MSFS is back

Post tips, stories, questions, or screenshots related to Flight Simulation software.

Moderators: Pipe, ZeroAltitude

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:31 am


User avatar
elaw
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: MSFS is back

Postby elaw » Thu Jun 13, 2019 11:56 am

Cool! :clap:

I've got a 20kw generator... hopefully that will be suitable to run a GPU that can provide a good frame rate. :mrgreen:

Do you think it'll have a 737 whose trim runs away as soon as you retract the flaps?

Actually... based on another thread here, they could combine it with Train Simulator and create "MSFTS 737 disaster edition".
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 5322
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: MSFS is back

Postby 3WE » Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:48 pm

Slightly Serious:

So what is it a person needs?
-A newer laptop (I note Eric's comment about the 20KW generator and always mushrooming resource heaviness of Windows.)
-Virtual reality goggles
-Yoke
-Rudder pedals
-A really big throttle quadrant to play "Boeing Bobby" (WITH mixture, prop and cowl flap levers so you can jump between Connies and 747's)

More corny:

The 737 Max with DCAS will be one of those add ons you download elsehwere (and hopefully it has a configuration setting for old vs. new DCAS.

If it offers an A-380, it must also offer Meig's Field (for the historic section)

Train simulator- yes, I bought it, but struggled to get much joy out of it- while I know there's some critical things engineers have to know and execute, they tend to be rather dry. I remember downloading an "adventure" with some vintage ALCO engines and the train simply stalled at the first hill.

More serious...How will this latest version "feel". MSFS was always a bit too serious to be a game, but a bit to weak to be a simulator- although I think we find it to be plenty useful as aviation enthusiast looking to advice Flyboy, Dummy and Bobby on their techniques and procedures.

While it'll be a net-download, it needs to include the free wings and epaulets. (And have vintage airlines like TWA for those uniform items)
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
elaw
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: MSFS is back

Postby elaw » Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:07 pm

All valid questions!

My current PC... a "decent" machine with a 5th generation(?) core i5 processor, large NVMe SSD, and the processor's built-in graphics, gives lousy performance with FS X. My much-more-clueful-about-gaming coworker tells me to get decent performance at the very least I'd need a $400 graphics card and a power supply upgrade. My guess is the new FS would require even more than that. :^( Although just having it understand a widescreen monitor would be a plus.

Re "feel"... am I the only one who finds MSFS much harder to fly smoothly and accurately than an actual airplane? Flying an actual 172 (disclaimer: I have not done same since about 10 years ago) not that I'd actually do it but I always had the sense in reasonably calm weather and with the plane trimmed properly I could take a 5- or 10-minute nap and when I awoke things would be about where I left them in all axes. In FS it seems like you constantly have to be correcting the plane's tendency to yaw or pitch or roll on its own. I've got a number of other gripes... do autopilots in real aircraft really work as poorly as the MSFS one?... but that's my biggest.
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 5322
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: MSFS is back

Postby 3WE » Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:31 pm

Re "feel"... am I the only one who finds MSFS much harder to fly smoothly and accurately than an actual airplane? Flying an actual 172 (disclaimer: I have not done same since about 10 years ago) not that I'd actually do it but I always had the sense in reasonably calm weather and with the plane trimmed properly I could take a 5- or 10-minute nap and when I awoke things would be about where I left them in all axes.
I can discuss this. My comment is that it's hard to put in to words, but indeed the two feel different.

There's a joke + reality deal that it sounds like you flew NEW 172's and NEW toy yokes. Maybe an aluminum 172 does trim better/easier but to truly lock it straight and level...in my experience the both drift off- no 5 minute naps!

I guess I'd agree that the silicon 172 is harder than the aluminum one. On the other hand, I think my silicon time benefitted my aluminium time.

Conversely, I always felt that I benefitted from jumping from a 172 to a 747 and learned some serious visual and automatic visual-muscle memory techniques to "drive" an aircraft down to the runway and flare it (with ZERO seat of the pants input...the added visual and flexible 'knowledge' was valuble- while the lack of seat of the pants, probably detrimental).

The lack of seat of the pants probably contributes to the silicon 172 being harder to 'learn'.

