb are working on the flight model for MSFS 2024, and Petrovich seems like a really great hire for Asobo.

Having said that, I really think the Asobo team, specifically Seb and Petrovich, may want to analyze the flight model of the A2A Comanche (maybe they are checking it out already?). Ultimately, we want every small GA plane in MSFS 2024 to have a flight model as nice as the A2A Comanche.

And maybe Asobo (or Jorg) may want to consider contracting the A2A team to help with the upcoming flight model in MSFS 2024? Of course, whatever flight model Petrovich and Seb have designed for MSFS 2024 will have to proceed, because 2024 is not far away. But if there is time left before MSFS 2024 is released, maybe A2A could provide some constructive input, and even help with the testing of the MSFS 2024 flight model, before MSFS 2024’s release.

Edit: I reference this analysis of the MSFS flight model for small GA planes vs A2A Comanche flight model from Stearmandriver, a Twitch streamer who mainly streams MSFS and a real life 737 pilot who also flies GA planes (ie. Stearman) on his free time:

I’ll weigh in on this, after several flights in the Comanche (and as someone who greatly enjoys the 310).

First, the flight model. A2A has, basically, created a new simulator here. Sure, much of the flight regime in MSFS feels quite good - better than we’ve had before in a sim - but there are problem areas. Take crosswind effects, for example: in all other MSFS aircraft, a 10 knot crosswind component feels like about 25kts. You can land in a sideslip with the longitudinal axis aligned with centerline, upwind wing low to prevent drift etc
 You can do this perfectly, and on touchdown weird things still happen in every plane I’ve previously used in MSFS. The plane lurches or slides sideways, the nose yaws around, there’s an extreme tendency to not only weathervane but drift INTO the crosswind etc.

The Comanche does none of this. 10kts of crosswind feels like 10kts, and if you touch down straight with no drift, nothing weird happens. You simply touch down on upwind main, downwind main, and nose gear, rolling straight all the while, and weathervaning is easily controllable with aileron into the wind as it should be.

It’s like you’re NOT flying MSFS; the quirks aren’t there. In THIS simulator, the plane behaves like it should!

Of course every other aspect of the flight model is great too. Stall / spin physics are phenomenal, and the fact that they spent time on something that the airplane isn’t even certified to do speaks volumes about attention to detail.






Those are just a couple examples but the whole plane is like that. Oh, the instruments! Hand flying instrument approaches is an absolute pleasure; the needles are 100% smooth, there’s no ticking at ALL. That seems like it should be simpler, but other devs seem to struggle with it


Ultimately, I’m coming to the conclusion that this plane, in this sim, represents nothing less than a new level of GA sim experience. Given that no true high-fidelity GA simulation devices exist (there are no level C or D Comanche boxes out there), I actually think the claim can be made that this is the most accurate, natural simulation of a general aviation aircraft that has ever been created. On any platform, not just limited to a desktop sim.

I get that this may sound fan-boyish but I’m objectively serious. It’s an entirely new level.

And for “casual” simmers? I mean we’re all here for fun so I’m not sure what the difference might be, but I think this plane is for everyone. I mean, it’s not hard to learn to fly a Comanche, and everyone will enjoy the flight dynamics from the get go. Interfacing with aircraft options is extremely simple via their tablet. There’s nothing to be intimidated about.

I mean, it’s really that good. I don’t understand what they’ve done. They should just build their own sim. :grin:

32 Likes
2

curious if Jörg and Asobo have the same opinion. i politely disagree here. sorry to say

3

The flight model for one plane doesn’t mean that it’ll work for all current and future planes.

And I kindly ask folks from making “we” statements. You want something and I think that’s great, but doesn’t mean we all want that.

What if theA2A is too much for new simmers? What if the CPU load is too much?

Developing a flight model is an iterative process. I like where the default flight mode is and I can only assume it’ll get better.

16 Likes
4

Yes please do not speak for everyone, whilst the flight model for A2A may well be very good that doesn’t mean it’ll fit into the base MSFS code for what Seb is working on. Every team, be it official or third party developer does things differently, let Asobo do what they do and simply enjoy A2As product in its own right.

