Want to see what the X-Plane Flight Model is doing behind the scenes? Follow these steps! Try X-Plane: www.x-plane.com/ Follow us on Twitter: / xplaneofficial
Man, the 3d math in these sims is wild, but allowing the players to see the math modeled is one of the coolest, smartest debugging tools I've ever seen a dev provide.
X-Plane has had that toolset for quite a while, too. At leave version 9 anyway. Microsoft Flight Sim didn't until the 2020 remake. And I suspect Xplane users pointing out how handy it is was why. It's particularly useful if you want to make your own aircraft in Plane Maker.
X plane is definitely a sim for pilots. The flying feels realistic. It has its moments but hey, it’s still a game at its core. I’m really impressed that you can even program something that can replicate something so complicated. It was 50 percent or more the reason I was able to last my instrument add on. When things weren’t going my way on my check ride I relied on the training where I wasn’t burning gas.
Both sims are fine. No one should be doing maneuvering physics in either and both are fine for procedures which is what you describe. I love both sims. But this fan boy one or the other is weird.
XP sitll uses Blade Element theory for its flight physics calculations though. This not as accurate as msfs boundary theory and CFD. And Weather, world wide weather representation is XPs weakness.
@@hpharold23 the CFD mfs use is not the same , high fidelity model that NASA uses it is about on par with blade element weaker in some aspects . Saying that mfs CFD( which is lower resolution has a small grid size ) is superior is ridiculous
Thank you for such great software Austin. As a real life pilot, my experience with X-plane (since version 8) is that it is VERY accurate compared to a real airplane once the joystick setups are adjusted. X-plane modeled by two airplanes very closely (Grumman AA5 and current airplane is Cirrus SR22T).
It’s rare that I comment on UA-cam. However, watching this video it shows the level and attention of detail LR provide making the sim as life like as possible even when users have limited equipment. I can’t even imagine the frustration you and your team share when users have the audacity to blame coding and not appreciating what they really have! As someone who has had the opportunity to fly real aircraft I can’t thank you guys enough for all you do. Your team have kept my passion alive for a fraction of the cost. I use this software to practice techniques and to aid my learning. One day I will be able to get back in the seat and continue my journey. Thank you for all you do.
Do I ever agree with you! In my case, I can't pass a Class III physical (advanced cardiovascular disease), but I once held a VFR ticket, and just like riding motorcycles, flight never gets out of your blood. X-Plane is the next best thing to actually getting in a real cockpit. What I think has happened in the sim market (thank God you guys support Linux!) is that the MS series of flt sims (I used to have a couple, when it was the only sim on the lower cost market) with its poor flight model has given some simmers an unrealistic expectation. I never saw that L deflection on takeoff in earlier MSFS versions, and not until I decided to give X-Plane a try did I notice it ... and it's real! In a real C152, you have to give it substantial R rudder on takeoff roll, for example. I still find this impressive, although not well-suited to a joystick. My IRL flight instructor was big on keeping the aircraft on the centerline, no matter what -- I can't always do that in XP, but my muscles are learning that *much* finer control skills necessary to do so. *Thanks for everything you do.* You'll never get one of those whining complaint e-mails from me about your flight model!!
@@8a41jt I'm sorry to hear that, that really sucks. But you're exactly right, when simulators are conducted in a professional manner especially a simulator like X-Plane, flying a Cessna to a 737 is pretty much true to life. If I were in your situation I'd be on simulators all the time (I'm on them all the time now) and invest all of my money into sim equipment and hardware instead of flying. It's so unfortunate to hear that but I really hope that you make a recovery and never give up on your passion for flying even if it is just on simulators.
YES Matthew - about getting back in the seat and continuing your journey: I hadn't landed a plane since I hung up my headset in 1996, but had X-plane(10/11) on my mac from 2008 to 2017. In mid 2019 I was right seat in a Cherokee II and the pilot asked jokingly if I wanted to try landing it at Guelph's 23, (CNC4 - look up that approach), well thanks to X-Plane I freaking nailed it. The plane owner couldn't believe it. (And candidly - neither did I haha) Thank you Austin and your brilliant piece of work X-Plane.
It could really do with a wind-tunnel mode in the plane-editor... a way of getting L/D ratios, stability margins, cg-positioning etc. in a controlled environment.
Yes I would pay for a different software that is more wind tunnel focused. I don’t need world scenery or mirror finishes or fancy cockpits. I just want to do testing on my design.
@@ArchOfficial I have to second this. As good as this is in X-Plane, a lot of optimizations and shortcuts are probably done to keep everything running real time on a reasonable computer at home. CFD simulations do what you want. Please note that FreeCAD has OpenFOAM support and other CFD stuff as well. It should definitely be possible to do what you need to design airplane stuff. But don't rely on it for human life!
@@TankdozerCavalry My point is that even the best non-realtime CFD that take forever to render are pretty inaccurate. Absolutely useless for automobiles and lacking at best for aircraft although much more usable than for automobiles. The only purpose of CFD is to guide towards possible optimizations of designs, not to actually test designs. You need experimental data to have a better idea of what is going on, even for aircraft.
Loved XP11, and it was fantastic with VR too. Managed to get it set up for my Dad, who was a retired pilot, to still fly around with on a modest PC I built up for him. He really loved the Glider, and I even installed the LET 410 for him, since that was one plane he flew amongst many. His mind was blown when I showed him XP11 VR one Christmas, the year before he passed away. I also showed MSFS, and let him fly around areas he used to thanks to the amazing Terrain and Graphics.... which unfortunately XP11 just couldn't do as the terrain looks, well, bland and the Autogen is terrible outside any major US or EU city. At least he had fun in both sims.
I am a FAA CFIA&ME Instructor that is totally committed to training pilots using a flight simulator; X-Plane is my choice even though it is not approved for logging time. I used to work for PIC out of Essex CT and went out on my own to do 10 training assignments for pilots to get them trained for the instrument rating. We used to use the old ATC-610 Desktop Simulator that was archaic compared to what X-Plane offers today. It was even FAA Approved to log time! I have tried MS Flight Simulator and it is no doubt a strong competitor, but I like X-Plane more because I use the Apple Mac Computer. I have been watching Austin's UA-cam videos lately and he just amazes me with his knowledge and expert grasp of the math he used to code X-Plane years ago. It has become so much improved, especially from what I am finding with version 12 Beta. This video he did answered some questions that I had along with many others I am sure.
I was on the fence between buying MFS and xplane. After watching this vid, I'm going to steam and buy your game. Thank you Mr. CEO. you showed your love to your consumers.