I am being redundant, but one my 'disturbing' stories was that I had been doing lots of crosswind work on the silicon one and then went out to an aluminum one during a crosswind...As I was landing the aluminum one, my mind was on autopilot with a totally cofortable feeling...I really wasn't doing anything wrong but given that you are going 70 MPH with a bunch of gasoline up over your head with a 36 ft surfaces that are great at grabbing the air, and that lesser (or unlucky to be more honest) pilots have been known to tip, over drag a wing, crash, burn and die.

Footonte: I have come to the conclusion that 'the thrill' of flying and executing a beautiful landing during gusty winds can be had much cheaper than an aluminum 172, AND the aluminum 172 just won't let me turn a 20 mile final with 600,000 lbs in the left hand (and a puny ass throttle in the right hand).
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:53 pm

Since the times of the Subloigic Flight Simulator II in the Commodore 64 (and I don't talk about previous versions in other platforms because I have not experienced them), MSFS has ALWAYS been one of the most (if not the single most) resources-hungry software out there. And that is something I guess will not change (although with the failed Microsoft FLIGHT they managed to get very good graphics and frame rate in a less-than-top PC)

The PC that you describe is a solid business PC, but it is a very poor gaming. Just the processor-built-in graphics is a non-no for any gaming much more serious than minesweeper. Then you have a 3-years-old 5th gen i5... That is a Nintendo GameWatch processor compared with the current 9th generation i9. And then how much RAM do you have? The NVMe solid state drive may be good though.

And to 3WE's point... I always found it useful for real flight the fact that you could fly dozens of different planes in MSFS. None of them had a very realistic handling qualities (or "feel") compared with their aluminum counterpart. At least I know for fact that was not the case for the 172, and even less for the Carenado Tomahawk. However, each of them was realistic in the way they solved the equations of flight, and departed from the feel in the real thing in different ways. In that way, while you cannot become an expert in any particular plane*, you can become used to adjusting to different feels, speeds, inertias, responsiveness, etc. And that IS useful.

* Some add-on's do a a pretty descent job at simulating the handling characteristics, as reported by real pilots of the real version, but especially at replicating the systems and their interfaces, which is probably the most important part of flying a bit airplane these days (as Evan can attest). aND YOU can become an expert in the plane in this sense. I met an Austral captain in the FSX presentation in Microsoft Argentina (they invited me because I had bought and registered a legal copy of FS9, something not very useful in Argentina) and he told me that he used the Mad Dog add-on (today FlyTheMadDog) before each recurrent training/check-ride to prepare and practice.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 5322
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: MSFS is back

Postby 3WE » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:24 pm

I met an Austral captain in the FSX presentation in Microsoft Argentina (they invited me because I had bought and registered a legal copy of FS9, something not very useful in Argentina) and he told me that he used the Mad Dog add-on (today FlyTheMadDog) before each recurrent training/check-ride to prepare and practice.
As I regularly razz Evan, there is a strong focus on procedural stuff, so I don't doubt that an airline jock can have a good model (cockpit especially) and can rehearse his memory items and whip out the QRH and practice flipping this automation and that automation.

And then, he can pull back on the itty bitty yoke (which feels totally wrong) till the Attitude indicator and airspeed look perfect for a strong climb and then hold it there...

And when he's in the real sim...he's that much more rehearsed, and the UNDERLYING rules for how you work the yoke are the same...even if it FEELS different.

Gabriel- you blew of Eric's question- Is the silicon T'hawk harder to fly than the aluminium one? I believe that to be true for the S'hawk.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Sat Jun 15, 2019 4:15 am

Gabriel- you blew of Eric's question- Is the silicon T'hawk harder to fly than the aluminium one? I believe that to be true for the S'hawk.
Yes and no. The Carenado Tomahawk (that is, the silicon one) was more stable and the stalls were docile like in a Cessna 152. But it lacks a lot of feedback (seat of the pants, feel in the yoke, surrounding view...)

User avatar
KPryor
Posts: 128
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:34 pm
Location: Right Behind You

Re: MSFS is back

Postby KPryor » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:50 pm

I'm really not excited about the new MSFS. Sure, it looks nice, but I have a feeling as noted above the system requirements will astronomical. I'm running the latest X-Plane on an I7-920 with 12GB RAM I built myself 10 years ago and it runs pretty well. I don't have all the graphic settings turned all the way up, but it looks pretty good and the frame rates are great. I left FSX behind finally a few months ago for X-Plane and love it. I've resolved not to spend a fortune on add-ons like I did in the FS 2002, 2004 and FSX days. For the most part, I don't see much need for a lot of add-ons with XP, although I did buy ActiveSkyXP and it was a good purchase.
I went to prison for murder, but I stayed for the chili!

