Real World Pilots, please state your feedback about the flight model

Commerical pilot here. I would report any issues and inaccuracies I find via zendesk. These include flight model behavior / aerodynamics, mechanical behavior (front wheel steering on ground), systems behaviors.

Too many issues to list here.

I find the community mods / tweaks to improve some aircraft dramatically. I enjoy flying the modded DG40 and Bonanza. Hopefully, Asobo will make use of these community mods and integrate them eventually.

What I haven’t reported yet: with some normally aspirated piston engines, mixture control is too touchy. Usually, such engines, according to their manuals, are run at mix full rich up to 5000 ft density altitude at full throttle. There are more issues with the modelling of engines, both piston and turbine though.


This is the best thread in this entire forum and should be kept alive, open, maintained and monitored for as long as possible.


I had hoped that you were able to alter propeller drag.

Concerning flap drag; Flap drag doesnt’t increase linear with flap deflection, hence it’s often necessary to add a second flap section which additionally increases drag for flap angles greater than ~15°.

Agreed, from 0 to 15 degrees of flaps for example the increase in lift is substantial with a minimal increase in profile drag while from 15 degrees to 30 degrees flaps for example the increase in lift is minimal but the increase in profile drag is substantial.

Thank you Nijntje91. This 15° flaps increase lift, no (or only little) increase drag, 40° flaps reduce lift, increase drag are hard-coded or table driven. I have to check.
Everything hard coded and not documented is real fun for everybody who wants to make a good flight model.

Everyone, its off topic but maybe you find this interesting:

40° (or even 50°) increases lift.

Absolutely agree with you, unfortunately it seems, that for a general public it is not that important hence at the moment it is not Asobo priority to further tweak flight model (sadly)

Okay, this MIGHT be the theory. I made measurements on FS2020 stock C152. The results are:
at 60 kts airspeed
0° 700 fpm
10° 825 fpm
20° 1045 fpm
30° 1300 fpm
The sink rate is for gliding, that is engine off. In FS2020 the lift DECREASES with flaps angle. Maybe you can change this behavior by configuration parameter, but this is how it is.

I wrote some/many Zendesk bug reports. It is like shovelling coal in a black hole: some days/weeks later you get state “solved”, BUT NOTHING HAPPENS THAT I CAN RECOGNIZE.

1 Like

It’s the official way to report bugs / make improvement requests. What they do with my feedback it is out of my control.

Fun fact I worked on a program, both managing and assembling( before promotion) the ATR 72 flaps. So cool to see this aircraft mentioned! Would love a good one for this sim.

1 Like

Yeah I only flew the -600, I did a conversion course for the 42-500 but haven’t flown it in real life. We used to call them flying tractor or Dusty the Crophopper. But they are good planes. Would be noce to see a nice -600 for flight sim. I know there one company making one for X-plane.

I’have done a trial flight one time, there i have flown a Piper Warrior by myself, the most of the flight. And I have flown many times as a passenger, on the right seat with my friend.
How do you compare the MSFS flight model with this from XP11?
I think today is only the turbulence effect in MSFS more realistic. For all the other mentioned effects MSFS has to catch up.
But the graphics are awesome, on some points you can forget that you don’t look at a real life picture.

X-plane has a much better flight model.

1 Like

Having designed flight models for MS flight sims and x-plane for many years, I definitely disagree.

That’s without even considering the WIP modern MSFS FDM.

I like to agree with you but I can’t, if I fly the Kingair or TBM trying to slow down, endlessly floating in ground effect.

Maybe you are right in the hands of 3rd party developers but what I’ve seen with the default planes so far X-plane has done a better job.

That’s why I’m presently not flying any turboprops and other constant speed prop equipped aircraft in MSFS.

The whole turboprop/propeller simulation is a realism/immersion killer for me, but I’m pretty sure that Asobo is going to considerable rework/improve these major problem areas :slight_smile:


i’m only a flight student, but the 3 most remarkable flaws in the sim for me are,

  • The Yaw , aint no need for rudder in the game, wich would be intolerable in real life.
  • The Wind , There is something with the wind still not working accordingly with real weather.
  • The View , As a VFR pilot, I tend to use remarkable points I cant find back in the game.
    For example, Bridges, AWOS radar systems, waterfalls, rocky parts on a mountain, etc etc (and what’s with the height of buildings??? ). I did however go around Japan , and if the whole world was rendered like Japan is , ( some parts of it anyway) then it would be more acceptable.
    If you want a perfect example go ahead and find mount rushmore in the USA, you will be SO disapointed if you even get to find it.
    I would undoubtly use the sim as some backup training if those things were corrected.
    I am certainly disapointed so far and I will NOT recommend it for a real world experience simulator.
    Maybe to have fun with other people flying around like fools (Even tho we can’t communicate ingame)
    So that’s it for my 0.02$
    Cheers and dream on.

The lack of propeller slipstream, P-factor etc. is handled in this thread. More votes are welcome!