Thanks Austin! I remember emailing you years ago about Helicopters and Stability Augmentation Systems, Stabilator Systems, autopilots for helicopters etc.. in particular the Black Hawk Model you had. One thing that impressed me the most with you was when you first just replied with the short answer of Google Blade Element Theory, I told you my credentials about being a reference pilot for the level D Full Flight Simulator and real world pilot of the aircraft in question. We then got into a very good discussion on aircraft systems that goes beyond just green coloured lines in order to make an aircraft feel more realistic. Especially helicopters with these systems fitted to dampen or enhance the control outputs. You listened and asked questions of me, didn't just shout me down with all your knowledge and defending code as we coders like to do. I give you a lot of credit to this day when I talk to others saying I've had this interaction with the creator of X-Plane! It's an amazing Game/Simulator, and you should be immensely proud of your achievements. The more you can do a comparison using your real aircraft VS. the sim the better. I have done many overlaid videos to prove my points that the sim does what the real aircraft does, when the non-believers pipe up! After all, that's that only way we can qualify and re-qualify a Level D Flight Simulator each 12 months by using very small tolerances in comparing data, both tabular and graphing. You did mention about incorporating some of my ideas into X-Plane 12 helicopters. I was wondering if you may be able to conduct a similar video on rotor-craft? I really enjoyed this Video. You really explained everything in a simple and fun way for even the non-pilot to understand. Well done and PEACE OUT! 🤩
I've been a Microsoft user since FS2004. For almost twenty years I stuck with it (loved it and still do, honestly) until in 2020 I upgraded my PC and saw XP11 for sale on Steam. I decided to give it a try, and after a brief adjustment period I was blown away and wished it was XP that I'd been using for the last twenty years! I have 800 hs flight time in real life (mostly turboprop) and found in XP a fidelity in flight dynamics I didn't know it existed sim-wise but was subconsciously yearning for. You've gained a committed customer here, Austin and team. Best regards!
I have no idea who this guy is, nor have I ever heard of X-Plane, but as an aerospace engineer, I want to point out that this guy explained and visualized a lot of the physics amazingly. Looking at the flow visualization, of course it’s not 100% accurate, but it’s definitely good enough for a game! Great job sir! 👏 Might have to give this game a try soon :)
Especially note the downwash of the wings impacting the flow over the tail surfaces. And, of course, also the propellor downwash impacting all the lift surfaces. I wonder if he also has some sort of way of modeling the actual flow over the fuselage, or if it’s just all propellor-dependent (and the fuselage is ignored). Anyways, love to see this attention to detail from a video game developer!
Just watched the part about trim. That proves that this guy is running a real-time longitudinal static stability model with all its elements (cg, aerodynamic center, center of lift, etc.) Extrapolating that to the third dimension often brings along huge computational cost, so I’m very curious on what kind of simplified model he used for that. Could be just a 2.5D approach, where doesn’t go full 3D and just takes the axes of the tail, wing and fuselage and calculates a matrix of force values on those… I’ve definitely found another field to explore in my free time! Haha
Thank you so much Austin. I was not aware of the importance of the sensitivity setting and have been having rudder control issues for ever. This morning I followed your advice on sensitivity experience and now the TBM 900 responds as expected. Perfect. Also I was unaware of CTRL M to see the force visuals. Simply awesome. Thank you so much . Would be great to see more videos like this from you!
I know, this doesn't say much about my intelligence, but as a non - pilot I always thought 100% on the sensitivity slider equals 100 % realism and 0% means total arcade for beginners. But hey, I'm just a little idiot who doesn't know a thing about programming. But in all honesty, you have my greatest respect for putting together such an awesome simulator. I can't even begin to imagine what it takes to successfully compete with Microsoft over all these years. Keep it up!
I appreciate you sharing this info with us and love your passion for flight simulation. I have X Plane 11 and now I’m fired up to get 12. Keep up the great work!
XPlane has fairly good physics, but what it and other flight sims have never been able to accurately simulate is positive dynamic stability. I.e., most planes seek stability when trimmed properly and you can take your hands off the controls, but in all the sims the planes continue to roll or pitch even when the controls are neutralized. And yes, I adjust dead zones, offsets, sensitivity settings, curves, etc.
I learned to fly in a Cessna 172. I can tell you first hand, your job of flying the plane doesn't end when it is properly trimmed. It requires constant input even if it's perfectly trimmed. The control forces required to do so are at their minimum in a properly trimmed aircraft but they are still required.
@@BeechHouse I learned to fly in a T-38 and have flown the F-15, F-16, and many GA airplanes, and I can tell you a properly trimmed aircraft does not require constant input.
While I have never tried XPlane 11 or XPlane 12, I will say I'm truly impressed with those diagnostic tools showing the effects of wind on flight surfaces. Where were you when I was in flight school learning this stuff? :) :) :)
Microsoft Flight Simulator has a very advanced system and can show those same wind flow effects and being a pilot myself and own both Xplane 11 & 12 and Microsoft Flight Simulator I can say that as of the 40th anniversary update to Microsoft one, it leaves Xplane in the dust for most things even physics now which is why I stuck to Xplane so long as graphics aren't everything but Microsoft is the complete package now. Xplane has become unplayable due to constant fps issues and considering that it's far inferior in graphics just doesn't add up. I used to be a staunch supporter for x plane but I can no longer say that I am due to its old outdated tech.
@@topgunsi MSFS is also a bandwidth hog because it has to download those world graphics. You pay dearly for it being as pretty as it is. I wouldn't say it's flight model is any better either. Not markedly WORSE like FSX was, but not better. Xplane is also easier to mod if that's your thing (like a LOT easier. Xplane connect, plane maker, etc). And it has weapons in it too as a bonus.
Thank you Austin. I have been with X-Plane since v6. In those days and many years since, you have been so accessible to us when we needed help. Now, there must be too many of us to have such individual help, and UA-cam give such a good way to continue with your help. I have been simulating real aircraft in X-Plane for years. Mostly, these have been the BAe Hawk, and the Flitzer series biplanes designed by Lynn Williams. The simulation benchmarks well with reality, as long as we make the airfoil files as accurate as possible, for a good range of Reynolds numbers. All other details just have to be exactly as the real thing, and we just get 95% reality sitting at our desk ! I have X-Plane 11 now, and have not used it for a while. I would like to see some additional parameters in Plane Maker:- 1. Having some approximation of effect on highly swept leading edges. 2. More drag simulation. Interference drag and parasitic drag, perhaps? Could we have some way of predicting Cd of nacelle shape. 3. Could we have some kind of control on turbine RPM vs thrust? Right now it seems to be linear. In reality, turbines make their most of their thrust only at high RPM.
Can't lie: I've played Flight Simulator for years and never even gave X-Plane a chance. Simply seeing all of the data diagnostics and other features (plus the beautiful graphics at 60 FPS) you showed off here makes me really excited to try out X-Plane at some point.
I have to sincerely apologize to you. The only previous exposure I've had of you was a couple of videos you did for XForce sims. I thought you were borderline nutty. In actuality, you're a friggin' genius. Thanks for all the hard work you've put into making X-Plane such a great simulator.
The by far best, most informative, most valuable video I've seen for a very long time! (If someone's interested in aviation, of course.) I to see X-Plane from a whole new perspective now, there's so much to learn, I'm stunned! Thanks an awful lot for sharing all these information!