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:14 am


User avatar
elaw
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: MSFS is back

Postby elaw » Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:24 pm

No kidding... 14 years is way too long to wait for a new MSFS!

I did love this one comment on the video:
Unfortunately my graphics card had a panic attack while watching this and I've had to get it counseling sessions.
:lol:
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
Not_Karl
Posts: 2642
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Not_Karl » Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:37 pm

No kidding... 14 years is way too long to wait for a new MSFS!

I did love this one comment on the video:
Unfortunately my graphics card had a panic attack while watching this and I've had to get it counseling sessions.
:lol:
Fortunately I don't have a graphics card* :D

*In my current, main, trash picked PC. I have lots of old cards in my collection that can run MSFS 95 at respectable frame rates :D
Junior Janitor, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Environmental Poisoning Assurance department.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Wed Oct 02, 2019 3:11 am

No kidding... 14 years is way too long to wait for a new MSFS!

I did love this one comment on the video:
Unfortunately my graphics card had a panic attack while watching this and I've had to get it counseling sessions.
:lol:
Fortunately I don't have a graphics card* :D

*In my current, main, trash picked PC. I have lots of old cards in my collection that can run MSFS 95 at respectable frame rates :D
Having started with FS2 in the Commodore 64, with a frame rate of 1 frame per second (literally), I rate anything above 10 fps acceptable, above 20 fps really good, and above 24 fps superfluous luxury (I don't need a better frame rate than a cinema).

User avatar
elaw
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: MSFS is back

Postby elaw » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:50 am

I agree, but I'd say that number has to be a minimum, not an average. Playing with it averaging 10 FPS but dropping to 1 or 2 when there are a lot of clouds is not fun.
HR consultant, Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 5322
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: MSFS is back

Postby 3WE » Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:36 pm

Gabriel posted a YouTube there.

It appears much effort has gone into making the outside world more realistic.

It was a gabreillian video, and I gave up before they discussed the flight models completely.

But, I still struggle with whether 'we' need better models...without G forces, what is there to nitpick about?

For now, my biggest hang up is how they have struggled with showing the whole panel AND the outdoors. (discussed before with VR goggles sort of being the solution)- but I also wonder if a big, widescreen TV might work....

Maybe the panel needs to be 'bigger than reality'...

/mindless ramblings...
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:38 pm

I agree, but I'd say that number has to be a minimum, not an average. Playing with it averaging 10 FPS but dropping to 1 or 2 when there are a lot of clouds is not fun.
Yep, agree, minimum FPS.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:39 pm

Gabriel posted a YouTube here.
Fixed

User avatar
Not_Karl
Posts: 2642
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Buenos Aires

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Not_Karl » Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:58 am

Having started with FS2 in the Commodore 64, with a frame rate of 1 frame per second (literally), I rate anything above 10 fps acceptable, above 20 fps really good, and above 24 fps superfluous luxury (I don't need a better frame rate than a cinema).
Well, the Not_videocard (iGPU) of my PC is probably the most powerful GPU I have and I doubt that it could spit out acceptable FPS in this new MSFS even in the lowest resolution and detail level possible :D. But I should try MFSX...
I agree, but I'd say that number has to be a minimum, not an average. Playing with it averaging 10 FPS but dropping to 1 or 2 when there are a lot of clouds is not fun.
Preemptively (and relentlessly) pull-up when the game freezes and all should be good.
Junior Janitor, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Environmental Poisoning Assurance department.

"I think, based on the types of aircraft listed, you're pretty much guaranteed a fiery death."
- Contemporary Poet flyboy2548m to a Foffie.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 5322
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: MSFS is back

Postby 3WE » Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:46 pm

Gabriel did his deal of always double posting stuff at both fora and 3BS missed it as a quality discussion broke out here
Fixed
Now it's fixed :mrgreen:
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 2086
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: MSFS is back

Postby Gabriel » Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:56 pm

Gabriel did his deal of always double posting stuff at both fora and 3BS missed it as a quality discussion broke out here
Fixed
Now it's fixed :mrgreen:
3WE, here you have another double post. Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOPIjzz ... e=youtu.be


Return to “Flight Simulator Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest