A2A Comanche and MS FS 2020

[marez]

I doubt it. All planes in msfs2020 fly awful. The flight model of msfs2020 is a joke and no developer has been able to improve the performance of their pay planes. The only solution is that a2a can import his own flight model and this does not depend at all of the msfs modern flight model. I don't know if this is possible

The physics and flight dynamics in MSFS are much better than in any sim before.

The best physics and flight dynamics in a simulator correspond to xplane and not to msfs2020. The xplane flight model is even used as an engineering tool to develop and test real airplanes, such as the Alia-250 vtol (https: //evtol.com/features/beta-unveils-alia-evtol/). Can you develop aircraft with the flight model of msfs2020? NOOOOO. Many people are dazzled by msfs2020's graphics and they are not objective.
Right now msfs is an arcade game and my only hope for this game became a simulator is A2A.

[DHenriques_]

I doubt it. All planes in msfs2020 fly awful. The flight model of msfs2020 is a joke and no developer has been able to improve the performance of their pay planes. The only solution is that a2a can import his own flight model and this does not depend at all of the msfs modern flight model. I don't know if this is possible

The physics and flight dynamics in MSFS are much better than in any sim before.

The best physics and flight dynamics in a simulator correspond to xplane and not to msfs2020. The xplane flight model is even used as an engineering tool to develop and test real airplanes, such as the Alia-250 vtol (https: //evtol.com/features/beta-unveils-alia-evtol/). Can you develop aircraft with the flight model of msfs2020? NOOOOO. Many people are dazzled by msfs2020's graphics and they are not objective.
Right now msfs is an arcade game and my only hope for this game became a simulator is A2A.

Keep in mind that when we (A2A) enter the FS2020 marketplace we will do that with our Accusim flight model separate from the 2020 code. You will get all that 2020 has to offer graphically along with a flight model operating as we have designed it to operate and using OUR physics engine not the 2020 flight model.
What could be better than that?
Dudley Henriques

[cristi.neagu]

I guess, in a way, it's up to developers like A2A, PMDG, MilViz, etc to lead the market towards realism. New developers coming into this because of the release of FS2020 will run into what's been described here: a strong push from their customers for a plane that feels "nice" (whatever that means to the average gamer) and not one that feels real. And because they're new, they cannot afford to tell most of their customers that they're wrong, and that's not how that plane flies, so they will have to water it down to please their customers. But A2A has an established customer base. We're here, through and through, for realism and fidelity. The move to FS2020, when and if it comes, can only increase the number of satisfied customers. So A2A can stick to their design philosophy and not compromise. And when a few more companies do the same, hopefully developers realise that despite what the masses might demand, there is a market there for realism, one that is very loyal, and they will be encouraged to also not compromise.

Not to mention that as time passes, less and less people will demand cartoon physics. As we've seen with FSX and P3D, the people that stick around the longest are those willing to put in a bit of effort to learn.

So i am looking forwards to A2A releasing the Comanche for FS2020. It will be a landmark moment for the platform.

[MkIV Hvd]

Clearly, the question of whether to MSFS or whether to not MSFS is a "to each his own" situation, but there are a couple of things I struggle to understand. First; why does this have to be such a polarizing, all or none thing for some? Second; why does every post about a simple thing have to turn into yet another ad nauseum discussion about why MSFS is complete crap and there's nothing good about it?

There have always been and there will always be different levels of flight simulation, so I think the "game vs. simulator" thing is ridiculous. We've seen Second World War pictures of JAF pilots in stick and rudder boxes, I've actually flown a Link Trainer in Air Cadets (look it up if you're not old enough to remember...), I've flown no-visual twin simulators during Multi-IFR training, the first jet simulator I flew was the Jet Commander, which was a no-visual, no-motion simulator and I've flown early generation full motion Westwind and Citation simulators with monochrome visuals for windshield only. Guess what the common characteristic of all those simulators was? Literally NONE of them flew exactly like "a" real airplane or "the" real airplane.