I love that Xplane allows you to do this however this feature doesnt work in replay mode where you're usually going to want to use it. Would be great if that feature could be implemented going forward :)
Hi Austin, Thank you for giving the tools for solving problems, rather than just giving answers. It is fascinating to get a view of what goes on "under the surface" in X plane, and a real privilege and joy to have a virtual wind tunnel on our desktop. I'm looking forward to doing more with Plane Maker. How the Wright Brothers would have marvelled at such a wonderful thing! I'm really enjoying X plane 12, it is a very much appreciated step forward from version 11. One of my favourite relaxations and challenges is to go cross country in the glider, and this really comes to life with the way you have developed the weather, complete with thermals, turbulence, slope lift and so on.... and I confess to being addicted to taking many sunset pictures as the lighting is really beautiful! Thank you so much!
On the "yaw left" under power: This is one of the things that annoys me about most of the flight sims I've run. I've been a racing sim developer (physics engine programmer, vehicle dynamics engineering among other things) for 20+ years. Most flight sims don't handle ground vehicle dynamics well. The discussion of the aero forces and resulting yaw moment from the prop induced airflow is great, but what is almost completely missed is the counteracting effect of the tires. A yaw moment to the left from the prop flow will induce a slip angle (like angle of attack but in the horizontal plane instead of vertical) in the tires. Tire forces grow with slip angle. With two rear tires behind the CG and one front tire ahead of it, the tires will create a yaw moment back to the right which reduces the left yaw acceleration. It doesn't cancel the net leftward yaw moment completely (slip angle must still develop for tire forces to exist to do anything), but it should counteract it to a large extent. In the video the leftward tire forces are visible, but there's no way of knowing how close that is to reality. It leaves me wondering what the tire model in XPlane and other sims look like and how the cornering stiffnesses and peak lateral force slip angles were tuned, if it's even modeling that at all. Many aircraft simulators use extremely simplified tire models tuned by aircraft people with little understanding of ground vehicle dynamics, and as a result are notoriously bad at ground transit simulation. What I suggest Austin looks at are the cornering stiffness of the tires and their yaw moment contribution as a function of slip angle relative to the prop wash induced left yaw moment. In particular I'd recommend doing some constrained testing (in sim). Force the aircraft path along the ground to a constant velocity with a constrained force, twist the aircraft to various slip angles with a constrained yaw moment, then observe the yaw moment contribution from BOTH the prop and the tires. Then tweak cornering stiffness in the tires (relative front and rear ratio is important here) and observe the effect on the overall non-constrained yaw moment. If the yaw moment is greater than it is in reality, then the sim aircraft will have a yaw acceleration to the left that's higher than the real plane's. I think what you'll find is if you give the front tire a very low cornering stiffness and much higher in the rear, the leftward yaw acceleration will be significantly reduced and probably be more in line with a real aircraft while on the ground. What this means is you can reduce the leftward yaw acceleration (I suspect significantly from my experience simulating cars) through careful tuning of tires. Real aircraft design engineers do this, it's part of the tire design process. In the sim, it's not THAT the plane veers to the left that's suspect, it's how strongly it does so. I'm not a pilot myself, but have flown in single engine prop planes with friends who are, and while there's a little pull to the left, it doesn't seem to be anywhere near as strong as it is in sims. One friend with a Piper didn't touch the pedals at all during takeoff from what I could see. My guess is because the tires are very different from what the flight sims often have. If there's any steer compliance in the front wheel, that'll effect it too. It's no surprise really if/when flight sims have trouble in this area, ground vehicle engineering is quite different. We're generally looking at different things from the flight sim people.
I wonder if Austin's work on X-Auto (basically X-Plane for land vehicles, which I believe was never released) fed back usefully into X-Plane's ground behaviour..
@@thromboid The fact that he never finished it and released something suggests probably not much. Land vehicles with tires, differentials, suspension geometry and all that are a heck of a lot harder to simulate than planes. I'm impressed with what he's done with XPlane but think he's missing some things in the ground vehicle department still. Ground vehicle dynamics is an entire field in itself. Most flight sim folks are completely unaware of most of it.
I have never played X-plane (except the one time I installed it and found my computer couldn't handle it). This however is insanely cool. I would probably do it even when I don't have a problem just to see how the air is blowing around the aircraft. It could be a very useful tool for students to visualize all the phenomena like p-factor, engine torque etc.
That was an excellent and entertaining video! Very well explained! Thanks for taking the time, hoping for more. I promise to never email you. 😆 PAUSE!!!
Could you please explain why you won't implement persistent airplanes? I'd like to see damage if I deploy flaps too early, and for that damage to be retained for my next flight until I repair it.
@@jaromirandel543 I have seen MSFS videos showing some data like this (when talking about using CFD), but was that developer exclusive or can users access the information for themselves in flight?
@@jaromirandel543 What do you mean "after X-Plane"? Austin hasn't even realized yet there is such a thing as Navier-Stokes equations. Although, maybe he has already - I haven't watched this video yet - but BET is nowhere close to what the guys at Asobo did program for the flight model in MFS. Sadly, it's rather low resolution, but that's mostly the problem of our current hardware (and of more robust CFD optimization methods not being discovered yet). Austin's physics knowledge is on the level of a high school student (a high school teacher at best), while the guy that works on the flight model at Asobo is an aerospace engineer. Do I need to spell the difference?
Or you can learn from the MSFS flight school series too. But yeah, gamers need to understand the physics behind flight. My Dad, who was a lifelong Aviator, had fun asking his students, "What happens when you pull back on the stick" ... "The nose goes up...?" Dad, "No, the Tail goes DOWN...points the nose up... then the nose pulls you up."
Outstanding X-Plane tutorial! Really appreciate your effort Austin to do these teaching videos. I've been a pilot for nearly 50 years and continue to learn from your videos.
THANKS! What a generous explanation for SXXI simmers. All this effort to create a beauty and all this effort to EXPLAIN to people that can´t be as patient and worker as you, Austin. Hug from Madrid, Eduardo simmer since 80's.
When I was a kid (10) I didn't know anything about P factor and I thought the joystick I had was broken because the airplane kept pulling left on take off lol.
This is an excellent video and really highlights a problem in flight Sims now that it's attracting a wider audience. Whilst this is great, we are getting more people into flight Sims and as a consequence, we now have a lot of users complaining about things that are real. An excellent example is the implication of helicopters in msfs. So many people complaining they are so difficult to fly. Haha. Its because they are and it takes skill to fly these naturally unstable aircraft. Xplane is very sophisticated as is dcs (and msfs is getting there) and users who are not pilots in real life need to spend the time to learn how to fly. That's what simulators are for!!!
