I replied on a few of the comments. Awesome comments, and awesome post. The Cessna 172 and the Cessna 152 are both really near and dear to my heart, so this is definitely a video that I seriously appreciate. The comments are excellent, and it is great to see perspectives from other’s real world experience.
Thanks for the feedback and thanks for watching! I've been a fan of the 172 since I was a teenager and I went up in one for a sight seeing tour of upstate NY. Never got time in the 152 due to W&B restrictions with me and my instructor unfortunately. I hear its a blast to fly!
Agreed, it was also great to have a real pilot not be condescending about how poor the MSFS flight models are compared to the real thing like so many IRL pilots on the official forum!
Thanks! This sims had its share of issues for me sure but there's no reason to toss it in the trash. It's a fairly capable sim overall - and from what I'm seeing in SU10 so far, its getting ALOT better. Does every plane fly great - no, some do feel toyish, but overall alot of them are at the very least good enough. For a home sim that should be fine for most people. I feel as more 3rd party aircraft come out and the sime matures - its going to be a great time for the home simmer!
I don’t want to be picky but you did the same thing a couple of times. When the plane was in the stall and starting to drop a wing you corrected with aileron instead of your feet. Really had that drilled in to me during my training, just hate to see you do it in the real thing and end up in a spin 🙂! Great video though!
That’s a really good observation actually that I didn’t even notice. It’s been a while now since I’ve practiced stalls and such since all my training had been primarily ifr now. Looking at it again (not to make an excuse) it almost looked like I pulled it over when reaching for the flaps. Obviously not something I want to do. I think it may be time to practice again next time I’m up with my instructor and get that muscle memory back! Thanks for watching and thank you for the feedback! Edit: nevermind i did it on the power on also. Gonna def practice recoveries again next time I’m up.
@@av8rchris Your response to pk3012's gentle critique made me trust the rest of your video that much more. Too many people get defensive, and your professional and respectful acceptance of ideas from a peer is rare and appreciated. Subbed and thanks. FWIW, I started my PPL yesterday, and we have a few more family members who will soon follow. We are going to build a simulator. Your recent experience will be helpful.
Thanks! I have a series starting that’s going to be covering all the components of the simulator starting with the tbm panel today. Be sure to check it out!
The biggest difference I found between the sim and real 172 is trimming. In the sim I found the airplane needs a lot of fine adjustment to keep it flying straight and level. The pitch seems more sensitive than the real plane. Which flight model did you use on the sim: Legacy or Modern?
I use modern flight model. I agree but also in general any sim I've used seem harder to fly then the real thing. Im guessing it has something to do with control sensitivities and quality of those components. Since I've switched to the Brunner force feedback yoke its certainly gotten way closer to the real thing, but still in sim trimming for straight and level can require some patience.
100% Winds down the runway I'm on left rudder to hold center - sometimes alot of it. Add a crosswind with some weathervaning and it can even be hard to hold on the runway at all. There also seems to be some weird crosswind characteristics. I can fly final with normal crabbing or side slip technique, but it seems either entering ground effect or just past ground effect you need opposite cross wind controls or get shifted way off centerline. I'd have to test this further with custom weather and run a few laps to be 100% of whats going on though. I find it much harder to land upwind wheel first for sure in this sim vs other sims or real world conditions.
Fun fact from my flight test & simulation minor i think in university: Simulating ground handling of an aircraft is actually one of the hardest behaviors to get right even for Level-D manufactures.
Nice comparison video. In my real world experience doing power off stalls in the Skyhawk, that nose drop looks about right to me. Of course there are many different factors involved in any particular scenario. I flew out of KFRG as well when I lived in NY. Love flying on Long Island 😊
I was wondering about the nose drop also. Because the thing is for me, in the real airplane, you can’t study the exact behavior of the pitch as well since you’re sitting inside of this box that is actually falling and you’re focused on recovering. So there is the possibility that your comfort level sitting on a simulator at home and not having the physical forces exerted on you, gives you a lot more mental sharpness to focus on the actual behavior. It’s really hard to say if that one’s 100% accurate or not.
Great video and a fantastic sim setup there. I was surprised to see on the real approach that the plane bounces around more than the sim and needs constant correcting.
Yep, that's something I feel pretty much all the current sims lack are thermals. As your coming in over different surface types you can get different updrafts, slight wind changes as the surface winds hit trees, buildings ect. MSFS is def getting there though! With the new gliders update I'm thinking we should start to 'feel' thermals in the sim now. Thanks for watching!
yes, excellent video. Again, I agree with the response and the post. One of my least favorite types of air fields to land that are the ones that are surrounded very close to the runway by trees. The reason I say this is because on the approach you get a feel for the winds and get everything adjusted properly with your yaw and everything else to compensate, and then, as soon as you break that tree line, the way the wind is blowing completely changes on you, when you’re a mere 40 feet off the ground. This has led to a couple of rather dicey landings for me, especially when I was doing my initial solos many many years ago.
one item that would be interesting …. two actually: 1. turning stall 2. un-coordinated turn, resulting in a spin. The second one is harder to duplicate in a real 172, but a 152 is absolutely unforgiving. I have not managed to duplicate these, the spin especially, as well in the simulator. Have you tried? SEL cert here, also. C-152, C-172, Diamond DA-20.
I dont think I've tried those in sim either. IRL I've only done the turning stall, never experienced a spin in the real thing. I will say I feel the 172 seems to want to drop one wing more than the other fairly often in MSFS vs the real thing. For most flying situations it feels pretty good though.
@@av8rchris back when I was doing my flight training, my flight instructor was having a hard time convincing me of the importance of a coordinated turn…. He finally just decided to stop saying anything and let me find myself in a spin the hard way a couple of times. needless to say, I understand the importance turn coordination. nothing like being absolutely weightless, watching your pin float off of your knee pad, and watching the altimeter lose about 500 feet in a second, to drive that point home.
@@johntaylor2433 I'd say that should certainly do the trick! I wanted to experience a spin but my instructor said the school wouldn't allow him to demonstrate. Not sure how true or not or if there was some other reason but maybe one day. I'd like to at least know what to expect if i ever messed up bad enough to end up in one (which i hope never happens!)
