Sim Skunk Works Leonardo (SIAI Marchetti) SF-260 AM

a new footage with modified spin after your reports.
It shows also an 1 G stall before the stall.
Hope that initial rollback is enough close to the real thing, hard to do something closer.
Some erratic movements during steady level flight is due to the recorder not the aircraft itself.


That video is from 2 years ago. Based on his recent videos he’s working on a Stemme S12 now. The last mention of the 260 on his channel was a video showing how to export it to DCS from 9 months ago, so I’d consider that thing dead.

Hello, surely it is postponed or it will not launch it for fs2020,

I’m confused… what are you talking about? The release of the SF-260? An SSW representative has been discussing the development of the MSFS version just 2 days ago…

He’s talking about the video by JRollon posted here.
He was supposed to port his SF260 from Xplane to MSFS.

1 Like

Thanks Mario for the new video.
The incipient phase of the spin looks better imo, but I don’t see enough rotation if there is full rudder application all along. It is hard to tell from the video though…

yes it’s just to watch the initial roll back, spin continued, however i see hard to have the closest to real spin :frowning:
the Asobo phisic engine has his limits…
Imho is a back step compared with P3D since the model-flight-system are not completely separated in MSFS 2020, so we do not have the same freedom of move


Yet another video display of Sim Skunk Works SIAI MARCHETTI SF 260
Thanks for watching.

we are hard working to release it before end of April.
(no promise)


Flight behaviour looks very good indeed - well coordinated maneuvers, performed with that ‘elegance’ for which the SF-260 is famous.
If may ask (not willing to spoil SSW trade secrets tho :sweat_smile:), are you using CFD modeling for propeller and airframe? I am curious whether in your opinion the CFD allows better tuning of airplane flight dynamics in MSFS.
Keep on the great work, for me will be instant buy once released :wink:

1 Like

no CFD, at least in the sense that you allude to if I understand because the SIM does the most important work in mathematics.
In general it is about correcting some parameters and fill some tables that the physical engine makes available to you.
This work takes a lot of time, many excel worksheets, experience and math obviously.
In this the great experience of real flight we have helps us a lot in evaluating the results and correct errors.
Just to give an example the efficiency coefficient of the real SIAI 260 is 9.964,
in our model has been verified to be 9.92 with test flights.
Hope this answers your question.


Thank you very much for the clear explanation, really appreciated!

Really looking forward to this as had the aircraft in X-plane 11 and was one of my favourite, having also owned SSW planes in FSX / P3D I know it will be done right too.

It’s an interesting discussion topic… His question was really how do you feel about the new tools you have for developing flight dynamics of aircraft versus the old way before the “CFD” tools were introduced. Some developers have stated they don’t have the flexibility they used to have, really “to fudge things to get them right”, like they used to have, so they feel it’s harder to get things “right”.

But, I think that question is kind of moot as this is the way it’s done now. Now I bet it’s more important for Asobo to understand what developers need to get this new flight model system working properly “more easily” than it is now. IOW, what’s missing from developers’ point of view? Rhetorical question really, but, we’d love to know. Just cause, well, we’re at work looking for things to distract us :grin:

1 Like

I personally believe that the lower flexibility compared to the previous paradigm (FSX/P3D) is rewarded by greater precision.
It’s true that the physical engine software is still a bit immature, optimized for “slow movers” and not exactly accurate for transonic and supersonic regimes where air compressibility comes into play, but I’ve seen constant improvements over time.
An area certainly to be improved are the changes induced by real weather, for example the response to the gust is exaggerated and unreal even the propwash of the propeller on the ground.
Personally, I would like some more tables that would allow to better model some parameters that are now reduced to coefficients.