I've flown both Microsoft and X- Plane for many years and the comparison to real life flying is interesting to say the least! My first flight sim was IFR for the Vic 20 which featured a Cessna 172 RG. There were no outside views much less moving scenery outside the windows. At the time, I wasn't a private pilot. After many decades of flying light aircraft, the new simulators are pretty close to what one could expect for aircraft control. As an inexpensive tool, I enjoy X Plane's ability to mimic avionics functions( mostly) and have pretty good representations of flight charts. Microsoft is pretty good at attractive visuals. The thing I like the most about current sims are that some users can offer interesting crafted models and add-ons!
hahaha I'll never forget starting a flight with a Cessna 172 and just being BLOWN off the runway... then seeing the wind was set to some ridiculously high level. hahaha. not sure what I did there but it was worth the laugh. I've never actually had a big issue with X-Plane, It's always been a great pleasure to fly in. This video is just kinda interesting to watch anyway lol.
The video explanation is appreciated. I worked with programmers in a production environment where if there was an issue their first response was "it must be a hardware issue", ha-ha. They were right about half of the time (tee-hee!!). Now that I have some understanding of how to do diagnostics I will return to flying the helicopters and try to figure out why there's a slow oscillation when going at a very fast horizontal velocity (exceeding Vne ?). I didn't recall ever experiencing it until around when X-Plane 12 came out it started up. Of course I also changed to a new joystick at the same time (Logitech, just like in your video)... so it could be "the hardware". My suspicion is that above Vne it's how a helicopter starts to buck due to trailing (retreating) rotor blade stalling or ??? Maybe you "fixed" that. Which raises the question: are there revision notes that would say such a thing?? Bravo for a great piece of software and, again, also for providing us with troubleshooting skills via this video! And yeah, "peace out" maaaaan and happy virtual flying. ***Update*** That issue that caused the Sikorsky helicopter to oscillate at high forward air speed seems to no longer exist. My guess is that there was either a flaw with the model or something in the software that needed correcting. Anyway, I no longer experience that after letting the software get updated to the latest... so am back to enjoying flying really fast!
We IT guys do that (blame hardware) all the time. It's a first kneejerk reaction to a substantiated complaint; we're only human, after all. Once you get past that complaint, it's time to debug your code. I watched Phillip Ringler go through X1000 autopilot operations -- he said several times "aw, there's a bug I have to fix". *You guys are good!* I've been programming for over 40 years, including for major airlines (UA, AA, CO), and I'm amazed at the quality of XP 12. I went with the beta and uninstalled XP 11, never looked back.
how are thermals, ridge lift and wave modelled in Xplane? I would imagine after watching this video that it is a great sim for simulating gliders! Great video 👍
They are modeled to some extent in 10 (the only version I have, sans the 9 Demo somewhere) and I believe they got more modelling in 11 and the still-in-development 12. I remember catching a few thermals by accident while playing with a powered glider I made in Plane Maker and going 'oh, hey, thermal!' because I didn't know that was a thing in the sim.
This is how I would expect someone programming aerodynamic models to be. Unwell. Thanks for sharing these diagnostic tools. I will enjoy putting them to use. Xplane really does deliver great fidelity of aircraft handling.
As a professionnal pilot (EASA), I confirme that Xplane gives us the most realistic feeling for the flight model.l and ground effects. Good job and thank you for all Sir ( and your team of course ) 🙏👨🏻✈️❤️
As far as the nose moving on a commercial airliner with flap deployment goes, some aircraft have automatic elevator compensation for flap and thrust changes. In planes that don't have automatic compensation you absolutely feel the force change and have to compensate to maintain whatever path you're on.
Gyroscopic precession, P-factor, spiraling slipstream, torque = 4 factors that cause left turning tendencies in single engine prop planes. Excellent video! X-Plane rocks!!
seeing that micro burst visual really wowed me . this is the of many peices of evidence that x plane is seriously the best flight sim . in terms of realism it means busniess . you also gotta love how happy and chipper austin sounds . this man is my insparation.
On a few low wing ( real) planes , when I lower flaps the nose pitches down vs on high wing nose pitches up due to couple . I just did adjustments in plane maker to emulate this .
I started with X-Plane and moved to MSFS on xbox because it was easier than getting a PC. Anyway these tips can help with any of the good sims if someone is having problems. Awesome informative video.
Very interest information! I have never been able to fly the stock Lancaire due to extreme erratic movement both trying to taxi and flying, so I am going to see what the sensitivity settings are on that plane!
This guy is going to sell so many copies because he is getting very personal with his fans
MSFS is better
@@Unknown_Ooh Ahahahahahaha
lol??
Yes but they still do not know how to make good clouds! 🙄🙄
Stikes me as if he's trying to bounce off / curb... A LOT OF COMPLAINTS from his customers.. I have no such complaints with FS2020.
Man, the 3d math in these sims is wild, but allowing the players to see the math modeled is one of the coolest, smartest debugging tools I've ever seen a dev provide.
X-Plane has had that toolset for quite a while, too. At leave version 9 anyway. Microsoft Flight Sim didn't until the 2020 remake. And I suspect Xplane users pointing out how handy it is was why. It's particularly useful if you want to make your own aircraft in Plane Maker.
Agreed - and that its the case with ALL games. To think that what we see is kinda visual math!
I wish more game developers were like you Austin. As passionate, as open, as invested in their games as you are. Much respect!
X plane is definitely a sim for pilots. The flying feels realistic. It has its moments but hey, it’s still a game at its core. I’m really impressed that you can even program something that can replicate something so complicated. It was 50 percent or more the reason I was able to last my instrument add on. When things weren’t going my way on my check ride I relied on the training where I wasn’t burning gas.
Both sims are fine. No one should be doing maneuvering physics in either and both are fine for procedures which is what you describe. I love both sims. But this fan boy one or the other is weird.
XP sitll uses Blade Element theory for its flight physics calculations though. This not as accurate as msfs boundary theory and CFD. And Weather, world wide weather representation is XPs weakness.
@@hpharold23 the CFD mfs use is not the same , high fidelity model that NASA uses it is about on par with blade element weaker in some aspects . Saying that mfs CFD( which is lower resolution has a small grid size ) is superior is ridiculous
@@hpharold23 troll alert
@@hpharold23 Great copy and paste.
Thank you for such great software Austin. As a real life pilot, my experience with X-plane (since version 8) is that it is VERY accurate compared to a real airplane once the joystick setups are adjusted. X-plane modeled by two airplanes very closely (Grumman AA5 and current airplane is Cirrus SR22T).
It’s rare that I comment on UA-cam. However, watching this video it shows the level and attention of detail LR provide making the sim as life like as possible even when users have limited equipment.
I can’t even imagine the frustration you and your team share when users have the audacity to blame coding and not appreciating what they really have!
As someone who has had the opportunity to fly real aircraft I can’t thank you guys enough for all you do. Your team have kept my passion alive for a fraction of the cost. I use this software to practice techniques and to aid my learning. One day I will be able to get back in the seat and continue my journey.
Thank you for all you do.