As former PPL-er, I too did the comparison. I also tried steep turns as max bank angle 60, and that also is pretty realistic compared to the real thing. ;-)
Thx for the comparison! In my experience I agree that the power settings and overall handling on the sim is really well done. I do not have the set-up you have and I am flying older 172s and I have even more trouble on the sim to figure out when to flare than on the real thing. I agree that the home sim is probably best for practicing procedures and that stuff and that the "feel of the pants" feeling, turbulence, Gs and all that need to be learned up in the air! Great video!
100% agree! The home sims been keeping me sharp between instrument lessons and staying comfortable on the comms ect on pilotedge and vatsim. If I was going to rate difficulty on home sim landing, I'd say single monitor the hardest, the home sim triple monitor is medium, and VR flying easiest. Flying in VR you just get that depth perception you don't get with anything else, well, aside from real life of course! I just wish it was easier to do IFR procedures in a VR headset, interacting with the ipad charts ect.
@@av8rchris Yes I agree with the VR thing its cool and I am a 3D geek but I like flying by the seat of my pants trying to navigate using maps ETC radio beacon /GPS and all that is not easy when under the hood. Just setting auto Pilot and having a coffee is kinda boring.
Good video. I am also a real-life C172S pilot. What I don’t like about the sim is that--when on approach and when flaring-the airplane is stiff as a board. There is no rolling of the wings (back and forth) ever so slightly. Even in your landing, watch the roll that happens in the real airplane video (at 10:07). Notice the sim at this time…barely moving.
Good point. I can’t tell if that’s flight model or lackluster weather in this sim. I have experienced that wing rock but very infrequent where real world happens more often. Glad you enjoyed the video!
also, in the real world the plan descends at a much greater angle.. in the sim he just smoothly coasted in. Maybe he didn't match altitudes just right.. but I've definitely felt in the real thing that you angle forward quite a bit more.
100%! The angle of attack is a much more nose down in the real plane vs MSFS. Xplane seems to get this right but MSFS not so much at least on most (all?) of the default aircraft.
Sort of - it seems MSFS may not simulate the changes in the wing when flaps are extended but instead simulate some sort of extra lift/drag so it doesn't allow for the AoA change. Boldmethod.com has a great article on what happens to actual wings when flaps are extended. You can search "Flaps angle of attack" - the article has good details!
These tests are cool. The ground handling issue in my mind is due to wind and ground grip, if there is SLIGHTEST wind from the right the plane wants to weathervane to the right so you need left rudder. I think this was little bit improved on SU X, but still it feels like there is no grip between tires and runway. Very common in all flight sims imo. Anyway, i also think that the MSFS default C172 and C152 are incredibly good planes for default planes! Beating almost every payware stuff from the legacy sims (FSX etc).
Ground handling seems to be an issue for all sims for sure. Xp seems to have a better handle on it but msfs will get there eventually. 100% what we have no is light years ahead of what we had. I can’t wait to see what folks like a2a are capable of now with this platform!
I think you are spot on with the ground handling. I have the same issue, in both the 172 and the 152. They did not model the gyroscopic precession very well.
@@johntaylor2433 Yep, had this again last night with a slight cross wind, the weathervaning almost makes you need the opposite correction you'd need in real life. Id have to do some more testing. I know Xp11 felt spot on after I came home from xwind training one day during PPL.
I know - I’m always on the lookout for an updated frg! Especially now since they did the runway move project last year. Fellow LIer! Thanks for watching!
So irritated that there isn’t a steam gauge model besides the 152. MS still treating this as more of an arcade game when they’re so close to a FANTASTIC sim. Still has its place and I use it a lot, but such a missed opportunity. And good LORD what did this setup cost you!!??
They have a steam 172 - they just put it behind the premium/deluxe versions unfortunately. Rumor has it the 172 steam combined with the new WB-Sim 172 Classic enhancement really gets on par. I haven't had a chance to put it through its paces yet though but will soon.
As for the cost - I'm not sure I full want to know yet lol. I'm doing a series on this channel taking a deep dive in to all the components. Next Thursday is going to be the final video where I cover construction and cost breakdown.
Nice comparison, I have 3 55 Inch curved tvs. 4k on a 6 DOF motion platform, it will be nice if Asobo has a remove "dash" soon in cockpit mode. But I am happy they gave us a 180 * view!
@@av8rchris I built my own and hybrid 8" actuators I modified with AC servo motors th-cam.com/video/I2CcVEYFYIA/w-d-xo.html and using Thanos AMC AASD 15A Servo Motion Controller, Its good motion. Using Ians BFF motion Software for flight and SIMtools for cars roller coaster etc.
Yep, I picked it up recently and plan on putting it through its paces. I heard they had a RW pilot tweak the flight model and such so I'm curious to see the differences!
I actually plan on covering all the details, right down to the (Im not sure I want to know the full total) cost lol. I have a playlist on the channel called 'Home simulator tour series' which every Thursday will be releasing a video covering some aspect of the sim build. The Realsim gear TBM panel is up and this Thursday Ill be covering the Brunner yoke, it's software and the Thrustmaster pedals I have. Thanks for watching!
It's been forever since I've used P3D but I do plan on doing a few more comparisons between the modded 172 in MSFS, as well as the stock and AFL 172NG in XP 12, once 12 releases!
Greetings, I have seen this review of yours of the Cessna 172 G1000 base plane and the paid Cessna 172 WB. I would like to tell me which one do you think is closer to reality?
I haven’t flown the wb in awhile so not sure if there’s any significant changes to the flight model but around when I made this video is supposedly used the stock 172 6 pack fm. Personally I felt the g1000 to be closer flight model wise. I’m guessing because the g1000 version uses the CFD model I believe.
You and me both! Once XP12 is out and the AFL 172 is updated, I plan on doing a video with the stock 172 and the AFL 172 to see how those all compare to the real thing and to each other.
One think notice is the lack of any slight turbulence. In the real plane you notice the entire plsne/dash moving around while the sim cockpit appears unrealistically smoothet. Maybe always try adding light turbulence to addtgst little detail for realism.
It really depends on the cloud and conditions but there is most certainly turbulence. It’s one of the reasons I’m looking for as much actual IMC as I can get during my instrument training.
The real plane absolutely feels turbulence, and in my humble opinion, it feels it a lot worse than a large plane. Turbulence that on large plane (I’m talking about Boeing 737s things like that) would barely register as a vibration, feel like serious earthquake in a little 172. I’ve had a few instances where I felt like every filling in my mouth got rattled out.