10 Likes
5

“Fit into?” Please don’t take words out of my mouth. I did not say anywhere that the A2A flight model should be inserted or become a part of MSFS 2024’s code.

I said A2A can be consulted for their expertise, especially with respect to their experience in small plane GA flight simulation models for MSFS 2024. This means advice and testing, but advice and testing does not mean A2A’s code will ever become a part of MSFS 2024.

8 Likes
6

I never said A2A’s flight model can work for all the planes that MSFS 2024 has to support.

A2A could definitely provide constructive advice though, especially for flight models concerning small GA aircraft.

8 Likes
7

agree of course that the Asobo FM needs a major revamp. imo must be completely new, any fixing on current will not work. But Asobo are not interested in improving the fm, my view.

1 Like
8

Wishful thinking, look at the statistics of MSFS2020; the absolute majority are casual and Xbox users combined, and that’s where the money is made by dropping basic and low cost airplanes with good graphics which a lot of people pick up to fly around in.

On steam only 6.8% have the achievement for more than 100 flight hours. Most people don’t actually want a accurate flight model and it would make the sim less accessible thus less possible money.

The A2A plane has to use a extra application to calculate flight physics in order to circumvent the simulator limitations, that’s why it flies so well.

I just cannot see why they would do that from a business perspective. Most people would just enable the “easy” flightmodel anyway, so it would be wasted resources.

1 Like
9

I think we agree here.

I think Seb said he was working with Petrovich, at the FSExpo presentation (Seb said “Andrey,” who should be Petrovich). Anyways, this is what their slide showed about MSFS 2024 from FSExpo:

Imgur

10

I think I know what you mean but I have always had the opinion that the correcter physics and a flightmodel are the easier it is to learn them. If you throw a ball in a game and it flies a made up trajectory you’ll find it difficult to learn its behaviour. But if it flies a correct parabola you can easily understand it and throw it correctly. Even if you’re not a trained pilot you will understand what an airplane does and you will eventually be more successful doing all kind of things in the sim.
And anyway: airplanes are not difficult to fly. SIM airplanes are. The Comanche is much more predictable and easier to fly than all this twitchy stuff we have had.

Beside that
 I have a feeling A2A wouldn’t sell Accusim xD

13 Likes
11

Absolutely agree! I would hope that most people here want a flight simulator that is more accurate to real life, and that includes the flight model. The A2A Comanche flight model is good because it’s much closer to how the Comanche, and small real life GA planes, fly in real life.

I’m not sure why people would would a less realistic flight model. Well said @Ephedrin87!

6 Likes
12

I would agree that it really does fly like nothing else in the sim at the moment, and its somewhat obvious why that is if you are up to date with the promotional material.

I landed the PA-24 in an 18kt crosswind, 1kt over max demonstrated, and it wasn’t particularly hard, and didn’t skid about on the ground once all the gear were down. It was night, and day.

3 Likes
13

Seb and Asobo doesn’t need to look at what A2A has done to know what they need to get done. They have clearly made moves to make the necessary improvements possible.

1 Like
14

So first and foremost, I think Seb is exceptionally smart, he has is PPL, and much of the flight model in MSFS is a result of his work. Nevermind the fact that he is the CEO of Asobo, managed to start and grow his company to what it is today, on top of learning everything about flight simulation on the fly! Seb is brilliant! In addition, Petrovich was an all star hire - Petrovich created a fabulous flight model in IL-2. When Asobo hired him, it made news in the flight sim community.

However, I don’t know if you have watched the movie Blackberry. In the movie Blackberry, they had some of the smartest people in Canada working at RIM (Research in Motion, the company that made Blackberry). At a certain point though, the engineers at RIM hit some brick walls. What happened next is that one of the co-CEOs of RIM saw they hit a brick wall, and then ran off to hire some of the smartest people at Google, Microsoft, etc, to help out with the engineers at RIM. With the help of the newly hired people from Google, Microsoft, etc, RIM finally managed to gets past those brick walls.

The point is, having some of the best and brightest people that understand how to model one of the most accurate flight models for small GA planes and giving some constructive advice, could be helpful to Seb and Petrovich. I am sure Seb and Petrovich will be the main drivers of the flight model in MSFS 2024. But IMO, it doesn’t hurt to get some extra advice from some of the best out there, and maybe even have A2A help out with testing Seb/Petrovich’s work, and A2A is definitely one of the best at modelling small GA aircraft flight models.

