Microsoft Flight Simulator Back.

[Vogel]

14 hours ago, TedOnMeds said:

This is a tale as old as time and always goes like so . . .
 

Painfully accurate. I do honestly wonder what rock home buyers are under when they buy property along the flightpath of a major airport or military installation then complain about said activity. The aircraft were flying overheard long before you arrived to the area, yet now you feel as if you have the moral authority to complain about it? Le sigh...

 

In relation to the trees. Asobo have said they're already working on improving the AI for tree placement (and the types of trees it renders). So I would perhaps expect things to improve as they gather feedback from a wider audiance. It would seem that they have quite a bit in the pipeline yet, including rotary aircraft. I do wonder if they released this a little too early, perhaps under pressure from Microsoft to release prior to the new console launches. Maybe in the hope it would garner more interest in the XBSX.

[Ludwig]

I have really enjoyed reading this thread and knowing you guys are having so much fun with it. 

Hey do me a favor and let me know if you find something for a Phenom 100 or 300 (EMB-500, EMB-505)  because it is really handy for clients that need to spend some time being familiar with the jet. I have been recommending low time guys to follow this path (they can afford the jet, the sim should be low cost) and it really does help them procedurally and general familiarization. We are seeing guys come through with 500 hours total time getting typed in the jet....     wow......

 

 

[Vogel]

@Firefly Seeing as you mentioned it I thought I'd check out Warsaw from the airfield you listed. How does this look for a comparisson? Perhaps not quite the perfect position for a 1-1 comparisson but close enough I'd wager. This isn't a "hand crafted" location either, the building/tree placement is purely auto-gen based off of satellite imagery.

[Firefly]

Wow, this is great! Thank you! The general layout and all the major features look bang on. Seeing that this is a procedurally generated scenery I wouldn't expect the same level of detail when up close, but still that's MIGHTY impressive. You made my afternoon good sir! 

[Vogel]

You're welcome .

[Britchot]

https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2020/8/27/21403769/hurricane-laura-microsoft-flight-simulator

[EmerlistDavjack]

Like Vonrd, I'm starting to see some limitations in the flight model. I can't get the C152 to spin.  I can get the C172 to spin for maybe two rotations, but it really doesnt want to and pulls itself out. Which is interesting because the devs said specifically that their flight model is built to simulate spins.  The basic slow flight and stalls feel right, though.  I really hope Microsoft continues to support the sim.  I'm skeptical, but the game has sold well for being a Flight Sim.

I'm always going to love ROF.  It's not perfect, but I feel like it really encapsulates flight.  I think I'll take a flight over England in an Eindecker while MSFS downloads the whole SF bay, Santa Cruz, and Monterey areas (for the next day).  The manual cache process is very annoying, since you have to zoom very far in to download high quality textures. Makes it so that I had to select Medium for the whole SF Bay to Monterey area, and then go into each city and spend an entire hour selecting the high quality areas, especially all the airports.  Man, I have a 1TB SSD I can dedicate to this game, I hope they fix this so I can select broad areas of high quality.

Where have you guys been flying?  I have cached Chicago, New York, and downloading SF area.  Next I will take the time to pre-cache the Hawaiian islands. 

[Lee]

So far, I’ve been doing local VFR flights getting used to how the G430 works on the DV20. Triangles with forty mile legs and airports as turn points.  Sometimes doing a touch and go at the turn points to help me sort out the traffic control mechanics.  Also doing some cross country flights like Virginia Beach to Washington DC.  I did fly down to Kittyhawk and land at the First Flight airstrip.
 

Warning!  DC is not hand made scenery.  The aluminum pyramid on top of the Washington monument is missing, among many, many other things. I guess it’s a carve out for the aftermarket scenery makers.
 

Can someone help me with management of Rotex on the DV20?  You have propeller pitch and throttle Controls. RPM is controlled by propeller pitch.  What I’ve been doing is taking off at max 2500 RPM and full throttle, then reducing RPM to the 2200 - 2400 range and backing off the throttle to drop manifold pressure by 1 to 2 in. Hg.  That sound reasonable?

[Britchot]

@Lee

Full/full for initial takeoff.

Reduce RPM to 2260 at a safe altitude (prop pitch lever), throttle full, airspeed 65 KIAS for initial climb and 70 KIAS after flaps up.  In the manual there’s a chart for best climb speeds at various altitudes and flaps, it decreases as you get higher (4k and up).

Cruise, RPM 1700-2260, throttle “as required”.

If you’re serious about a single airplane, google the Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) or Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) for that plane and at least look through chapter 4, normal procedures.

Here’s the Rotax DV20: http://support.diamond-air.at/fileadmin/uploads/files/after_sales_support/DV20_Katana/Airplane_Flight_Manual/Basic_Manual/40120e-r1-DV20-100-AFM.pdf

[Lee]

@Britchot

Thanks for the reply. It's the "as required" part I'm not clear on.  My procedure was inferred from the manual so your response is much appreciated and gives me a good feeling on how I'm handling the engine.  In all of my personal flying, the engine was always 200 feet away at the other end of the tow line.  