I am planning on it. I’m waiting on xp12 to mature a bit as there seems to be some issues with the flight model at the moment. I actually provided feedback to the devs so we’ll see what comes of it. At the moment there’s way too much drag when you cut the power and you sink like a rock resulting in really hard and short landings.
At a high level my cousin is good at wood working/construction and built a platform with walls to mount everything to. I’m doing an in depth series on the channel here where I’m going in to all the details of it. Look for the playlist home simulator tour series. Next video is Thursday!
Yep! It uses the Sim Update 10 native multi monitor setup to place the image on the screens with proper geometry. Then I have all the hardware setup so I pretty much never need to click on the VC.
@@av8rchris if I have the SimUpdate 10 but an average PC (Nvidia GT730)with 12 GB RAM. Fsx works great with no jitter, just trying to see how far I can push my PC.
Really great video, and a sick setup! I'm a simmer only, never even stepped foot into a real GA plane so it was fascinating to hear how they compare. Just Flight have released an add on for the Cessna 172 steam gauge that came with the MSFS premium and deluxe packs that is supposed to bring the electronics and instruments up to study level. You can flood the engine, foul the spark plugs, get damage and wear and tear and even break the prop if you land and fall forward. If you have the steam gauge Cessna any chance you could do a comparison of that with the add on?
Thanks - glad you enjoyed! I just heard of the 172 steam gauge add-on recently. I've actually been debating on picking it up to put it through it's paces so now you have me curious on the comparison as well. I'll gladly do a comparison with that add-on and the real plane!
@@av8rchris Thanks! As a non IRL pilot I'd like to know if it picking it up will help me learn more about handling a real plane. I currently fly the G1000 model but I like the idea of learning some actual real aviation startup procedures and being required to fly the plane within its POH restraints.
It's one of the reasons I wanted to make this video in the first place. For years as a simmer only I wanted to know if I was doing anything right, or how the planes flew compared to real life ect. Now we have at least a basic idea! The home sims are really what you make of it - you can fly around 3rd person, or grab a study level GA aircraft and really learn the ins and outs! If your into live flight sim streams - Im about to go live on www.twitch.tv/av8rchris Hope to see you there!
I flew the 172 and pa28 in the real world and in VR this is as real as it gets . You do need good equipment flight yoke, rudder pedals with toe brakes and a throttle quadrant. I use the excellent CH stuff.
100%. I had the cheap Logitech/saitek yoke for years and landings were extremely hard due to the poor controls. Same with the logi pedals. Quality gear is important! Vr most certainly as real as it gets. I wish we had a bit wider fov though for vr and it’d be perfect.
@@av8rchris I must confess to having the Saitek cessna trim wheel for a more real experience. Yes the FOV in VR is a problem but I'm sure in time this problem will be mostly resolved.
I agree - the tech will get better for sure. I heard the saitek trimwheel isnt bad though. Flight Velocity makes a replica ive been thinking of getting.
@@av8rchris Because in VR, The brain can sometimes delude you with movements that are not present in the simulator, but as a result of the effect of the three-dimensional image, the sounds of the plane, the surrounding wind, and your feeling that you are actually in the plane.
So more of a comparison of the situational awareness levels between VR and non-VR flying? Or rather the comparison on how VR flying equates to the real thing? I think I can come up with ideas for both actually.
Most likely not - I have the majority of my time in the 172, and just a few hours across the warrior and archer. Haven't had enough time in those aircraft to really run a proper comparison for that. Who knows where IRL flying takes me - maybe one day!
I use the sim's native built in multi-monitor support. X-Plane 11 has it already built in. For MSFS, it's in the Sim Update 10 beta which has the 'experimental' multi display options. I did a quick video on that here if your interested! th-cam.com/video/zq6eZhCjJ1s/w-d-xo.html
Congrats on starting your training! It certainly flies close enough - it’s just that takeoff ground roll and some other ground handling anomalies that could give you bad habits. The only other thing I noticed is crosswind landings seem to behave a bit differently in sim vs real thing so maybe that’s another video at some point (didn’t have crosswind footage in hand). This sim will excel for you at vfr cross countries when you get to that point in your training. My instructor told me what the airports were and I planned the route via charts - flew it in sim (in vr at the time). The next day when we flew it together for real I felt like I was already there. Every ground based visual reference matched up it was wild! Anyway - enjoy your training and safe flying!
I picked it up actually but haven't had time to really sit down with it and put it through its paces. When I do I'll certainly run through another comparison!
@@ehsanmikaeili9315 each aircraft has its challenges for sure. I’ve only flown light ga aircraft irl but in sim I’d say one of the things I noticed flying airliners is the difference in response and that everything happens much quicker. Theres obviously the complexity of systems too however once trained I imagine it’s not a challenge for trained airline pilots. One of my personal challenges was learning techniques to spot other planes, as that’s not something you typically need to do in sim and when you do they draw in a way you can easily spot them.
Yep - works excellent in the SU10 beta - it should be releasing (i think) in another 2 weeks or so. I have some details in my video here: th-cam.com/video/zq6eZhCjJ1s/w-d-xo.html
It would be interesting to see another video like this but using the recently released JustFlight C172 Enhancement Mod. So far I think the mod is worth the $21 it costs, although some others feel it's a steep price to pay.
I was debating on doing a video comparing that mod, I've been looking for a 'study level' type 172 but was preferring g1000 since thats what im doing my instrument rating on. Not that you can't fly instrument on steam gauge its just the gns530/430 seem to be a little lack luster in their current state in MSFS. I may pick it up and put it through its paces to see how it stacks up and of course a video will follow!
@@av8rchris Sounds like a reasonable plan. I'll be interested in your take on this enhancement. If I'm not mistaken, I've noticed some liveries are not compatible. At least the Embry Riddle one doesn't appear to be.
I was just thinking the same thing as I watched this video. I watched an enhancement mod video recently as well and am definitely going to buy it. I already own the premium version of msfs 2020 so not sure if that helps with the price or not. I prefer the steam gauges with the garmin 530/430 as I am really into learning without the G1000 until maybe later when I am further along my learning path.
Its a good path. I started my IRL training on steam with the 530/430 then transitioned to G1000. My only issues really lie sim related as the 530/430 have a few quirks that don't exist on the real world units. Enter the G1000 NXi from WT and there's nothing I found that they can't do compared to real world, with the exception of the systems pages and stuff. Per one of the WT devs, he says it will be coming eventually as the sim now simulates GPS sat and SBAS using actual positions. Another positive note, they're doing the G3000 and 530/430 also, so we should be seeing some top quality stuff coming soon!
