![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gig 601XL Builder writes:
One reason is that MSFS doesn't use a physics model it uses tables to simulate what will happen with a given set of control settings and conditions. If the conditions at a particular time in the game are not in the table it uses the nearest set. With the advent of some really good physics models IN GAMES that are out there it really surprises me that MSFS hasn't implimented one yet. If the current model produces the correct results, there's no reason to change. Which results are wrong? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Gig 601XL Builder writes: One reason is that MSFS doesn't use a physics model it uses tables to simulate what will happen with a given set of control settings and conditions. If the conditions at a particular time in the game are not in the table it uses the nearest set. With the advent of some really good physics models IN GAMES that are out there it really surprises me that MSFS hasn't implimented one yet. If the current model produces the correct results, there's no reason to change. Which results are wrong? Well it seems the one we are talking about earlier in this thread. Pilots that fly the planes told you that real planes won't do something and you stated that it would do it in the sim. That is an example of a problem related to the lack of a physics model. Nobody wrote a table for that particular condition so it has to default to the closest thing it can find. The outcome is not one that happens in the real world. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gig 601XL Builder writes:
Well it seems the one we are talking about earlier in this thread. Nobody has tried it for real, so nobody knows. Pilots that fly the planes told you that real planes won't do something and you stated that it would do it in the sim. They are speculating; I'm not. They haven't actually tried it in the real aircraft, nor have they attempted it in simulation. I simulated it and succeeded. So I have more experience with it than they do. That is an example of a problem related to the lack of a physics model. Nobody wrote a table for that particular condition so it has to default to the closest thing it can find. The outcome is not one that happens in the real world. You haven't done it, either, so you don't actually know that. Which part of the model doesn't work for this situation? What's special about the situation that can't be simulated correctly? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Home Built Aircraft - Alternative Engines - Geo/Suzuki | OtisWinslow | Home Built | 1 | October 12th 05 02:55 PM |
Book Review: Converting Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft , Finch | Paul | Home Built | 0 | October 18th 04 10:14 PM |
P-3C Ditches with Four Engines Out, All Survive! | Scet | Military Aviation | 6 | September 27th 04 01:09 AM |
U.S. Air Force Moves Ahead With Studies On Air-Breathing Engines | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 29th 03 03:31 AM |