 I had previoulsy downloaded the manual.  I think we have the 80 hp version in game, not the 100 hp model.  The RPMs in game match the 80hp manuals. I wish MicroSoft would tell us exactly which version of the Katana we have in game.  They should also include a flight manual for each aircraft.  Oh well, there is always google.

The 80 hp manual is here: http://support.diamond-air.at/fileadmin/uploads/files/after_sales_support/DV20_Katana/Airplane_Flight_Manual/Basic_Manual/40103-r3-DV20-AFM-USA.pdf

 

 

 

 

[Kliegmann]

The 172 is a VERY stable aircraft, and is actually very difficult to spin.  It isn't surprising that people are having problems spinning a 172.  When we did our incipient spin training in flight school, the first thing our instructors taught for 172 recovery is feet on the floor, hands in your lap, the 172 flies out of a spin.  Then we were taught the proper technique.  For CFI spin training we used a Citabria, not the 172.

[Ludwig]

Exactly correct, to get a 172 or 152 to spin you must hold it in the spin. The moment you release the controls it will come out. Remember the washout in the wingtip incidence... that was a BIG deal when the plane was produced early on. Spin training was something we all thought SHOULD be taught, just in and of itself.... but it was rare 50 years ago and non-existent now. 

 

[Snaggle]

7 hours ago, Lee said:

So far, I’ve been doing local VFR flights getting used to how the G430 works on the DV20. Triangles with forty mile legs and airports as turn points.  Sometimes doing a touch and go at the turn points to help me sort out the traffic control mechanics.  Also doing some cross country flights like Virginia Beach to Washington DC.  I did fly down to Kittyhawk and land at the First Flight airstrip.
 

Warning!  DC is not hand made scenery.  The aluminum pyramid on top of the Washington monument is missing, among many, many other things. I guess it’s a carve out for the aftermarket scenery makers.
 

Can someone help me with management of Rotex on the DV20?  You have propeller pitch and throttle Controls. RPM is controlled by propeller pitch.  What I’ve been doing is taking off at max 2500 RPM and full throttle, then reducing RPM to the 2200 - 2400 range and backing off the throttle to drop manifold pressure by 1 to 2 in. Hg.  That sound reasonable?

I did that also back in '90 I think, took a Cesnna 177(RG) from the flying club at NAS Norfolk.

[Britchot]

5 hours ago, Ludwig said:

Spin training was something we all thought SHOULD be taught, just in and of itself.... but it was rare 50 years ago and non-existent now. 

I highly agree! I had to go to an aerobatic school to learn spin recovery, hands on.

[EmerlistDavjack]

On 8/28/2020 at 9:22 AM, Ludwig said:

Exactly correct, to get a 172 or 152 to spin you must hold it in the spin. The moment you release the controls it will come out.

 

This is something my instructors never taught me!  I did one spin lesson and that was it, maybe the plane did it all for us, lol.  It was not a PPL requirement 20 years ago.  The general idea is that you never get yourself in that situation in normal flight, but you can get out of it. On one of my first flights, the instructor told me to turn to a heading and I yanked/banked the C152 to it and he said "whoa, we arent fighting the Germans!"

One thing that REALLY annoys me about this game is that it seems to demand a higher bandwidth threshold for downloading than it needs.  If I monitor my downloading while tooling around at 120 KTS, the game only needs 2-3Mbps to download the buildings and textures at the speed of a Cessna.  However, if my overall download is under 10Mbps (most days 10am-10pm), the game will disallow streaming textures.  So I probably could have an enjoyable experience during peak hours on my 4g connection, but the game wont let me. 

 

EDIT:  Here's something I noticed yesterday.  I had the Logitech Gaming Framework software installed, but never used it for anything.  When running FS2020, the Logitech Gaming software hogged around 8gb of RAM for no reason.  So unless you use it for profiles and such, it could be beneficial to uninstall it or at least monitor the use. 

[Ludwig]

I just saw a youtube video showing the Garmin nav setup with the Auto pilot for a C-172....   my ..... goodness... I simply can not imagine. I was ferrying them from ICT with holes in the panels because the new owners would put in their own instruments and radios....    I feel so old... I can only assume that the Garmin is more expensive than the cost of the airplanes I was ferrying back in the 70's.

I teach the Garmin 1000 and 3000 and we are up to the software 2.xx load on the 3000... which has the ROAAS, and the EDM which are the two big features (sorry.. ROAAS is Runway Overrun Awareness and Advisory System, and the EDM is the Emergency Descent Mode)   The ROAAS is a big deal and a really hot topic with the FAA, and something that they are pounding really hard due to the number of overrun incidents.  The EDM is the first step towards the automation with auto-throttles coming right behind it because no more mechanical connection to the engines through the power levers measured in PLAs.   We are not allowed to call them "throttles" any more and believe me...  it is akin to calling someone you have known your whole life by a different name. 

