He is using it with his setup to fly MSFS and use his panels! If you are interested! It in the upper left corner of his video when he has it running! He says it works and shows us it does! I don't have panels but I know some people had questions about it working or not. Apparently it does work.

 

 

Yes of coure work you can read it in the announcement of SPAD.neXt

"With MSFS 2020 being released on August 18th it's about time to say something about the SPAD.neXt compatibility.

Basically MSFS 2020 is (already) supported by any version of SPAD.neXt (0.9.5,0.9.6,0.9.7) if you have a FSX/P3D License for SPAD.neXt.
Basically means, you can use the SimConnect variables that existed already in FSX. This does not mean everything will be working like before. Adjustments to your profiles will most likely need to be done.

Also, as expected, MSFS makes changes to SimConnect (aprox. 500 new variables and 400 new Events) and changed some of the behaviors.

On the day MSFS 2020 releases to public, SPAD.neXt 0.9.8 will be released , giving you full access to everything that is available for MSFS.
This will include some ready to fly basic profiles for the stock aircraft that come with MSFS.

To update to SPAD.neXt 0.9.8 an active update-suscription will be required. ( See viewtopic.php?f=4&t=37310 )

Nothing can be said about the support for 3rd party aircraft at this point in time, as too little is known yet.

SPAD.neXt 0.9.8 will also contain the following new major features:

- Aerofly FS2 Support
- Elgato Streamdeck Support ( Complete License only )

A MSFS 2020 Questions and Answers Thread will be started in the forum in the next days.
However this will only be SPAD.neXt releated, since MSFS is still under NDA"

 

1 hour ago, in2tech said:

He is using it with his setup to fly MSFS and use his panels! If you are interested! It in the upper left corner of his video when he has it running! He says it works and shows us it does! I don't have panels but I know some people had questions about it working or not. Apparently it does work.

 

 

Here's a link to NASA's website on basic Newtonian laws of motion. https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/newton1.html

Looking at this video I recognise the distinguished achievement of overcoming universal laws of motion, mass, and inertia that have defined motion on this planet for the last 4.5 billion years. But the stunning achievement here is how you can alter the trajectory of a large object as though it had no mass at all, or inertia, merely by "thinking". Almost no controlling movement really necessary. It's a miracle!

Expressed with all good humour. The aircraft do look very nice, and the scenery as ever, is wonderful.

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by robert young

Oh well yes, it works, I use it 🙂

2 hours ago, robert young said:

Here's a link to NASA's website on basic Newtonian laws of motion. https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/newton1.html

Looking at this video I recognise the distinguished achievement of overcoming universal laws of motion, mass, and inertia that have defined motion on this planet for the last 4.5 billion years. But the stunning achievement here is how you can alter the trajectory of a large object as though it had no mass at all, or inertia, merely by "thinking". Almost no controlling movement really necessary. It's a miracle!

Expressed with all good humour. The aircraft do look very nice, and the scenery as ever, is wonderful.

This again? 😅 I really want to understand what exactly you have qualms with in terms of the flight model being unrealistic, I just don't see what I'm missing...

Hello High-Alpha,

I can't really explain it anymore than I've already done so after numerous posts. I don't want to offend anyone. Maybe I'm a deluded soul and perhaps 25 years of work is all wasted. There is no point in appealing to a majority because I realise the majority are either locked in group think or perhaps they so want this sim to be good (and much of it is) that they just don't want to look closely.

I really can't add much to what I've expressed already. But just one clue here. A machine with a sizeable mass could not possibly yaw so abruptly, either on the ground or in the air even if your foot had kicked the rudder pedal through the floor in less than .2 of a second. But that's just the start of it. Every motion of this aircraft is just implausible to my eyes. Every single movement. 

The chap controlling it is barely moving the stick at all, and he shows at some point that his stick is very near minimum sensitivity. I've flown this type, and many similar ones and if I could make them move like this I would assume I was flying a fantasy machine with a tenth of the mass and control surfaces that were five times the size and rocket assisted! I can't really add more than this.

 

9 minutes ago, robert young said:

Hello High-Alpha,

I can't really explain it anymore than I've already done so after numerous posts.

Hmm, so the expert pilots with thousands of flight hours in GA aircraft who say that FS is the most realistic consumer simulator ever are not as knowledgeable as an armchair hobbyist?  And the years that Asobo worked with the manufacturers was all for show I guess. 

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by n4gix
Removed unnecessary long quote!

Robert, he needs to begin by setting all of the axis devices to use a log curve rather than the default linear.

Only then can proper fine-tuning be done using the config files.