It all brings back a conversation I was privy to during my first sessions in the full motion Westwind simulator at Flight Safety, Wilmington. Our block-headed Chief Pilot got into a "discussion" with the sim instructor about how our Westwind 1123 with turbo jet power flew differently than the the turbo fan Westwind 1124 modelled in the simulator (exact same airframe btw...a much longer discussion than it should have been ). That discussion led into one about how the simulator does not fly like the airplane regardless, to which the instructor replied that, "Yes, the simulator does not fly "exactly" like your airplane. Just as different models of the same airplane may not fly exactly like another, so the simulator may differ in some respects. It is your job as the Captain to figure that out and deal with it." Made sense to me......

The bottom line is that this discussion was had 40 years ago inside a multi-million dollar simulator...MSFS Standard is still below $100 USD last time I looked, it is only 9 months old and there are scads of free and very effective upgrades available to improve the experience. I'm thinking if you can't find something to like in MSFS, then maybe you just don't have enough imagination...

By the way, the idea that all MSFS airplanes are crap is also ridiculous. I am having a blast with a few of them and I almost hate to even pull this card, but please note that the most experienced instructor we have here on this forum, in the person of Dudley Henriquez, has apparently been primarily flying MSFS for a few months now...with nary a peep about how bad the sim is...just sayin'...

Cheers,
Rob

EDIT: was typing this while the previous four posts were in progress...

[AKar]

Period. So true. But there's a threat - so called "mass market", you can find some "devs" and "community mods" and when you look under the hood, basically there's no math behind changes they do, but you still have 1000's of people saying "yes, now it feels so good!". One example I can give you is increasing beta for constant speed prop, so governor will never kick in, because people were complaining that it engine overspeeds on takeoff and prop which in real life has over 40lbs gets inertia of piece of cartoon because "yeah, now I have instant power!". They are now happy about it and this leaves no room for discussion. Sad, because becomes is a video game at the end, not a simulator.

Indeed. Why spend all the time and effort studying, recording and recreating what something really is like and how it behaves, when gaming community will simply tell when something feels "better" or "just right". Sad it is, but I've seen all too many watered-down simulations, and/or unrealistic sound environments, and so on, apparently for no other reason than this.

-Esa

I remember during our betas a long discussion Scott and I had one night on the phone concerning how we could replicate for realism how a prop "unloads" as a takeoff progresses.
I have never in all the years I've been working with realism transfer on simulation seen a developer other than us, even at study level, who delved this deeply into putting realism and depth of fidelity into a flight model.
Dudley Henriques

Calculate the advance ratio... whether a prop or a windmill, it is always about plotting against the advance ratio.

-Esa

[MarcE]

The physics and flight dynamics in MSFS are much better than in any sim before.

The best physics and flight dynamics in a simulator correspond to xplane and not to msfs2020. The xplane flight model is even used as an engineering tool to develop and test real airplanes, such as the Alia-250 vtol (https: //evtol.com/features/beta-unveils-alia-evtol/). Can you develop aircraft with the flight model of msfs2020? NOOOOO. Many people are dazzled by msfs2020's graphics and they are not objective.
Right now msfs is an arcade game and my only hope for this game became a simulator is A2A.

Keep in mind that when we (A2A) enter the FS2020 marketplace we will do that with our Accusim flight model separate from the 2020 code. You will get all that 2020 has to offer graphically along with a flight model operating as we have designed it to operate and using OUR physics engine not the 2020 flight model.
What could be better than that?
Dudley Henriques

I am convinced that the easiest flight model is the correct flight model. The way A2A have created their aircraft is as real as possible and at the same time it's predictable because it's correct. Realism is a word with many meanings and all of us know that a computer flight simulator for 150$ (sim + accusim airplane) with typical USB flight controls can never reach up to a real airplane. It IS different, it will always be. The Accusim Cessna 172 feels different to the F172N I fly in reality. This comes from my settings, from my controls, it even feels completely different whether I use the 2D monitor or 3D VR. The latter feels more realistic obviously. I set up my Honeycomb yoke with FSUIPC to match the movements of the A2A yokes and this is absolutely great now. But still it will never be the same. But different isn't worse. What A2A (and several other developers) have achieved with P3D and XPlane and will achieve with MSFS (which again will improve within the coming 10 years) is amazing and I'm sure A2A will be the absolute best in General Aviation prop planes.