@@jeffwelch2587 I'm guessing rental of a 172 with the G1000 would be more expensive than the steam gauges (?), so most people early in training, keeping it within the budget, would be flying mostly steam gauges? I haven't flown in awhile, so I'm not sure this would be true. I suppose I could check the local flight school rental pricing.
Not bad for a completely stock aircraft, and is testament to the effort Asobo has put into the ever evolving flight model. I thank you for doing this video as it puts to bed this ridiculous notion that MSFS is no better than an XBOX game for kids, that some people from a different flight sim would have you believe. And I include the CEO of said company in that. I bet you cannot wait for the A2A Cessna 172 to be released? Will take your sim to a whole new level. 😊👍 EDIT: Ah after reading your comments below, you're training on the G1000 and the A2A has steam gauges. 😊 Do you have the Working Title G1000 mod installed? It is absolute class.
The WT G1000 is top tier! Oh I still can't wait for the A2A 172, that's a guaranteed buy for me. Even though its steam I'm still able to use air manger to put those instruments on the PFD/MFD screens. That was the whole purpose of this as I was kind of curious if I matched speeds just how close or not a landing or takeoff would be, or if power settings matched for certain maneuvers. Does this replace real world flying - of course not, but it does show the effort they've put in to the flight model which as you said is constantly evolving. Can't wait to see the sim in another 1-2 years how much further its come!
I use the Thrustmaster TPRs which are great - all metal and excellent build quality. I wish the toe brakes had a bit more resistance but all in all they are excellent. I am looking at getting the Brunner force feedback ones to complete the setup eventually.
@@av8rchris I also have the same TPR, however, to achieve a feeling that is closer still to the original pedals, I removed the centering springs, on the pedals and also the Hotas Joystick.
@@robertpelland5649 Interesting - never though about removing the centering spring. After how much i love the brunner yoke Im seriously considering their pedals as well. Might try that in the meantime.
You are correct - while I do have the push/pull style handles, I haven't found a way to get them to mount in to the home sim without losing other functionality.
That's certainly on my radar, although I may do the comparison in XP11. XP12 after a few days of using it is going to need some work, as well as support from the 3rd parties.
I was using custom weather which I think was 10-gusting 15 with infrequent gusts. I have seen where turbulence is a factor, although not in clouds it seems.
How are you trying to compare the sim plane you created with a twin-engine quadrant, Gear lever (Only one model of 172RG had retractable gear) and non-force feedback yoke with the real 172M or SP that has natural force feedback, where the primer is not always required anyway and unpredictable things can happen, like power peaks that blows a fuse, or elevator stuck, or basically anything else? Flight sim is for fun or procedure practice not for training... The truth is, C172xx is way more difficult on a flight sim than on a real plane, despite the fact you will survive all of your stupidity, lack of training and knowledge playing on a flight sim and you most likely would kill yourself on a real plane while trying some crazy manoeuvres. Flightsim is a perfect tool for IFR practice, general navigation and so on. These days it is great sightseeing tool thanks to photogrammetry but cannot be directly compared to a real plane.
I think your overthinking the purpose of the video - it was a 'for fun' video to compare how the flight model loosely relates to the real aircraft. The twin quadrant is just a usb controller that I'm using in place of the typical push/pull style found on the Cessna as the one I have doesn't fit quite right with the home sim build. Same goes for the gear lever, this works with other airplanes, and not for the 172. My home sim is not meant to be a replica C172 in any way. My yoke actually IS force feedback, capable of 24 lbs of pitch and 4.5 lbs of roll force. All that is irrelevant as this is a home based game/sim for fun and not used for any training. I use it to stay comfortable with the G1000's and instrument procedures as well as comms with ATC networks such as Pilotedge, not practicing maneuvers - we keep that to the real thing with a CFI on board.
@@av8rchris The title suggested a comparison between these two. I just pointed out visual differences, some of them are going to have a huge impact on the comparison, even if it was for fun, and I do believe you as I did compare C172 as well in reality straight after MSFS2020 hit the market. What I want to point out is the ability to practice procedures of all sorts. Unfortunately, G1000 on the sim is not good enough for practising as many functions are missing. ATC procedures are also incomplete and wrong. for example, try to make a PAN PAN call on MAYDAY. It is not implemented in the sim yet. Try to request HI-LO right out... And so on... If you use forced feedback yoke and rudder, you can actually practice some manoeuvres. They should feel similar to a real flight. But general cockpit to compare particular machine is not a great idea, that is my conclusion when I was using generic CH yoke and rudders and power quadrant from sitek... I did like your video, and I think it is a great idea to compare real views with those from the simulator. Show similarities and differences or even errors (Like Toronto CN Tower that looks more like a rocket...).
It was more so to be a comparison of the MSFS 172 to the real thing, not to my home simulator so to speak, thats just what I used to fly the sim. As for the G1000 - have you tried the G1000 NXi from Working Title? It's a fantastic unit that I've found to match the real world G1000's I've used - with the exception of any of the systems pages of course. The stock G1000 in MSFS is horrible though however! The stock ATC is also horrible - i stick to Pilotedge & Vatsim for my online ATC interactions and procedures! Thanks for watching!
@@av8rchris Just downloaded NXi, it is way better than its predecessor, thank you for this suggestion. I agree that ATC in MSFS is simply speaking terrible, but there is hope that Asobo will improve it in the future. I must admit the physics of the C172 feels somewhat similar to the real plane and is not worse than X-Plane 11. I hope to see more of your videos!
I replied on a few of the comments. Awesome comments, and awesome post. The Cessna 172 and the Cessna 152 are both really near and dear to my heart, so this is definitely a video that I seriously appreciate. The comments are excellent, and it is great to see perspectives from other’s real world experience.
Thanks for the feedback and thanks for watching! I've been a fan of the 172 since I was a teenager and I went up in one for a sight seeing tour of upstate NY. Never got time in the 152 due to W&B restrictions with me and my instructor unfortunately. I hear its a blast to fly!
That was one of the coolest flight sim videos I have watched. Love your green screen setup.
Thanks!
Agreed, it was also great to have a real pilot not be condescending about how poor the MSFS flight models are compared to the real thing like so many IRL pilots on the official forum!
