![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
TxSrv writes:
You are missing the point that MSFS does not model, nor need it for the vast majority of sensible users, the forced (slewed) behavior of a 172 in the high flight levels be real. Without testing the aircraft at that altitude, there's no way to verify the MSFS modeling of the aircraft at that altitude. Since the real aircraft cannot reach that altitude on its own, there's not much point in worrying about the MSFS model; but one cannot simply say that it is incorrect, one can only say that it is unverified. If MSFS allowed a 172 to climb to that altitude even though it could not do so in real life, that would be an obvious flaw in the model; but I don't believe it does that (I never fly the 172). Slewing does not count because that is a deliberate overruling of the laws of physics for convenience in setting up simulations. Any real pilot, who knows the feel/behavior of a 172 class airplane near sea level, verses say 12,000 feet, and who understands the aerodynamics involved and the effect of limited HP in really rarefied air, need not be a "rocket surgeon" to be able to accurately extrapolate. In other words, nobody knows for sure. When you actually test the aircraft at that altitude, be sure to report back, as the data can be checked again the model. In the meantime, neither you nor anybody else can say anything definitive about it. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|