Do I ever agree with you! In my case, I can't pass a Class III physical (advanced cardiovascular disease), but I once held a VFR ticket, and just like riding motorcycles, flight never gets out of your blood. X-Plane is the next best thing to actually getting in a real cockpit. What I think has happened in the sim market (thank God you guys support Linux!) is that the MS series of flt sims (I used to have a couple, when it was the only sim on the lower cost market) with its poor flight model has given some simmers an unrealistic expectation. I never saw that L deflection on takeoff in earlier MSFS versions, and not until I decided to give X-Plane a try did I notice it ... and it's real! In a real C152, you have to give it substantial R rudder on takeoff roll, for example. I still find this impressive, although not well-suited to a joystick. My IRL flight instructor was big on keeping the aircraft on the centerline, no matter what -- I can't always do that in XP, but my muscles are learning that *much* finer control skills necessary to do so. *Thanks for everything you do.* You'll never get one of those whining complaint e-mails from me about your flight model!!
@@8a41jt I'm sorry to hear that, that really sucks. But you're exactly right, when simulators are conducted in a professional manner especially a simulator like X-Plane, flying a Cessna to a 737 is pretty much true to life. If I were in your situation I'd be on simulators all the time (I'm on them all the time now) and invest all of my money into sim equipment and hardware instead of flying. It's so unfortunate to hear that but I really hope that you make a recovery and never give up on your passion for flying even if it is just on simulators.
YES Matthew - about getting back in the seat and continuing your journey: I hadn't landed a plane since I hung up my headset in 1996, but had X-plane(10/11) on my mac from 2008 to 2017. In mid 2019 I was right seat in a Cherokee II and the pilot asked jokingly if I wanted to try landing it at Guelph's 23, (CNC4 - look up that approach), well thanks to X-Plane I freaking nailed it. The plane owner couldn't believe it. (And candidly - neither did I haha) Thank you Austin and your brilliant piece of work X-Plane.
It could really do with a wind-tunnel mode in the plane-editor... a way of getting L/D ratios, stability margins, cg-positioning etc. in a controlled environment.
Austin hear hear, please this would be a wonderful tool for people who design their own aircraft projects. I was wished for that in Plane-Maker.
Yes I would pay for a different software that is more wind tunnel focused. I don’t need world scenery or mirror finishes or fancy cockpits. I just want to do testing on my design.
@@RA-gk5zg Invest in real professional software. You will need non-realtime CFD for that, and be warned that it will be very inaccurate.
@@ArchOfficial I have to second this. As good as this is in X-Plane, a lot of optimizations and shortcuts are probably done to keep everything running real time on a reasonable computer at home.
CFD simulations do what you want. Please note that FreeCAD has OpenFOAM support and other CFD stuff as well. It should definitely be possible to do what you need to design airplane stuff. But don't rely on it for human life!
@@TankdozerCavalry My point is that even the best non-realtime CFD that take forever to render are pretty inaccurate. Absolutely useless for automobiles and lacking at best for aircraft although much more usable than for automobiles.
The only purpose of CFD is to guide towards possible optimizations of designs, not to actually test designs. You need experimental data to have a better idea of what is going on, even for aircraft.
Software Engineer here.
I appreciate your work and especially that you show Rookies how to "Debug" ^^
Thank you
This is the best add for software I've ever seen. Just author explaining his behind the hood decisions while having a lot of fun.
Loved XP11, and it was fantastic with VR too. Managed to get it set up for my Dad, who was a retired pilot, to still fly around with on a modest PC I built up for him. He really loved the Glider, and I even installed the LET 410 for him, since that was one plane he flew amongst many. His mind was blown when I showed him XP11 VR one Christmas, the year before he passed away.
I also showed MSFS, and let him fly around areas he used to thanks to the amazing Terrain and Graphics.... which unfortunately XP11 just couldn't do as the terrain looks, well, bland and the Autogen is terrible outside any major US or EU city.
At least he had fun in both sims.
i love how happy he sounds it adds a lot
He's happy because he's getting idiots to buy x-plane.
Agreed! I'm jealous -- Austin *loves* his job -- that's the best life anyone could ask for!
This is a man who is sick of answering dumb emails.
Can't believe it's more than 20 years since I bought my first copy of X-Plane!
I remember x-plane on PC bout 12yrs ago.. sure has come a long way.
I am a FAA CFIA&ME Instructor that is totally committed to training pilots using a flight simulator; X-Plane is my choice even though it is not approved for logging time. I used to work for PIC out of Essex CT and went out on my own to do 10 training assignments for pilots to get them trained for the instrument rating. We used to use the old ATC-610 Desktop Simulator that was archaic compared to what X-Plane offers today. It was even FAA Approved to log time! I have tried MS Flight Simulator and it is no doubt a strong competitor, but I like X-Plane more because I use the Apple Mac Computer. I have been watching Austin's UA-cam videos lately and he just amazes me with his knowledge and expert grasp of the math he used to code X-Plane years ago. It has become so much improved, especially from what I am finding with version 12 Beta. This video he did answered some questions that I had along with many others I am sure.
I was on the fence between buying MFS and xplane. After watching this vid, I'm going to steam and buy your game. Thank you Mr. CEO. you showed your love to your consumers.
Glad this was helpful!
@@XPlaneOfficial You can help Austin pay rent this month! I heard he’s been panhandling on the street after the release of Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Thanks Austin! I remember emailing you years ago about Helicopters and Stability Augmentation Systems, Stabilator Systems, autopilots for helicopters etc.. in particular the Black Hawk Model you had. One thing that impressed me the most with you was when you first just replied with the short answer of Google Blade Element Theory, I told you my credentials about being a reference pilot for the level D Full Flight Simulator and real world pilot of the aircraft in question. We then got into a very good discussion on aircraft systems that goes beyond just green coloured lines in order to make an aircraft feel more realistic. Especially helicopters with these systems fitted to dampen or enhance the control outputs. You listened and asked questions of me, didn't just shout me down with all your knowledge and defending code as we coders like to do. I give you a lot of credit to this day when I talk to others saying I've had this interaction with the creator of X-Plane! It's an amazing Game/Simulator, and you should be immensely proud of your achievements.
The more you can do a comparison using your real aircraft VS. the sim the better. I have done many overlaid videos to prove my points that the sim does what the real aircraft does, when the non-believers pipe up! After all, that's that only way we can qualify and re-qualify a Level D Flight Simulator each 12 months by using very small tolerances in comparing data, both tabular and graphing.
You did mention about incorporating some of my ideas into X-Plane 12 helicopters. I was wondering if you may be able to conduct a similar video on rotor-craft?
I really enjoyed this Video. You really explained everything in a simple and fun way for even the non-pilot to understand.
Well done and PEACE OUT! 🤩
Austin really had enough of all of y'all questions lmao
I've been a Microsoft user since FS2004. For almost twenty years I stuck with it (loved it and still do, honestly) until in 2020 I upgraded my PC and saw XP11 for sale on Steam. I decided to give it a try, and after a brief adjustment period I was blown away and wished it was XP that I'd been using for the last twenty years! I have 800 hs flight time in real life (mostly turboprop) and found in XP a fidelity in flight dynamics I didn't know it existed sim-wise but was subconsciously yearning for. You've gained a committed customer here, Austin and team. Best regards!