6 Likes
15

The A2A Comanche is the latest “secret sauce” plane for me, one where I spend a great deal of time wondering what is this wizardry and why is it so effective? I ask myself the same thing when I fly Ant’s Tiger Moth, or the SWS RV-14 (just a couple of examples).

Specifically the trimming and the elevator response really sold it for me. The Comanche doesn’t twitch at ALL. I feel like I’m finally getting my money’s worth out of my Honeycomb Alpha. In turns, the back pressure feels very close to what I’d apply in an IRL plane, I apply a significant amount of pressure to keep the nose up, and it just stays at the right level rather than pitching up too much. In terms of setting elevator trim, the Comanche is one of the best I’ve flown.

As wonderful as the Comanche is, I have enjoyed flying all of the Asobo planes, and really have no major complaints about anything. However if I could change anything about the current FS default flight model, I would:

  1. Make things less twitchy. The elevator response on many planes is such that applying a moderate amount of pressure may result in an unrealistically fast/excessive pitch change (the nose immediately jumps up, VSI shows +500 FPM immediately). Somehow they have managed to solve this with the Comanche, it feels much more natural.
  2. Make the elevator trim more like the Comanche. I feel like it’s just easier to use.

Much thanks and gratitude to the teams at Asobo and Microsoft, for continually promising and DELIVERING the ENTIRE WORLD. Thank you!!!

9 Likes
16

I would (gently) say that if they Optioned the level of the plane, meaning one could turn off, at a click, all of the advanced settings (failures and other procedures that might discourage or confuse new/entry level/casual users), this would be a way to have a ‘near study level/true to life’ aircraft, with options for everyone’s level. Development in this manner would mean the plane starts from a full compliment of complexity and realism, and not from the other direction of basic systems at best, with a simple FM only. With a fully advanced aircraft, with options to simplify, you start from a full glass, rather than a half-empty glass and then playing ‘catch-up’ over months and years.

But the options to simplify would be a must in order to incorporate all users for the aircraft.

3 Likes
17

It would also be worth asking the question how those more experienced users got experience in the first place, without such options existing.

Flying other, more simple aircraft would be an option.

It might sound like gatekeeping at first glance, but no one learned to drive in an F1 car.

18

Agree - if someone can avail someone else of their knowledge, provide tips, suggestions, successful examples of procedures and know-how, then why wouldn’t you seek out that assistance? Surely there are people on this planet, out there somewhere, that just might possess a bit of superior knowledge and experience that one could tap for help, if the will and the way is there to do so. If you can’t access that type of assistance so be it, but it never hurts to seek out more experienced or advanced help, if you perceive and respect the existence of that person or method.

A lot of folks were pained by the initial FM in MSFS 2020 and some were fair minded enough to give the team credit as the FM gradually improved over the last 2.5 years. That said many of the same people praised A2A and how their planes handled in other sims, lamenting the wait for those aircraft to make their way to MSFS 2020. They also said ‘just wait until you see their products, you will understand what I mean’. And now we have them. And now many people are seeing for themselves what that all meant. And yet, some of the same people are saying ‘No, no, no’ to the idea of A2A imparting any of their experience or knowledge to the team, to perhaps assist in a problem, or get past a sticking point. No FM for a single aircraft will work for every aircraft but physics and dynamics comprehension and proficiency can be spread across other aircraft, adapted specifically because of the underlying intelligence behind the methods and theories.

I hope if there is a chance that A2A would do such a thing, and Asobo and the team would seek out any assistance, that they could mutually benefit in some way, in the overall MS FM development. In the end, we all benefit from the best FM possible.

1 Like
19

I agree with this, and it’s worth acknowledging the fact that it’s really all about how aircraft developers code against the flight model. A2A have created a proprietary flight model that allowed them to create a plane with desirable characteristics; developers coding against the default MSFS flight model can also create planes with desirable characteristics.

20

I thought that A2A might be using their own External Flight Model ? which is something I also seem to remember Asobo saying they were not going to support. ?

Who knows
 things change every month