[FIXED 1.13.17.0] World Update 3 has broken flight dynamics, exhibit A

Is there an official statement by the developers on this issue yet?

A plane that Asobo have probably not changed to work with the new flight model.

This is one aspect, among many, that I’m unsure about. The two planes they did change are in the Standard edition, and are not protected. You can do what you like with them. The following are not, and are protected/encrypted:

image

You mention the Baron, and that is in the deluxe edition. It does not have a flight model file, but I can see that some of its core files were changed on the 16th:

image

At a guess I would say that file is wrapped up in that cfg.fsarchive file, and all three of these were changed on the 16th. So was it tweaked by Asobo to match the new flight model? I can’t say for sure.

The 172S does not handle as it did before, not as bad as the 208, but it does not perform the same. I have not tried the 172 G1000 to compare, and but I know it hasn’t been changed since December:

image

On what basis do you make this claim? Do you have access to the coding changes Asobo made? I’ll leave it to Asobo to address this, and hopefully they will do so soon. But after they do that, we expect that we will be reverting our change to the A32NX flight model.

In a future update, we hope to adjust our flight model to take advantage of the new capabilities. But these are two different items.

What I find hard to understand is that a company like Microsoft can let customers rant for days and days without providing any useful response. Ok, it’s fun for the community to discuss these things, it keeps us busy :wink:.

But in so many support forums for other products (many which are a lot smaller) I would already have gotten some meaningful answer from a support person or even a developer.

I couldn’t see anything on zendesk either but maybe that’s because I didn’t log the ticket.

5 Likes

They could make available a beta version for flight model testing that only worked with the Bing Data off, no multiplayer, no traffic, and weather presets.

This would allow us to provide feedback on the core flight model behavior without requiring a 2nd set of servers, while they work to stand up a set of beta servers to allow for a full Bets in the future.

After the “Press Any Key” saga, I can’t particularly blame them for being so slow to answer to this bizarre community.

However, now that this product has become Hot Air Balloon Simulator 2020, one would think that this is something they need to jump on quite urgently…

That’s not a bad idea actually - but only allows beta testing for anything flight model related and not visuals

It’s not that bad really and as @Yeti64 says there are plenty of quick fix mods out there for most planes that will tide us over until Asobo fix it properly. They acknowledged all the feedback a couple of days ago

Obviously we need a full Beta in the future but if setting up separate servers is somehow a barrier to that, it would at least be a temporary option to get a beta program started.

1 Like

Agree and better than nothing

It has been raised to Asobo and they are aware, they are looking into it. That’s all we know :slight_smile:

1 Like

Maybe check out Aerosoft’s CRJ thread on their forum.

Their project lead, Mathijs Kok, has effectively said that they are supportive of the changes to the flight model, made by Asobo, and that they will be tuning their aircraft performance to adapt to those changes.

Aerosoft Aircraft: CRJ - Page 97 - Product Previews - AEROSOFT COMMUNITY SERVICES to save you searching.

1 Like

Thanks for the reply. So we basically now nothing then :yum:

Maybe its the wheel drag? If you perform a proper X-wind landing you will touch on the upwind wheel first, maybe that wheel creates so much drag that the aircraft is yawing into the direction the wind is coming from without the yaw actually being induced by the wind? Just thinking out loud here…

What weight? I assume the red band on the airspeed tape represents the Vs0 in the worst conditions, meaning max. weight and forward CG.

Never used that one, we use 10% increase in speed is 20% increase in landing distance…

Last night with the TBM, I managed to glide nearly the entire 6800 ft length of RWY12 at KOPF at 45-ish kts a couple of feet above the pavement while at zero power. I then powered up for a go-around.

Yeah, that’s just not right. How did this get past testing unnoticed?

2 Likes

Jup, worrying indeed. Microsoft Ekranoplan simulator 2020.

image

2 Likes

Like I said in another post about this, looks like MSFS is now part of the Star Wars universe and they’ve installed repulsor lifts on the planes.

1 Like

You cant change one thing and not compensate for what it affects. If all the flight_model.cfg files were updated as they should have (iow not doing a halfass job), then there would be absolutely no problems.

This would be seen as a positive change and 3rd party developers can them apply the same compensations. As of now, nobody knows what to do to make it ‘normal’ again.

PS: This was a breaking change and it should have been fully documented in the SDK. There is not a single mention of any changes in the SDK release notes.

2 Likes