5 minutes ago, MarkSC said:

Hmm, so the expert pilots with thousands of flight hours in GA aircraft who say that FS is the most realistic consumer simulator ever are not as knowledgeable as an armchair hobbyist?  And the years that Asobo worked with the manufacturers was all for show I guess. 

Robert has been - and still is - one of the finest developers of flight dynamics on a professional level and is as far removed from being an "armchair hobbiest" as one can be.

Instead of being hypercritical and dismissive, why not offer something substantive instead?

I'm not sure if any of us can offer anything substantive to Robert anymore as he refuses to acknowledge how stick sensitivities have worked in computer gaming for decades.

According to his critique every sim ever created for the PC has been inaccurate. Maybe that's true but that's a larger problem than what MSFS can solve on its own.

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by Slides

29 minutes ago, robert young said:

I really can't add much to what I've expressed already. But just one clue here. A machine with a sizeable mass could not possibly yaw so abruptly, either on the ground or in the air even if your foot had kicked the rudder pedal through the floor in less than .2 of a second. But that's just the start of it. Every motion of this aircraft is just implausible to my eyes. Every single movement.

Could you provide some specific timestamps in the video that you interpret as so abrupt that it defies real life flight (and taxi lol) envelopes? Otherwise it is hard to look at a 45 minute video and use the same sample size to accurately discuss the topic at hand. Also I in no way now or previously am trying to condescend or belittle your credentials and experience. I just think we have differing opinions, and I've developed mine from real aviation as well.

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by High_Alpha
Removed unnecessary long quote!

4 minutes ago, MarkSC said:

Hmm, so the expert pilots with thousands of flight hours in GA aircraft who say that FS is the most realistic consumer simulator ever are not as knowledgeable as an armchair hobbyist?  And the years that Asobo worked with the manufacturers was all for show I guess. 

Which experts? Almost all of the flight model approving videos have been made by people who have never flown an aircraft, and those that are flown by pro pilots clearly are limited by NDA about what they can say. I can't say too much on this because I do not want to get anyone into trouble, but I do know that beta testers are not the same breed as those running promo videos from a freebie and there will be unconstrained pilots who will not be quite so generous. I understand why everyone wants to say nice things about everything, and as I said, much of it is very good. But the Emperor's New Clothes Fable is something that might be remebered.

It is your perfect right to say I am an "armchair hobbyiest" but it is not true. I have not earned a living from flying but I had a current PPL for decades and a glider rating for many years after that, and have flown numerous different types. Over 25 years I designed the flight models of various Boeings, Airbuses, corporate jets, more GA aircraft than I could list and quite a few twins, nearly all of them in consultation with extremely experienced pro-pilots on type, and believe me they didn't miss a trick, nor did they hold back on what was required. But thanks for expressing your views.

 

 

1 minute ago, n4gix said:

Robert, he needs to begin by setting all of the axis devices to use a log curve rather than the default linear.

Only then can proper fine-tuning be done using the config files.

Yes Bill, I get that, but he appears to show in the video that he has indeed set his controls to a curve that is shallow at the beginning, indicating a low sensitivity.

Asobo has added a ton of truly useful control adjustments to the sim; far beyond what any flight sim has ever had. That's why everyone will need to customize the response curves of the hardware before tackling the other problems - and yes there are problems - with the OTB flight dynamics.

5 minutes ago, robert young said:

Which experts?

The ones on Asobo's internal team and hired consultants. Plus the ones who are real GA pilots and in the beta program who have commented on the GA aircraft and other GA pilots who have shared their views online. Just because you're not aware of them, doesn't mean that don't exist.

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by Slides

13 minutes ago, Slides said:

I'm not sure if any of us can offer anything substantive to Robert anymore as he refuses to acknowledge how stick sensitivities have worked in computer gaming for decades.

According to his critique every sim ever created for the PC has been inaccurate. Maybe that's true but that's a larger problem than what MSFS can solve on its own.

I have never refused to discuss stick sensitivities. In most of the past products where I have written documentation I have specificallly addressed control setups as being important. I've also repeated ad infinitum on this thread that you cannot explain aircraft behaviour only by the implementation of sticks. There are inherent aircraft movements themselves, and nothing to do with control input, that don't look right to me.

Actually over the years I have defended FS9 and FSX's core aerodynamics against a barrage of statements like "flies on rails" which are simply not true. It is the individual tuning of flight models that makes or breaks an individual aircraft. PMDG gets it right commensurate with the aircraft type, and so do A2A in most cases, as do a lot of other designers.

Edited August 15, 20205 yr by robert young