Posts by jcomm

I wonder if the changes in the FDM, just like the changes in weather effects, namely turbulence and variability which I felt were better reproduced in AEFS1, result from a simplification of the original FDM.

I am disappointed for instance with the prop effects, namely on how they reflect on yaw ( they practically don't ) and are present mainly in rolling moments. I also find the ground physics and for instance touchdown is too tame, no matter with what v/s you touchdown, the aircraft mostly staying without any bouncing, no damage, nothing like we had in AEFS1...

Hey!

You're borrowing my DTG FSW banner request

But for sure I would use both

Quote from Murmur

I think I tried it some time ago in the C172 on AeroflyFS 1, and the yaw due to propwash increased.

I will keep trying, also with the prop thrust and drag parameters. Maybe something changed in AEFS2 ( ? )

Quote from Murmur

What are the results? Does the prop-induced yaw increase?

Nope, at least based on the observation of the TC ball. Maybe the limitation is on the physics of the TC ?

Quote from CavendishD

The Extra doesn't require a huge amount of rudder on takeoff IRL as it has a massively powerful rudder but I believe the turn slip indicator on the extra and Cessna are nowhere near sensitive enough as I can yaw the aircraft quite a lot with only little effect on the ball.

Yep, that can also account for it.

Quote from Murmur

I think the effect of helical propwash on each aerodynamic surface (in this case, the vertical stabilizer) can be tweaked using the PropwashRotation attribute: https://www.aerofly.com/aerofly_fs_2/d…ropwashrotation

I tried playing with that one, but lack or rw data, and the results I obtained, didn't suite very well :-/

Link to a post I just left at another thread.

http://www.ipacs.de/forum/showthre…39868#post39868

Yesterday after the huge install, I decided to give all prop aircraft in AEFS2 a go...

Picked the C172 for a start, then the Extra 300, the Pitts, ...

I find, in pretty much all of them, practically no yaw due to prop effects. There's roll, though, somehow even reminding me a lot of X-Plane pre torque-bug fix...

It puzzles me how an Extra 300 requires practically no rudder input to counter the prop torque/ slipstream / p-factor ... both during the takeoff run but also inflight at high AoA / high power settings ?

In the C172 I can fly "all day long" under various regimes, with the T/C ball centered and requiring only rudder input during turns, due to adverse yaw ( ? )

Even thought this might be caused by some sort of "auto-rudder" mode, but it doesn't look like so, unfortunately..., unless that option mentioned in the above linked post may have something to do with it ?

Might this also be the reason why I find the Extra 300 so mild in prop effects during takeoff, and inflight ?

Takeoff run with engine set to normal takeoff thrust requires practically no rudder to stay on course and steer up to rotation speed, and inflight power changes translate mostly into roll, on practically all prop aircraft in AEFS2, there being prcatcally no hints of yaw / sideslip.

The "ball" in the C172 stays pretty much centered all of the time, from takeoff to high power climb. Roll is most noticeable effect, requiring yoke to counter, but when wings are level, the ball is centered ...

These "features" remind me a lot of X-Plane pre torque-bug fix ( thx to Murmur's proof of inconsistency )

Tried to play with some config file settings for prop and propwash, but no great results....

Apart from Aerofly FS 2 - which I do not even have installed - I presently own only IL2 Battle of... and DTG's recently released and already great FSW, but my position regarding AEFS2 is that of someone who can own a Bugatti but can't take it for work every day...

It stays, at the garage, for special moments, special needs of the joy of driving a Bugatti...

Will it be updated ? For sure it will, but not at the typical pace simmers expect programs and their developers to bring them news, and I am very badly trained on that by 1C / 777 and their incredible update rate on the IL.2 Battle of series.... but still, AEFS2 IS AEFS2, and has a potential that I can only compare to that of IL.2 and DCS World flight dynamics and performance wise...

It's my Bugatti

Well,

this, OTOH, makes me think if we'll ever be able to see a PMDG add-on for AEFS2... since AEFS is also tied to Steam ?

Honestly,

I confess I am enthusiastic about the upcoming DTG offer, and wish them the best. It would be great to be able to have there a Game platform to continue on the FSX track, which is still, after all, a good one for many users.

I am waiting on AEFS2 though, although I fear the progress around here might be rather slow compared to what will probably be offered at the start for DTG's flight simulator.

Only "problem" is that both DTG FSW, and P3D share the core flight dynamics of MSFS, which not being bad at all is, nonetheless, inferior in potential to what I've seen as being already available to model aircraft and flight in AEFS2.

AFAIC, major problem with AEFS 2 for me is the absence of a perpetual daylight and Moon phase and ephemeris model. Just as X-plane it is restricted to some date / year and can't give us, based on any date and time, a proper daylight, including Moon position and phase, model. A mandatory requirement for me in any flight Simulator...

Quote from Trespassers

Just open any ground, approach and clean file and you'll understand approach and clean are only presets configurations. For instance flaps extended, gear down, landing lights on, etc. for approach ; gear up, flaps up, n% power, lights setting, etc. for clean.

So, no different dynamics or flight model, and no blending necessary, just presets applied depending on whether you start a flight on ground, in-flight or in approach...

Cheers
Antoine

Right! That's it - how stupid of me :-/ Should have opened one before posting, but just read the Wiki, and it somehow suggest it's used for the flight Dynamics too.

Thank you!

weather ?

Jon V mentioned weather effects with the upcoming LOWI scenery for AEFS2. Wonder if this means an update to the weather system is going to be released with that ORBX scenery add-on ?

TMD files, apart from the main / default one, can be used to express flight dynamics properties under three states - ground, approach, clean.

I've been thinking about this approach and the limitations it can impose.

For a start, how do these states blend as transition from clean to approach takes place ?

And, why was it necessary to separately / so discretely, define the flight dynamics according to these three states only ?

Quote from Overloaded

Is a normally flown Airbus not just a computer game simulation anyway? Who cares what such a dead experience actually feels like? The South Atlantic tragedy shows the result of completely removing the true flying experience and pilot involvement. I always feel unease on an Airbus.

I have to disagree Overloaded... It's a great aircraft, IMHO.

Having flown the Full flightsyms ( Thales and CAE ) I do believe that it feels just like an ordinary aircraft designed to make pilot's life even easier than it already is on modern airliners.

Quote from Jet-Pack

Hi José,
thanks for decribing that in more detail. But maybe the FSX platform in general doesn't allow a detailled rigidbody simulation, so inheritly the feel could be off. Have you also tried the Flight Sim Labs A320 by chance? I find that a very good representation of the Airbus, but I can't judge that entirely - I'm also "just" a glider pilot but have flown the A320 as a passenger countless times. And I have read a bunch of information about the aircraft.

Yep, the FSLabs A320 was my last investment a couple of months ago, first for FSX, then for P3D.

Nice as a systems simulation, even if far from complete / perfect... Flight dynamics wise, I prefer by far even your unfinished A320 in AEFS2

The inertia is there in the real thing too. Most of the guys I've flown with switch off A/T A/P at FAF, and fly the approach manually. It's pretty much evident the way the aircraft reacts to power adjustments feels a lot more plausible in your model, even if far from complete, than in anything I have ever tried for FSX / P3D and even X-plane.

Quote from Jet-Pack

"Best Airbus feel" can you describe that further? What exactly makes it better for you?Jan

I'll try, the best I can...

Well, as a pilot IRL, I've "only" been flying gliders ( for more than 3 decades, almost 4... ). But civil aviation is my passion since I became aware I existed and I have long been hunting for the "perfect flight simulator" since I started using this addictive games around 1987.

Well, along my journey, and since most of my fellow glider pilots are airline pilots ( mostly bus drivers these days... ), I've had the chance to jumpseat on many occasions ( also due to my job... ), including full flights ( from takeoff to park at gate ), and also had the chance to fly the full flight simulators at TAP headquarters next to where I work here at LPPT.

What I mean is that, better than in any other flight simulator where airbuses have been represented, I get in AEFS2 a feel of inertia, heaviness, instead of sudden - Extra 300 like - response to stick inputs that I find in every other A320/21/19/30/40 representation for FSX / P3D / X-Plane / FG, ...

I didn't try Airlinetools A32x, but all of the other Airbus add-ons, for any simulation platform I could try, lack that feel I got from the Level-D sim sessions, or when I jumpseat in an Airbus. Yes they're FBW, but the reponse to control inputs, to turbulence and wind variation / shear, shows the weight of an airliner, and not the instant / brisk / irrealistic responses I get form every other simulated modern Airbus.

Aerofly FS 2 flight dynamics capture that "inertia" better than any other A320 simulation I have used as a simmer.

The upcoming updates can only make it even better!

The first link appears to be from Airbus site.

This is probably what has been happening with other aircraft and flight simulation platforms whenever something more detailed / good / worth trying to explore financially is born...

Remember the names of the aircraft fleet in Flight Unlimited ?

Recently DCS World dealed with the same kind of problems when they released the Huey, and I believe one of their 3pds is now dealing with more of the same regarding the Gazelle ( probably same source - Airbus Industries ? ).

I just hope this doesn't compromise the best Airbus feel I got so far from any simulation platform I have used - the Airbus in Aerofly FS 2 - and the announced upcoming updates for systems!

Well,

the "good" news that are circulating around, regarding a new approach to developers of Airbus models for the Game market of flight simulation, which is, after all, what we are in when playing AEFS2, XPlane, FSX, P3D...., are starting to circulate:

You can check it here...

Wonder if IPACS has been contacted ?

It could look like good news at first read, but for me it may also mean that small developers, even if offering great modelling, already, will have to give up if the royalties heart...

When they write this, I don't see the news as so good for some smaller simulation platforms :-/

Jan,

that is great News! Thx for sharing

Ah, and sorry for not having put it all into a single thread...