Thanks! This sims had its share of issues for me sure but there's no reason to toss it in the trash. It's a fairly capable sim overall - and from what I'm seeing in SU10 so far, its getting ALOT better. Does every plane fly great - no, some do feel toyish, but overall alot of them are at the very least good enough. For a home sim that should be fine for most people. I feel as more 3rd party aircraft come out and the sime matures - its going to be a great time for the home simmer!
I don’t want to be picky but you did the same thing a couple of times. When the plane was in the stall and starting to drop a wing you corrected with aileron instead of your feet. Really had that drilled in to me during my training, just hate to see you do it in the real thing and end up in a spin 🙂! Great video though!
That’s a really good observation actually that I didn’t even notice. It’s been a while now since I’ve practiced stalls and such since all my training had been primarily ifr now. Looking at it again (not to make an excuse) it almost looked like I pulled it over when reaching for the flaps. Obviously not something I want to do. I think it may be time to practice again next time I’m up with my instructor and get that muscle memory back! Thanks for watching and thank you for the feedback! Edit: nevermind i did it on the power on also. Gonna def practice recoveries again next time I’m up.
Take a taildragger course like I did at Brookhaven airport. That will wake up them feet 😂
I was based out of Republic as well when I lived in NY
@@av8rchris Your response to pk3012's gentle critique made me trust the rest of your video that much more. Too many people get defensive, and your professional and respectful acceptance of ideas from a peer is rare and appreciated. Subbed and thanks.
FWIW, I started my PPL yesterday, and we have a few more family members who will soon follow. We are going to build a simulator. Your recent experience will be helpful.
Thanks - really appreciate your feedback! Good luck on your PPL and your sim!
Thank you very much for the studio!
Thanks for watching!
Absolutely loved this video. I will mention it on my next live stream. Really well done
Glad you liked it and thanks! Ill have to stop by and check it out!
Awesome video and great home setup! Loved seeing the side-by-side with the commentary.
Thanks! I have a series starting that’s going to be covering all the components of the simulator starting with the tbm panel today. Be sure to check it out!
The biggest difference I found between the sim and real 172 is trimming. In the sim I found the airplane needs a lot of fine adjustment to keep it flying straight and level. The pitch seems more sensitive than the real plane. Which flight model did you use on the sim: Legacy or Modern?
I use modern flight model. I agree but also in general any sim I've used seem harder to fly then the real thing. Im guessing it has something to do with control sensitivities and quality of those components. Since I've switched to the Brunner force feedback yoke its certainly gotten way closer to the real thing, but still in sim trimming for straight and level can require some patience.
That is true. I can trim a real one with the smallest movement. I do use the trim wheel quite a bit in the various sims.
In MSFS the Cessna looks like a train on rails ... 🫤
I saw this in my recommend and wow your flight sim setup is awesome.
Thanks for watching! Keep an eye out as over the next few weeks I'll be releasing some deep dive videos on the various components and setup!
Very nice video, the C172 is getting better, I agree the takeoff is backwards for the p factor on takeoff.
100% Winds down the runway I'm on left rudder to hold center - sometimes alot of it. Add a crosswind with some weathervaning and it can even be hard to hold on the runway at all. There also seems to be some weird crosswind characteristics. I can fly final with normal crabbing or side slip technique, but it seems either entering ground effect or just past ground effect you need opposite cross wind controls or get shifted way off centerline. I'd have to test this further with custom weather and run a few laps to be 100% of whats going on though. I find it much harder to land upwind wheel first for sure in this sim vs other sims or real world conditions.
Fun fact from my flight test & simulation minor i think in university: Simulating ground handling of an aircraft is actually one of the hardest behaviors to get right even for Level-D manufactures.
Interesting! I can't imagine the code that goes in to anything related to creating a flight simulator. I imagine this is quite challenging!
Nice comparison video. In my real world experience doing power off stalls in the Skyhawk, that nose drop looks about right to me. Of course there are many different factors involved in any particular scenario. I flew out of KFRG as well when I lived in NY. Love flying on Long Island 😊
Thanks! Yea it seems pretty spot on. Obviously as you said there a ton of other factors but all in all, its pretty good.
I was wondering about the nose drop also. Because the thing is for me, in the real airplane, you can’t study the exact behavior of the pitch as well since you’re sitting inside of this box that is actually falling and you’re focused on recovering.
So there is the possibility that your comfort level sitting on a simulator at home and not having the physical forces exerted on you, gives you a lot more mental sharpness to focus on the actual behavior. It’s really hard to say if that one’s 100% accurate or not.
Thanks for the feedback
No problem - it was fun overlaying the footage and seeing how close they perform!
Great video and a fantastic sim setup there. I was surprised to see on the real approach that the plane bounces around more than the sim and needs constant correcting.
Yep, that's something I feel pretty much all the current sims lack are thermals. As your coming in over different surface types you can get different updrafts, slight wind changes as the surface winds hit trees, buildings ect. MSFS is def getting there though! With the new gliders update I'm thinking we should start to 'feel' thermals in the sim now. Thanks for watching!
yes, excellent video. Again, I agree with the response and the post. One of my least favorite types of air fields to land that are the ones that are surrounded very close to the runway by trees. The reason I say this is because on the approach you get a feel for the winds and get everything adjusted properly with your yaw and everything else to compensate, and then, as soon as you break that tree line, the way the wind is blowing completely changes on you, when you’re a mere 40 feet off the ground.
This has led to a couple of rather dicey landings for me, especially when I was doing my initial solos many many years ago.
one item that would be interesting …. two actually:
1. turning stall
2. un-coordinated turn, resulting in a spin.
The second one is harder to duplicate in a real 172, but a 152 is absolutely unforgiving. I have not managed to duplicate these, the spin especially, as well in the simulator.
Have you tried?
SEL cert here, also. C-152, C-172, Diamond DA-20.
I dont think I've tried those in sim either. IRL I've only done the turning stall, never experienced a spin in the real thing. I will say I feel the 172 seems to want to drop one wing more than the other fairly often in MSFS vs the real thing. For most flying situations it feels pretty good though.
@@av8rchris back when I was doing my flight training, my flight instructor was having a hard time convincing me of the importance of a coordinated turn…. He finally just decided to stop saying anything and let me find myself in a spin the hard way a couple of times.
needless to say, I understand the importance turn coordination. nothing like being absolutely weightless, watching your pin float off of your knee pad, and watching the altimeter lose about 500 feet in a second, to drive that point home.