I'm surprised that you got complaints about the flight model. That is the most perfect thing in the whole thing, in my opinion.
Austin, you’ve created a beautiful tool to analyze this information. All the best mate.
I have no idea who this guy is, nor have I ever heard of X-Plane, but as an aerospace engineer, I want to point out that this guy explained and visualized a lot of the physics amazingly. Looking at the flow visualization, of course it’s not 100% accurate, but it’s definitely good enough for a game! Great job sir! 👏
Might have to give this game a try soon :)
Especially note the downwash of the wings impacting the flow over the tail surfaces.
And, of course, also the propellor downwash impacting all the lift surfaces. I wonder if he also has some sort of way of modeling the actual flow over the fuselage, or if it’s just all propellor-dependent (and the fuselage is ignored).
Anyways, love to see this attention to detail from a video game developer!
Just watched the part about trim. That proves that this guy is running a real-time longitudinal static stability model with all its elements (cg, aerodynamic center, center of lift, etc.)
Extrapolating that to the third dimension often brings along huge computational cost, so I’m very curious on what kind of simplified model he used for that.
Could be just a 2.5D approach, where doesn’t go full 3D and just takes the axes of the tail, wing and fuselage and calculates a matrix of force values on those…
I’ve definitely found another field to explore in my free time! Haha
X Plane is actually used by smaller Plane makers to design Aircraft. Its not a game like msfs. Its a training certified sim@@Ahsan_Fazal
Thank you so much Austin. I was not aware of the importance of the sensitivity setting and have been having rudder control issues for ever. This morning I followed your advice on sensitivity experience and now the TBM 900 responds as expected. Perfect. Also I was unaware of CTRL M to see the force visuals. Simply awesome. Thank you so much . Would be great to see more videos like this from you!
Thanks Austin. As a long-time X-Plane user, I think you do an incredible job. :)
Wow, this was an awesome demo (3500 hour pilot here with only a little sim experience). Thanks! Going to have to play around with this a LOT more.
Anti Meme: "You say diagnostic techniques, I say learning tools, we are the same."
I know, this doesn't say much about my intelligence, but as a non - pilot I always thought 100% on the sensitivity slider equals 100 % realism and 0% means total arcade for beginners. But hey, I'm just a little idiot who doesn't know a thing about programming.
But in all honesty, you have my greatest respect for putting together such an awesome simulator. I can't even begin to imagine what it takes to successfully compete with Microsoft over all these years. Keep it up!
I appreciate you sharing this info with us and love your passion for flight simulation. I have X Plane 11 and now I’m fired up to get 12. Keep up the great work!
XPlane has fairly good physics, but what it and other flight sims have never been able to accurately simulate is positive dynamic stability. I.e., most planes seek stability when trimmed properly and you can take your hands off the controls, but in all the sims the planes continue to roll or pitch even when the controls are neutralized.
And yes, I adjust dead zones, offsets, sensitivity settings, curves, etc.
I learned to fly in a Cessna 172. I can tell you first hand, your job of flying the plane doesn't end when it is properly trimmed. It requires constant input even if it's perfectly trimmed.
The control forces required to do so are at their minimum in a properly trimmed aircraft but they are still required.
@@BeechHouse I learned to fly in a T-38 and have flown the F-15, F-16, and many GA airplanes, and I can tell you a properly trimmed aircraft does not require constant input.
Brilliants explanations, thx M. Austin , push the Sim to the Top Level
While I have never tried XPlane 11 or XPlane 12, I will say I'm truly impressed with those diagnostic tools showing the effects of wind on flight surfaces. Where were you when I was in flight school learning this stuff? :) :) :)
SOMEBODY has some downloading to do - x-plane.com/try-it (it's free)
Microsoft Flight Simulator has a very advanced system and can show those same wind flow effects and being a pilot myself and own both Xplane 11 & 12 and Microsoft Flight Simulator I can say that as of the 40th anniversary update to Microsoft one, it leaves Xplane in the dust for most things even physics now which is why I stuck to Xplane so long as graphics aren't everything but Microsoft is the complete package now. Xplane has become unplayable due to constant fps issues and considering that it's far inferior in graphics just doesn't add up. I used to be a staunch supporter for x plane but I can no longer say that I am due to its old outdated tech.
@@topgunsi MSFS is also a bandwidth hog because it has to download those world graphics. You pay dearly for it being as pretty as it is. I wouldn't say it's flight model is any better either. Not markedly WORSE like FSX was, but not better. Xplane is also easier to mod if that's your thing (like a LOT easier. Xplane connect, plane maker, etc). And it has weapons in it too as a bonus.
Thank you Austin. I have been with X-Plane since v6. In those days and many years since, you have been so accessible to us when we needed help. Now, there must be too many of us to have such individual help, and UA-cam give such a good way to continue with your help.
I have been simulating real aircraft in X-Plane for years. Mostly, these have been the BAe Hawk, and the Flitzer series biplanes designed by Lynn Williams. The simulation benchmarks well with reality, as long as we make the airfoil files as accurate as possible, for a good range of Reynolds numbers. All other details just have to be exactly as the real thing, and we just get 95% reality sitting at our desk ! I have X-Plane 11 now, and have not used it for a while. I would like to see some additional parameters in Plane Maker:-
1. Having some approximation of effect on highly swept leading edges.
2. More drag simulation. Interference drag and parasitic drag, perhaps? Could we have some way of predicting Cd of nacelle shape.
3. Could we have some kind of control on turbine RPM vs thrust? Right now it seems to be linear. In reality, turbines make their most of their thrust only at high RPM.
Can't lie: I've played Flight Simulator for years and never even gave X-Plane a chance. Simply seeing all of the data diagnostics and other features (plus the beautiful graphics at 60 FPS) you showed off here makes me really excited to try out X-Plane at some point.
In summary: "Stop breaking my balls you noobs, learn to fly". Love it
Austin, your sim looks amazing and smooth.
I have to sincerely apologize to you. The only previous exposure I've had of you was a couple of videos you did for XForce sims. I thought you were borderline nutty. In actuality, you're a friggin' genius. Thanks for all the hard work you've put into making X-Plane such a great simulator.
Excelent explanation Austin!! X-Plane for me, is the best FS developed ever.
X Plane is the only home flight simulator that exists in my mind. Nothing else comes close. Laminar 4 lyfe!
Wow, someone give this programmer a hug
The by far best, most informative, most valuable video I've seen for a very long time! (If someone's interested in aviation, of course.) I to see X-Plane from a whole new perspective now, there's so much to learn, I'm stunned! Thanks an awful lot for sharing all these information!