Now  you can learn the Garmin on the MSFS... maybe it will make my job easier... HAH!   I have to fail that stuff to make them fly the jet....  everything is done in automation. 

I was a Guinea pig in the 737 MAX (ooops... we can't call it that any more... now it is the 737-8)  a couple of weeks ago...  that's another story. 

[Britchot]

I've been using a GPS and laser altimeter autoland in a $12M military drone for over 12 years.  I'd probably still get very nervous at the round out, though.  Ours flies to the ground, it isn't pretty but it is under G and reusable

Today, I found some errors in the G1000 in the DA40NG, at least.  One IAF was WAAAY off and a small airport didn't even have its VOR approach available. 

[Vogel]

From what I remember of my flying days the 152 feels very realistic for stalls. I never did spin recovery but for a regular stall with wing drop it felt very lifelike.

I'm trying to learn how to use the G1000 systems but all my IRL flying has been with the traditional six pack of instruments. I bet guys who are used to the SA afforded by the moving map display get REALLY disorientated when they're forced to fly without it. Being able to place yourself on a map using traditional methods is a skill every pilot should know like the back of their hand. GPS is cool until something happens or the company/state that owns them decides to not play ball. Germany in particular has spent a lot of time and money investing and upgrading their VOR stations as it's still very much needed.

[Lee]

Was going to buy a couple of sectional charts to use with MSFS 2020, but discovered charts suitable for simulation flying are available online and are optimized for iPad type devices. I’m sure most of you guys already knew this, but it was new to me. Here’s the website: http://vfrmap.com

[Britchot]

Since I use ForeFlight for my manned flying, I use the program for MSFS.  I don’t recommend anyone that doesn’t need it for flying to run out and get it, though.  It’s an annual subscription, and fairly pricey.  But if you do have it, you can link the two together in a sim mode to give you a moving GPS icon on your map, as if you were flying.

[EmerlistDavjack]

On 9/2/2020 at 6:55 AM, Vogel said:

From what I remember of my flying days the 152 feels very realistic for stalls. I never did spin recovery but for a regular stall with wing drop it felt very lifelike.

I'm trying to learn how to use the G1000 systems but all my IRL flying has been with the traditional six pack of instruments. I bet guys who are used to the SA afforded by the moving map display get REALLY disorientated when they're forced to fly without it. Being able to place yourself on a map using traditional methods is a skill every pilot should know like the back of their hand. GPS is cool until something happens or the company/state that owns them decides to not play ball. Germany in particular has spent a lot of time and money investing and upgrading their VOR stations as it's still very much needed.

The vertical/slow flight stalls in the 152 feel pretty good.  The ground effect feels a bit weak on landing and short-field takeoffs, but not terrible.  That probably has to do with the fact that real life flying has so much more feel to it, something that Helicopter pilots note when played DCS etc.

I haven't flown in a decade (lots of reasons), and only ever cert for VFR, but I was trained in 2004 and was maybe part of the last large group of private pilots to learn the old school ways of piloting. I really only fly the 152/172 with analog so far, it brings me back. I've messed around with Garmins and Autopilot so far in MSFS, and it is nice to do an altitude hold and kick back, but my entire experience of flying was to check the WX, use an E6b, trim the aircraft, and hold the heading/altitude for however long I had to. 

Pilotage: fixing position using landmarks and the sectional, was something my instructor said I was pretty good at, but the in game maps suck to the point where I have chosen to use a laptop next to me as a "kneepad." This is my main complaint with both MSFS AND IL2: FC.  The in-game maps suck.  Compared to ROF, why does FC only display larger forests on the map, making navigation confusing only except the map is so small you can see major cities all the time?  And MSFS has a "VFR" map that is TRASH.  It is so unlike a sectional it makes me a bit salty, because there is no altitude data and you can't even look up Nav frequencies!  It doesn't even seem to portray minor highways and rail lines like a true sectional.  Everything is meant to be set up through the pre-flight navigation system that hooks into the "N" nav menu. That doesn't allow for dynamic in-game analog Nav and it is annoying as hell. 

That said, I love this game a lot and I will overlook a lot of the faults...like my home airport not having a VASI for some reason despite the South SF Bay area being pretty well rendered.   As Vonrd said...their Tree Algorithms need a bit work, but I'm glad to see the Devs seem to support the game. 

[TedsOnMeds]

I've never played a civilian flight simulator before but I heard grumblings they might expand the new MFS with Some Military bases and Military aircraft at some point? IF true I think it would be really fun to fly out of my Local Air Guard and USAF bases, and MSP in some jets since I live  close to Minneapolis.

[Vogel]

Teds I would imagine that will absolutely happen. There were plenty of military aircraft available to fly in FSX, so no doubt this will be the case in FS2020.

[Jonne]

Has one of you tried it yet in VR? Now that VR support is existing and I am grounded due to the damn virus causing flight lessons to be forbidden until further notice, I am actually considering to give it a go.

[Britchot]

No, but I can try and give it a shot.  I use it with my iPad for navigation (links directly over my wifi to give map position in ForeFlight), so I avoid VR.