@@johntaylor2433 I'd say that should certainly do the trick! I wanted to experience a spin but my instructor said the school wouldn't allow him to demonstrate. Not sure how true or not or if there was some other reason but maybe one day. I'd like to at least know what to expect if i ever messed up bad enough to end up in one (which i hope never happens!)
As former PPL-er, I too did the comparison. I also tried steep turns as max bank angle 60, and that also is pretty realistic compared to the real thing. ;-)
Once a pilot always a pilot Marcel! I've done steep turns and other maneuvers as well and its pretty realistic indeed!
Could you explain how you got the multi-monitor to set up?
It's built in to MSFS as of SU10. Its under the experimental menu.
@@av8rchris I got it to work. Thanks!
Thx for the comparison! In my experience I agree that the power settings and overall handling on the sim is really well done. I do not have the set-up you have and I am flying older 172s and I have even more trouble on the sim to figure out when to flare than on the real thing.
I agree that the home sim is probably best for practicing procedures and that stuff and that the "feel of the pants" feeling, turbulence, Gs and all that need to be learned up in the air!
Great video!
100% agree! The home sims been keeping me sharp between instrument lessons and staying comfortable on the comms ect on pilotedge and vatsim. If I was going to rate difficulty on home sim landing, I'd say single monitor the hardest, the home sim triple monitor is medium, and VR flying easiest. Flying in VR you just get that depth perception you don't get with anything else, well, aside from real life of course! I just wish it was easier to do IFR procedures in a VR headset, interacting with the ipad charts ect.
@@av8rchris Yes I agree with the VR thing its cool and I am a 3D geek but I like flying by the seat of my pants trying to navigate using maps ETC radio beacon /GPS and all that is not easy when under the hood. Just setting auto Pilot and having a coffee is kinda boring.
Same - I've had way too many headsets at this point lol. I love VR flying just much harder for procedures and knobs.
Good video. I am also a real-life C172S pilot. What I don’t like about the sim is that--when on approach and when flaring-the airplane is stiff as a board. There is no rolling of the wings (back and forth) ever so slightly. Even in your landing, watch the roll that happens in the real airplane video (at 10:07). Notice the sim at this time…barely moving.
Good point. I can’t tell if that’s flight model or lackluster weather in this sim. I have experienced that wing rock but very infrequent where real world happens more often. Glad you enjoyed the video!
also, in the real world the plan descends at a much greater angle.. in the sim he just smoothly coasted in. Maybe he didn't match altitudes just right.. but I've definitely felt in the real thing that you angle forward quite a bit more.
100%! The angle of attack is a much more nose down in the real plane vs MSFS. Xplane seems to get this right but MSFS not so much at least on most (all?) of the default aircraft.
@@av8rchris oh.. is it because the pilot is trying to maintain a certain speed and MSFS will give him that speed with a much higher nose?
Sort of - it seems MSFS may not simulate the changes in the wing when flaps are extended but instead simulate some sort of extra lift/drag so it doesn't allow for the AoA change. Boldmethod.com has a great article on what happens to actual wings when flaps are extended. You can search "Flaps angle of attack" - the article has good details!
These tests are cool. The ground handling issue in my mind is due to wind and ground grip, if there is SLIGHTEST wind from the right the plane wants to weathervane to the right so you need left rudder. I think this was little bit improved on SU X, but still it feels like there is no grip between tires and runway. Very common in all flight sims imo. Anyway, i also think that the MSFS default C172 and C152 are incredibly good planes for default planes! Beating almost every payware stuff from the legacy sims (FSX etc).
Ground handling seems to be an issue for all sims for sure. Xp seems to have a better handle on it but msfs will get there eventually. 100% what we have no is light years ahead of what we had. I can’t wait to see what folks like a2a are capable of now with this platform!
I think you are spot on with the ground handling. I have the same issue, in both the 172 and the 152. They did not model the gyroscopic precession very well.
@@johntaylor2433 Yep, had this again last night with a slight cross wind, the weathervaning almost makes you need the opposite correction you'd need in real life. Id have to do some more testing. I know Xp11 felt spot on after I came home from xwind training one day during PPL.
Great video. I live a few miles directly south of that airport runway. Pity there isn’ an update for that airport and Long Island :(
I know - I’m always on the lookout for an updated frg! Especially now since they did the runway move project last year. Fellow LIer! Thanks for watching!
Thank you.
Very welcome - thanks for watching!
So irritated that there isn’t a steam gauge model besides the 152. MS still treating this as more of an arcade game when they’re so close to a FANTASTIC sim. Still has its place and I use it a lot, but such a missed opportunity.
And good LORD what did this setup cost you!!??
They have a steam 172 - they just put it behind the premium/deluxe versions unfortunately. Rumor has it the 172 steam combined with the new WB-Sim 172 Classic enhancement really gets on par. I haven't had a chance to put it through its paces yet though but will soon.
As for the cost - I'm not sure I full want to know yet lol. I'm doing a series on this channel taking a deep dive in to all the components. Next Thursday is going to be the final video where I cover construction and cost breakdown.
Nice comparison, I have 3 55 Inch curved tvs. 4k on a 6 DOF motion platform, it will be nice if Asobo has a remove "dash" soon in cockpit mode. But I am happy they gave us a 180 * view!
Wow awesome! I was debating on the 6 DOF platform idea and just staying with VR but ultimately went to this. Which 6 DOF platform did you go with?
@@av8rchris I built my own and hybrid 8" actuators I modified with AC servo motors th-cam.com/video/I2CcVEYFYIA/w-d-xo.html and using Thanos AMC AASD 15A Servo Motion Controller, Its good motion. Using Ians BFF motion Software for flight and SIMtools for cars roller coaster etc.
Key difference can now be solved with the C172 realism mod from Just flight, check it out!
I just picked it up yesterday. Gonna sit down with it and put it through its paces but I already like some of what I've seen!
Just Flight, WB-Sim has a study level addon, but I think it is for the non G1000 version.
Yep, I picked it up recently and plan on putting it through its paces. I heard they had a RW pilot tweak the flight model and such so I'm curious to see the differences!
@@av8rchris Nice would love to see your thoughts on it.
Interesting to know the approximate cost of the sim setup you have or more information as you would want to reveal.