This is very informative hearing this right from the developer
I love that Xplane allows you to do this however this feature doesnt work in replay mode where you're usually going to want to use it. Would be great if that feature could be implemented going forward :)
Austin is a fantastic educator. The way he explains these topics with such enthusiasm. Im glad I bought XP9/10/11/12 to give my support!
Love this video!
And your work at XPlane!
Thanks.
Hi Austin, Thank you for giving the tools for solving problems, rather than just giving answers. It is fascinating to get a view of what goes on "under the surface" in X plane, and a real privilege and joy to have a virtual wind tunnel on our desktop. I'm looking forward to doing more with Plane Maker. How the Wright Brothers would have marvelled at such a wonderful thing! I'm really enjoying X plane 12, it is a very much appreciated step forward from version 11. One of my favourite relaxations and challenges is to go cross country in the glider, and this really comes to life with the way you have developed the weather, complete with thermals, turbulence, slope lift and so on.... and I confess to being addicted to taking many sunset pictures as the lighting is really beautiful! Thank you so much!
On the "yaw left" under power: This is one of the things that annoys me about most of the flight sims I've run. I've been a racing sim developer (physics engine programmer, vehicle dynamics engineering among other things) for 20+ years. Most flight sims don't handle ground vehicle dynamics well. The discussion of the aero forces and resulting yaw moment from the prop induced airflow is great, but what is almost completely missed is the counteracting effect of the tires. A yaw moment to the left from the prop flow will induce a slip angle (like angle of attack but in the horizontal plane instead of vertical) in the tires. Tire forces grow with slip angle. With two rear tires behind the CG and one front tire ahead of it, the tires will create a yaw moment back to the right which reduces the left yaw acceleration. It doesn't cancel the net leftward yaw moment completely (slip angle must still develop for tire forces to exist to do anything), but it should counteract it to a large extent.
In the video the leftward tire forces are visible, but there's no way of knowing how close that is to reality. It leaves me wondering what the tire model in XPlane and other sims look like and how the cornering stiffnesses and peak lateral force slip angles were tuned, if it's even modeling that at all. Many aircraft simulators use extremely simplified tire models tuned by aircraft people with little understanding of ground vehicle dynamics, and as a result are notoriously bad at ground transit simulation.
What I suggest Austin looks at are the cornering stiffness of the tires and their yaw moment contribution as a function of slip angle relative to the prop wash induced left yaw moment. In particular I'd recommend doing some constrained testing (in sim). Force the aircraft path along the ground to a constant velocity with a constrained force, twist the aircraft to various slip angles with a constrained yaw moment, then observe the yaw moment contribution from BOTH the prop and the tires. Then tweak cornering stiffness in the tires (relative front and rear ratio is important here) and observe the effect on the overall non-constrained yaw moment. If the yaw moment is greater than it is in reality, then the sim aircraft will have a yaw acceleration to the left that's higher than the real plane's. I think what you'll find is if you give the front tire a very low cornering stiffness and much higher in the rear, the leftward yaw acceleration will be significantly reduced and probably be more in line with a real aircraft while on the ground.
What this means is you can reduce the leftward yaw acceleration (I suspect significantly from my experience simulating cars) through careful tuning of tires. Real aircraft design engineers do this, it's part of the tire design process. In the sim, it's not THAT the plane veers to the left that's suspect, it's how strongly it does so. I'm not a pilot myself, but have flown in single engine prop planes with friends who are, and while there's a little pull to the left, it doesn't seem to be anywhere near as strong as it is in sims. One friend with a Piper didn't touch the pedals at all during takeoff from what I could see. My guess is because the tires are very different from what the flight sims often have. If there's any steer compliance in the front wheel, that'll effect it too.
It's no surprise really if/when flight sims have trouble in this area, ground vehicle engineering is quite different. We're generally looking at different things from the flight sim people.
I wonder if Austin's work on X-Auto (basically X-Plane for land vehicles, which I believe was never released) fed back usefully into X-Plane's ground behaviour..
@@thromboid The fact that he never finished it and released something suggests probably not much. Land vehicles with tires, differentials, suspension geometry and all that are a heck of a lot harder to simulate than planes. I'm impressed with what he's done with XPlane but think he's missing some things in the ground vehicle department still. Ground vehicle dynamics is an entire field in itself. Most flight sim folks are completely unaware of most of it.
Thanks for the video. Would love to see more like these..
This is a great learning tool. Thanks for sharing... and for putting all this in Xplane.
I have never played X-plane (except the one time I installed it and found my computer couldn't handle it). This however is insanely cool. I would probably do it even when I don't have a problem just to see how the air is blowing around the aircraft. It could be a very useful tool for students to visualize all the phenomena like p-factor, engine torque etc.
I think I remember you taping yarn to your plane when doing airflow testing to program the sim better.
Love X-Plane, love this, you're clearly very passionate. Bring on the MSFS fanbois.
I've been playing with the free mode on my tablet and it has been a great experience. Great for messing around on quick sessions.
Brilliant as usual!
You sir are an absolute legend.
That was an excellent and entertaining video! Very well explained! Thanks for taking the time, hoping for more. I promise to never email you. 😆 PAUSE!!!
A little, light airplane with a powerful turbo prop has strong left yawing tendencies.
Shocked!
Could you please explain why you won't implement persistent airplanes? I'd like to see damage if I deploy flaps too early, and for that damage to be retained for my next flight until I repair it.
Note: This video is not just about X-plane. It is quite universal for any flight simulator.
I don't know of any simulator that models physics like X-Plane 12, using Blade Element Theory that effectively.
@@ronsflightsimlab9512 DCS:World, MSFS 2020 (shame they did start to use that 25 years after X-plane)
@@jaromirandel543 I have seen MSFS videos showing some data like this (when talking about using CFD), but was that developer exclusive or can users access the information for themselves in flight?
@@jaromirandel543 What do you mean "after X-Plane"? Austin hasn't even realized yet there is such a thing as Navier-Stokes equations. Although, maybe he has already - I haven't watched this video yet - but BET is nowhere close to what the guys at Asobo did program for the flight model in MFS. Sadly, it's rather low resolution, but that's mostly the problem of our current hardware (and of more robust CFD optimization methods not being discovered yet).
Austin's physics knowledge is on the level of a high school student (a high school teacher at best), while the guy that works on the flight model at Asobo is an aerospace engineer. Do I need to spell the difference?
@@getsideways7257 Seb is an Aerospace Engineer?
you rock austin!
Excellent Job!!! Thanks
Thanks for your detailed xplane-ation
Love this guy’s passion
Or you guys can take Private Pilot License in some flying school then you can appreciate what X-Plane is
Or you can learn from the MSFS flight school series too. But yeah, gamers need to understand the physics behind flight. My Dad, who was a lifelong Aviator, had fun asking his students, "What happens when you pull back on the stick"
... "The nose goes up...?"
Dad, "No, the Tail goes DOWN...points the nose up... then the nose pulls you up."
Outstanding X-Plane tutorial! Really appreciate your effort Austin to do these teaching videos. I've been a pilot for nearly 50 years and continue to learn from your videos.
thank you so much Ron Perlman!
I respect this guy
Great explanation! I didn't know so much about the topic.
THANKS! What a generous explanation for SXXI simmers. All this effort to create a beauty and all this effort to EXPLAIN to people that can´t be as patient and worker as you, Austin. Hug from Madrid, Eduardo simmer since 80's.
Nice Work..!!
When I was a kid (10) I didn't know anything about P factor and I thought the joystick I had was broken because the airplane kept pulling left on take off lol.
What an amazing program. That's a lot of incredible work behind it.
This is an excellent video and really highlights a problem in flight Sims now that it's attracting a wider audience. Whilst this is great, we are getting more people into flight Sims and as a consequence, we now have a lot of users complaining about things that are real. An excellent example is the implication of helicopters in msfs. So many people complaining they are so difficult to fly. Haha. Its because they are and it takes skill to fly these naturally unstable aircraft. Xplane is very sophisticated as is dcs (and msfs is getting there) and users who are not pilots in real life need to spend the time to learn how to fly. That's what simulators are for!!!
I've flown both Microsoft and X- Plane for many years and the comparison to real life flying is interesting to say the least! My first flight sim was IFR for the Vic 20 which featured a Cessna 172 RG. There were no outside views much less moving scenery outside the windows. At the time, I wasn't a private pilot.
After many decades of flying light aircraft, the new simulators are pretty close to what one could expect for aircraft control. As an inexpensive tool, I enjoy X Plane's ability to mimic avionics functions( mostly) and have pretty good representations of flight charts. Microsoft is pretty good at attractive visuals.
The thing I like the most about current sims are that some users can offer interesting crafted models and add-ons!
hahaha I'll never forget starting a flight with a Cessna 172 and just being BLOWN off the runway... then seeing the wind was set to some ridiculously high level. hahaha. not sure what I did there but it was worth the laugh. I've never actually had a big issue with X-Plane, It's always been a great pleasure to fly in. This video is just kinda interesting to watch anyway lol.
You, sir, are a legend! ...and funny :D
Hah, always love a video from Austin... a true Rennaissance man!
TEACHER, TEACHER, I KNOW WHY THE PLANE IS PULLING TO THE LEFT! (I'm being that annoying kid... I know this part of the video was intended for me 😉)
I'm starting to really like xplane watching his videos and I've never even played the game/sim
"Community" was the best!
flying all kind of sims from 98' this video explained everything :)
This is so Educational. Thank you Sir
The video explanation is appreciated. I worked with programmers in a production environment where if there was an issue their first response was "it must be a hardware issue", ha-ha. They were right about half of the time (tee-hee!!).
Now that I have some understanding of how to do diagnostics I will return to flying the helicopters and try to figure out why there's a slow oscillation when going at a very fast horizontal velocity (exceeding Vne ?). I didn't recall ever experiencing it until around when X-Plane 12 came out it started up. Of course I also changed to a new joystick at the same time (Logitech, just like in your video)... so it could be "the hardware". My suspicion is that above Vne it's how a helicopter starts to buck due to trailing (retreating) rotor blade stalling or ??? Maybe you "fixed" that. Which raises the question: are there revision notes that would say such a thing??
Bravo for a great piece of software and, again, also for providing us with troubleshooting skills via this video! And yeah, "peace out" maaaaan and happy virtual flying.
***Update*** That issue that caused the Sikorsky helicopter to oscillate at high forward air speed seems to no longer exist. My guess is that there was either a flaw with the model or something in the software that needed correcting. Anyway, I no longer experience that after letting the software get updated to the latest... so am back to enjoying flying really fast!
We IT guys do that (blame hardware) all the time. It's a first kneejerk reaction to a substantiated complaint; we're only human, after all. Once you get past that complaint, it's time to debug your code. I watched Phillip Ringler go through X1000 autopilot operations -- he said several times "aw, there's a bug I have to fix". *You guys are good!* I've been programming for over 40 years, including for major airlines (UA, AA, CO), and I'm amazed at the quality of XP 12. I went with the beta and uninstalled XP 11, never looked back.
how are thermals, ridge lift and wave modelled in Xplane? I would imagine after watching this video that it is a great sim for simulating gliders! Great video 👍
They are modeled to some extent in 10 (the only version I have, sans the 9 Demo somewhere) and I believe they got more modelling in 11 and the still-in-development 12. I remember catching a few thermals by accident while playing with a powered glider I made in Plane Maker and going 'oh, hey, thermal!' because I didn't know that was a thing in the sim.
Alright! Now you have gone and done it Austin! You have to make the slipstream data RGB scriptable now!
The levels of snark is glorious! Love it!
this was very informative, thanks
This is how I would expect someone programming aerodynamic models to be. Unwell. Thanks for sharing these diagnostic tools. I will enjoy putting them to use. Xplane really does deliver great fidelity of aircraft handling.
As a professionnal pilot (EASA), I confirme that Xplane gives us the most realistic feeling for the flight model.l and ground effects. Good job and thank you for all Sir ( and your team of course ) 🙏👨🏻✈️❤️
Thanks for sharing!
As far as the nose moving on a commercial airliner with flap deployment goes, some aircraft have automatic elevator compensation for flap and thrust changes. In planes that don't have automatic compensation you absolutely feel the force change and have to compensate to maintain whatever path you're on.
Great video. Could you do one on thermals and souring with a glider?
The first time I tried to take off in Xplane and the plane yawed to the left, I was like.... THIS IS AN ACTUAL FLIGHT SIM!
actually did not learn anything new, but this videolecture was like repeating, cospect of my basic knowledge. Thank you!)
Gyroscopic precession, P-factor, spiraling slipstream, torque = 4 factors that cause left turning tendencies in single engine prop planes. Excellent video! X-Plane rocks!!
This is for modelling real planes not props
@@justcommenting4981 props = propeller driven aircraft
@@alergicgamer2711 propeller driven airplanes are real planes not just props!
@@justcommenting4981 now, I really don't know if it's a troll or not
I am with you since V5!
seeing that micro burst visual really wowed me . this is the of many peices of evidence that x plane is seriously the best flight sim . in terms of realism it means busniess . you also gotta love how happy and chipper austin sounds . this man is my insparation.
My answer to the intro would be: Well, have you flown in a 2-seater airplane?
I'm buying this game just for this dude.
Hello from Iowa State!
On a few low wing ( real) planes , when I lower flaps the nose pitches down vs on high wing nose pitches up due to couple . I just did adjustments in plane maker to emulate this .
I started with X-Plane and moved to MSFS on xbox because it was easier than getting a PC. Anyway these tips can help with any of the good sims if someone is having problems. Awesome informative video.
Love the Mac Studio in the background Austin
Very interest information! I have never been able to fly the stock Lancaire due to extreme erratic movement both trying to taxi and flying, so I am going to see what the sensitivity settings are on that plane!