A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Coordinated turns without rudder, and autopilots



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old May 31st 07, 04:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Mxsmanic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,169
Default Coordinated turns without rudder, and autopilots

Snowbird writes:

MSFS has for a long time been known to have a rather inaccurate flight
model. MS tends to focus on the eye candy aspects of simulation.


Which aspects are inaccurate?

In my own experience, the stall/spin entry behavior is an easily explored
area which quite clearly reveals the inadequacies of MSFS' flight modeling
as compared to the real world. And it reflects of course as well in other
areas of the flight envelope.


A coordinated turn is neither a stall nor a spin.

Years ago I flew extensively with a popular WWII networked combat airplane
simulator (Warbirds). One of its claims to fame was that its flight dynamics
model was based on actual real-time calculation of the motional differential
equations that govern the flight dynamics of an aircraft. This in contrast
to the "simplistic table-driven flight dynamics model of the mainstream PC
simulators" probably referring to MSFS.


Table-driven models are often more accurate. They don't have to calculate
anything; they just look up the data taken from the real aircraft. They don't
work in exceptional regimes of flight because the data for those in the tables
are either absent or incorrect (as the real aircraft may have never been flown
in those regimes to gather the data). But they work better than physics
calculations in normal regimes of flight because they are guaranteed to match
the real aircraft--after all, they are just reproducing what the real aircraft
did in those cases.

Physics models are better at handling all regimes of flight, since they
calculate behavior on the fly. However, they rarely match the real aircraft
precisely, because inaccuracies in the model are extremely difficult to
correct completely enough to reproduce real-world behavior in flight,
especially in real time. It's much easier to just measure the real aircraft
and put that in a table. Additionally, if you want to certify a simulation,
table-driven simulation is a lot easier to certify because it's very easy to
make the simulation match a specific real-world aircraft.

Marketing talk aside, I found that simulator MUCH more realistic in the
flight dynamics modeling than MSFS. Especially at the edges of the flight
envelope, where the differences between different airplanes were very
significant.


See above. I don't fly at the edges of the envelope--on that path lies
danger.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question: Standard rate turns, constant rate turns, and airspeed Robert Barker Piloting 5 April 15th 07 04:47 PM
Coordinated turns and the little ball Mxsmanic Piloting 51 October 11th 06 10:17 PM
Is rudder required for coordinated turns? Mxsmanic Piloting 41 September 24th 06 06:40 PM
DGs and Autopilots Andrew Gideon Products 11 April 14th 05 06:04 PM
Coordinated turning stall and spins Chris OCallaghan Soaring 20 November 18th 03 08:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.