I actually plan on covering all the details, right down to the (Im not sure I want to know the full total) cost lol. I have a playlist on the channel called 'Home simulator tour series' which every Thursday will be releasing a video covering some aspect of the sim build. The Realsim gear TBM panel is up and this Thursday Ill be covering the Brunner yoke, it's software and the Thrustmaster pedals I have. Thanks for watching!
Im curious to see how other sims compare or other payware in other sims such as the default x-plane vs payware x-plane vs accusim in p3d etc.
It's been forever since I've used P3D but I do plan on doing a few more comparisons between the modded 172 in MSFS, as well as the stock and AFL 172NG in XP 12, once 12 releases!
@@av8rchris awesome to hear it! Check out justflights 172 for msfs as well, just released
Greetings, I have seen this review of yours of the Cessna 172 G1000 base plane and the paid Cessna 172 WB. I would like to tell me which one do you think is closer to reality?
I haven’t flown the wb in awhile so not sure if there’s any significant changes to the flight model but around when I made this video is supposedly used the stock 172 6 pack fm. Personally I felt the g1000 to be closer flight model wise. I’m guessing because the g1000 version uses the CFD model I believe.
I am looking forward comparsion between xp12 vs RW
You and me both! Once XP12 is out and the AFL 172 is updated, I plan on doing a video with the stock 172 and the AFL 172 to see how those all compare to the real thing and to each other.
One think notice is the lack of any slight turbulence. In the real plane you notice the entire plsne/dash moving around while the sim cockpit appears unrealistically smoothet.
Maybe always try adding light turbulence to addtgst little detail for realism.
I agree - weather needs a bit of work but getting better. Id like to see some turbulence in the clouds especially.
@@av8rchris I've heard when a tip of your wing touches a cumulus cloud you'll feel moderate turbulence in a small GA plane, is that true?
It really depends on the cloud and conditions but there is most certainly turbulence. It’s one of the reasons I’m looking for as much actual IMC as I can get during my instrument training.
The real plane absolutely feels turbulence, and in my humble opinion, it feels it a lot worse than a large plane.
Turbulence that on large plane (I’m talking about Boeing 737s things like that) would barely register as a vibration, feel like serious earthquake in a little 172.
I’ve had a few instances where I felt like every filling in my mouth got rattled out.
Can you do the same test with the X-Plane 12 ?
I am planning on it. I’m waiting on xp12 to mature a bit as there seems to be some issues with the flight model at the moment. I actually provided feedback to the devs so we’ll see what comes of it. At the moment there’s way too much drag when you cut the power and you sink like a rock resulting in really hard and short landings.
how did you build your sim?
At a high level my cousin is good at wood working/construction and built a platform with walls to mount everything to. I’m doing an in depth series on the channel here where I’m going in to all the details of it. Look for the playlist home simulator tour series. Next video is Thursday!
Awesome video 👍
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed!
Do you have the virtual cockpit and then extend it to the 3 displays? Very nice sim setup!
Yep! It uses the Sim Update 10 native multi monitor setup to place the image on the screens with proper geometry. Then I have all the hardware setup so I pretty much never need to click on the VC.
@@av8rchris if I have the SimUpdate 10 but an average PC (Nvidia GT730)with 12 GB RAM. Fsx works great with no jitter, just trying to see how far I can push my PC.
I took my flight training at republic!
Awesome!
Really great video, and a sick setup! I'm a simmer only, never even stepped foot into a real GA plane so it was fascinating to hear how they compare. Just Flight have released an add on for the Cessna 172 steam gauge that came with the MSFS premium and deluxe packs that is supposed to bring the electronics and instruments up to study level. You can flood the engine, foul the spark plugs, get damage and wear and tear and even break the prop if you land and fall forward.
If you have the steam gauge Cessna any chance you could do a comparison of that with the add on?
Thanks - glad you enjoyed! I just heard of the 172 steam gauge add-on recently. I've actually been debating on picking it up to put it through it's paces so now you have me curious on the comparison as well. I'll gladly do a comparison with that add-on and the real plane!
@@av8rchris Thanks! As a non IRL pilot I'd like to know if it picking it up will help me learn more about handling a real plane. I currently fly the G1000 model but I like the idea of learning some actual real aviation startup procedures and being required to fly the plane within its POH restraints.
It's one of the reasons I wanted to make this video in the first place. For years as a simmer only I wanted to know if I was doing anything right, or how the planes flew compared to real life ect. Now we have at least a basic idea! The home sims are really what you make of it - you can fly around 3rd person, or grab a study level GA aircraft and really learn the ins and outs! If your into live flight sim streams - Im about to go live on www.twitch.tv/av8rchris Hope to see you there!
I flew the 172 and pa28 in the real world and in VR this is as real as it gets . You do need good equipment
flight yoke, rudder pedals with toe brakes and a throttle quadrant.
I use the excellent CH stuff.
100%. I had the cheap Logitech/saitek yoke for years and landings were extremely hard due to the poor controls. Same with the logi pedals. Quality gear is important! Vr most certainly as real as it gets. I wish we had a bit wider fov though for vr and it’d be perfect.
@@av8rchris I must confess to having the Saitek cessna trim wheel for a more real experience.
Yes the FOV in VR is a problem but I'm sure in time this problem will be mostly resolved.
I agree - the tech will get better for sure. I heard the saitek trimwheel isnt bad though. Flight Velocity makes a replica ive been thinking of getting.
Nice video, could you make a comparison of Mfs Cessna 172 VR mode vs Real.
I'm not sure I follow - this was mainly a comparison of flight model not the home simulator vs the 172.
@@av8rchris Because in VR, The brain can sometimes delude you with movements that are not present in the simulator, but as a result of the effect of the three-dimensional image, the sounds of the plane, the surrounding wind, and your feeling that you are actually in the plane.
So more of a comparison of the situational awareness levels between VR and non-VR flying? Or rather the comparison on how VR flying equates to the real thing? I think I can come up with ideas for both actually.
Great video! Will you be doing comparison videos for the other models?
Most likely not - I have the majority of my time in the 172, and just a few hours across the warrior and archer. Haven't had enough time in those aircraft to really run a proper comparison for that. Who knows where IRL flying takes me - maybe one day!
What sofware do you use to run your three screen set up?
