Watch for the hype

[Hai Perso Coyone?]

I was thinking...maybe this makes sense...but here goes anyway...

After 9/11, I highly doubt that MS will implement the reality factor...I know this is bordering Politics and whatnot...but wouldn't reality make it simpler for anyone to do Flight training at home and do...well you know what...

Just my 2 cents

[Nexus]

Jakemaster: Putting an airplane into a spin or whatever is not likely part of "commercial training" as you refer it to. It's part of basic aerodynamics and the effects of inertia and kinetic energy.

Commercial flying is better depicted than Cessna or Piper flying, just so you know.
Since airliners flies very gentle and doesnt push the envelope (which requires advanced computations)

[JBaymore]

[quote]

[JBaymore]

After 9/11, I highly doubt that MS will implement the reality factor...

I think that they don't want too much reality factor for a far different reason.

For every "serious simmer" .... like those of us who hang out here at SimV......... wanting more realism....... there are scads of "casual types" and "gamers" that would not buy the program if it took too much effort to learn to fly it.

I think extreme realism would be a poor economic move on their part.  They have to run a balance....keep both "sides" happy.

best,

.................john

[justplanecrazy]

I want it as real as you can get it in all respects i mean you could teach a monkey to fly a cessna but theres a lot more to it than just flying around what i would like to see is all your pen and paper nave tools in a flight planing screen in sted of the simple electronic flight planner and some more realistic charts

[x_jasper]

John

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Surely, instruments which actually mean something isn't too much to ask, is it ?

Consider: traditionally MS sims have one basic prop form which is constant speed, however graphically they are variable speed.

The merlin engine for example is rated at 3,000RPM and the gearbox reduction ratio is 2.38:1, this means that at max RPM the tacho should read 3,000 as you would expect, and the actual prop RPM would be 1260.

At slow run / idle say engine RPM ~ 800, the tacho should read 800 and the prop rpm would be 336RPM.
ALAS!! even under slow / idle engine RPM the tacho still reads 3,000 !

Now, MS would have you believe their tacho is showing prop RPM, and not engine RPM. This is blatently untrue since I for one would be very worried indeed if I were near a ten foot prop spinning at 3,000RPM. I don't know what the tip speed would be but it would be a safe bet to assume mach 1 had been passed. This is what breaks props, and the reason for having a reduction gearbox.

So it's a bit pathetic really to have an engine tacho that always reads 3,000

Most likely the 'gaming' fraternity doesn't realise this basic fact.

C'mon MS  ;)

Jasper

[Jakemaster]

GUYS!  REMEMBER!  Its only a computer simulation.  I dont know what you expect to be honest.  I really dont understand what you are looking for.  Do you want it to be exactly like real life?  If so, then you need to spend a lot more than 50 bucks on it and buy projectors,full motion platforms, cockpit hardware.  I mean, come on!  Even if the flight dynamics are perfect there are still so many different aspects you cant replicate.  So I hate to say it, but live with what your given my MS and Aces

[Jakemaster]

Jakemaster: Putting an airplane into a spin or whatever is not likely part of "commercial training" as you refer it to. It's part of basic aerodynamics and the effects of inertia and kinetic energy.

Commercial flying is better depicted than Cessna or Piper flying, just so you know.
Since airliners flies very gentle and doesnt push the envelope (which requires advanced computations)

What I mean is FS is not meant to be a commercial level sim, its not intended to train real pilots, its intended to entertain those like myself and others who love flying and dream of flight but cant afford it in the real world (even tho all the money ive spent on my computer and sim stuff is probably enough to get some training)

[JBaymore]

......(even tho all the money ive spent on my computer and sim stuff is probably enough to get some training)

LOL  

[Ecko]

I agree Jasper, there's no idea in not fixing a stupid mistake like the incorrect gauges, since that would be an extremely easy thing to correct.

Jake, you have to agree here, it's a mistake that could be fixed in a matter of seconds..
You're saying; do not correct it. Why?
If they cannot give us some serious flight dynamics, which they clear can or will not, they can at least spend some time fixing those stupid mistakes that makes the game unrealistic.

[Joe_D]

[quote]

I think that they don't want too much reality factor for a far different reason.

For every "serious simmer" .... like those of us who hang out here at SimV......... wanting more realism....... there are scads of "casual types" and "gamers" that would not buy the program if it took too much effort to learn to fly it.

I think extreme realism would be a poor economic move on their part.

[x_jasper]

I just don't know what it is with some people and spin.

Unreasonable, is pointless RPM and boost gauges etc.

Reasonable, is inaccurate spin characteristics. People may not realise it but actually to model spin correctly would involve massively complex algorithms. MS could be let off the hook as regrads spin.

But please, let us see accurate gauge, correct prop modelling, and smooth FM's. These are after all basics and by now the FS series has matured to the point where these basic features are justified.

P.S. out of interest when FS9 first came out I remodelled the dynamics for the DC3 & Trimotor, these were very popular and I gave the files to dozens of people. Everyone was wholly satisfied and I did not charge a single cent for my work. So, if I can do it........

Regards all
Jasper

[C]

[quote]

The most important point is that is an under $100 USD computer program.

[Katahu]

Dang, if a multi-million dollar piece of hardware can't do 100% realism then I certainly doubt the FS series would be able to fix its dynamics even if M$ did concentrate on that.

I've been flying the latest update of X-Plane lately and I can that even X-Plane has its drawbacks in terms of dynamics. For example: No matter how hard I work to setup the sensitivity and null zone on my joystick almost all of the aircraft in X-Plane seems to twitch when I try to turn gently to either side. Heck, you can even see the control surfaces act all twitchy. I'm not sure if this is the result of a poorly setup joystick or a flaw in X-Plane's ability to understand anny joystick input. And let me remind you that X-Plane is one of the most accurate commercial sims in the market.

[Jakemaster]

Im not saying not to fix little quick problems, but Im saying that there really is no need to worry about some of the larger weakneses in flight dynamics