[Jarek]

If you don't care about quality, you will have nothing but a video game. It is far from ridiculous. As a developer I will be so happy too - c172 or pa24? Who cares? Just copy config files from one to another and here we go, cash flows... People will get used to. If someone asks questions - blame the sim flight model. There won't be many of them, you still have a chance for 4.9/5.0 rating in the store. Hopefully not something what we really are looking for...

[twsharp12]

What A2A does is great for us simmers who would like to be pilots but due to life circumstances cannot. I appreciate their work towards as much realism as can be provided in a simulation environment. With Vatsim and A2A it's about as close as I need to the real thing anyway. Thanks guys.

[cristi.neagu]

For me A2A's Comanche is the release i am most looking forward to, out of anything in the gaming industry. Budget permitting, i am buying it on day 0. It would be really, really great to get some kind of status update on this, if they're actively working on it or if they're waiting for SDK improvements from Asobo, and if they can see light at the end of the tunnel. I know we can't get any sort of timing info, but a bit of a status update would be great

[twsharp12]

For me A2A's Comanche is the release i am most looking forward to, out of anything in the gaming industry. Budget permitting, i am buying it on day 0. It would be really, really great to get some kind of status update on this, if they're actively working on it or if they're waiting for SDK improvements from Asobo, and if they can see light at the end of the tunnel. I know we can't get any sort of timing info, but a bit of a status update would be great

If there is any correlation with other big name developers such as PMDG and Majestic, then I wouldn't be surprised if this carries over into 2022 for release.

[cristi.neagu]

For me A2A's Comanche is the release i am most looking forward to, out of anything in the gaming industry. Budget permitting, i am buying it on day 0. It would be really, really great to get some kind of status update on this, if they're actively working on it or if they're waiting for SDK improvements from Asobo, and if they can see light at the end of the tunnel. I know we can't get any sort of timing info, but a bit of a status update would be great

If there is any correlation with other big name developers such as PMDG and Majestic, then I wouldn't be surprised if this carries over into 2022 for release.

As much as i hate saying it, yes, that is my impression as well. I don't know how A2A addons compare to PMDG ones in terms of complexity. I know a 737 has a lot more systems than a Comanche, but i don't think PMDG spends quite so much time as A2A does tuning flight models. Who knows. I'm sure that the bottom line for both is "it's done when it's done". But PMDG have been far more talkative about their progress than A2A have.

[cro24]

Keep in mind that when we (A2A) enter the FS2020 marketplace we will do that with our Accusim flight model separate from the 2020 code. You will get all that 2020 has to offer graphically along with a flight model operating as we have designed it to operate and using OUR physics engine not the 2020 flight model.
What could be better than that?
Dudley Henriques

I love

[Scott - A2A]

Accu-Sim is in no way limited by the host program regardless of what it is, Xplane, P3D, FS2020, etc. So from our POV the platform is irrelevant in terms of how the airplane functions and behaves as all of this exists in our code, not the host platform. The host platform is basically just a world where the Accu-Sim airplane lives.

Scott.

[cristi.neagu]

Accu-Sim is in no way limited by the host program regardless of what it is, Xplane, P3D, FS2020, etc. So from our POV the platform is irrelevant in terms of how the airplane functions and behaves as all of this exists in our code, not the host platform. The host platform is basically just a world where the Accu-Sim airplane lives.

Scott.

I am going to choose to believe that this is confirmation that Accu-Sim is currently possible in FS2020. Woohoo \o.o/

[Dogsbody55]

Accu-Sim is in no way limited by the host program regardless of what it is, Xplane, P3D, FS2020, etc. So from our POV the platform is irrelevant in terms of how the airplane functions and behaves as all of this exists in our code, not the host platform. The host platform is basically just a world where the Accu-Sim airplane lives.

Scott.

Is this not dependent on whether or not the host program will recognise the Accu-Sim module?? Based on my increasingly inaccurate memory and rather a lot of discussion on this, I seem to recall that the issue so far has been that MSFS does not recognise Accu-Sim. Has that changed? I hope so, because at this stage, I'm relying on the A2A Comanche to make MSFS a decent flight sim, as against the present offerings that make a decent scenery sim.


Cheers,
Mike