I use the sim's native built in multi-monitor support. X-Plane 11 has it already built in. For MSFS, it's in the Sim Update 10 beta which has the 'experimental' multi display options. I did a quick video on that here if your interested! th-cam.com/video/zq6eZhCjJ1s/w-d-xo.html
This is awesome. I just started training in a 172SP and it seems absolutely identical to the game’s version. At least to my beginner’s senses 😁
Congrats on starting your training! It certainly flies close enough - it’s just that takeoff ground roll and some other ground handling anomalies that could give you bad habits. The only other thing I noticed is crosswind landings seem to behave a bit differently in sim vs real thing so maybe that’s another video at some point (didn’t have crosswind footage in hand). This sim will excel for you at vfr cross countries when you get to that point in your training. My instructor told me what the airports were and I planned the route via charts - flew it in sim (in vr at the time). The next day when we flew it together for real I felt like I was already there. Every ground based visual reference matched up it was wild! Anyway - enjoy your training and safe flying!
@@av8rchris thanks Chris for all the info!
You should try WB-Sim - 172SP Classic Enhancement, it changes everything...
I picked it up actually but haven't had time to really sit down with it and put it through its paces. When I do I'll certainly run through another comparison!
@@av8rchris Im excited to see the video :)
@@franckcagnes6370 Im thinking I should have it out by next week!
Hi Captain, I have a question, do you think it is a problem to fly a plane, whether it is a light plane or an airline plane?
Sorry - I don't understand what you mean?
I asked you, do you think flying is difficult and challenging? I mean both light aircraft and large aircraft?
@@ehsanmikaeili9315 each aircraft has its challenges for sure. I’ve only flown light ga aircraft irl but in sim I’d say one of the things I noticed flying airliners is the difference in response and that everything happens much quicker. Theres obviously the complexity of systems too however once trained I imagine it’s not a challenge for trained airline pilots. One of my personal challenges was learning techniques to spot other planes, as that’s not something you typically need to do in sim and when you do they draw in a way you can easily spot them.
Did you notice an exaggerated left roll tendency?
I didn't think it was exaggerated, if I did I subconsciously corrected for it maybe. Ill have to pay attention next time I fly the 172.
How do you have multi monitor working? Is it the beta of the next release? Working fine?
Yep - works excellent in the SU10 beta - it should be releasing (i think) in another 2 weeks or so. I have some details in my video here: th-cam.com/video/zq6eZhCjJ1s/w-d-xo.html
It would be interesting to see another video like this but using the recently released JustFlight C172 Enhancement Mod. So far I think the mod is worth the $21 it costs, although some others feel it's a steep price to pay.
I was debating on doing a video comparing that mod, I've been looking for a 'study level' type 172 but was preferring g1000 since thats what im doing my instrument rating on. Not that you can't fly instrument on steam gauge its just the gns530/430 seem to be a little lack luster in their current state in MSFS. I may pick it up and put it through its paces to see how it stacks up and of course a video will follow!
@@av8rchris Sounds like a reasonable plan. I'll be interested in your take on this enhancement. If I'm not mistaken, I've noticed some liveries are not compatible. At least the Embry Riddle one doesn't appear to be.
I was just thinking the same thing as I watched this video. I watched an enhancement mod video recently as well and am definitely going to buy it. I already own the premium version of msfs 2020 so not sure if that helps with the price or not. I prefer the steam gauges with the garmin 530/430 as I am really into learning without the G1000 until maybe later when I am further along my learning path.
Its a good path. I started my IRL training on steam with the 530/430 then transitioned to G1000. My only issues really lie sim related as the 530/430 have a few quirks that don't exist on the real world units. Enter the G1000 NXi from WT and there's nothing I found that they can't do compared to real world, with the exception of the systems pages and stuff. Per one of the WT devs, he says it will be coming eventually as the sim now simulates GPS sat and SBAS using actual positions. Another positive note, they're doing the G3000 and 530/430 also, so we should be seeing some top quality stuff coming soon!
@@jeffwelch2587 I'm guessing rental of a 172 with the G1000 would be more expensive than the steam gauges (?), so most people early in training, keeping it within the budget, would be flying mostly steam gauges? I haven't flown in awhile, so I'm not sure this would be true. I suppose I could check the local flight school rental pricing.
Not bad for a completely stock aircraft, and is testament to the effort Asobo has put into the ever evolving flight model. I thank you for doing this video as it puts to bed this ridiculous notion that MSFS is no better than an XBOX game for kids, that some people from a different flight sim would have you believe. And I include the CEO of said company in that.
I bet you cannot wait for the A2A Cessna 172 to be released? Will take your sim to a whole new level. 😊👍
EDIT: Ah after reading your comments below, you're training on the G1000 and the A2A has steam gauges. 😊
Do you have the Working Title G1000 mod installed? It is absolute class.
The WT G1000 is top tier! Oh I still can't wait for the A2A 172, that's a guaranteed buy for me. Even though its steam I'm still able to use air manger to put those instruments on the PFD/MFD screens. That was the whole purpose of this as I was kind of curious if I matched speeds just how close or not a landing or takeoff would be, or if power settings matched for certain maneuvers. Does this replace real world flying - of course not, but it does show the effort they've put in to the flight model which as you said is constantly evolving. Can't wait to see the sim in another 1-2 years how much further its come!
I don't know, I've never taxied on ice skates in a 172
Maybe poor choice of words but definitely doesn't taxi like a piper!
Cool, what rudder pedals do you use?
I use the Thrustmaster TPRs which are great - all metal and excellent build quality. I wish the toe brakes had a bit more resistance but all in all they are excellent. I am looking at getting the Brunner force feedback ones to complete the setup eventually.
@@av8rchris I also have the same TPR, however, to achieve a feeling that is closer still to the original pedals, I removed the centering springs, on the pedals and also the Hotas Joystick.
@@robertpelland5649 Interesting - never though about removing the centering spring. After how much i love the brunner yoke Im seriously considering their pedals as well. Might try that in the meantime.
C-172 don't use Piper style Levers they use Push Pull Throttle, Mixture and Prop.
You are correct - while I do have the push/pull style handles, I haven't found a way to get them to mount in to the home sim without losing other functionality.
Thanks Cpt. Obvious
Unless it's the much older PA28s
This I actually did not know!
now do the X-Plane C172 REP from simcoders
That's certainly on my radar, although I may do the comparison in XP11. XP12 after a few days of using it is going to need some work, as well as support from the 3rd parties.
Not bouncy enough in the sim
I was using custom weather which I think was 10-gusting 15 with infrequent gusts. I have seen where turbulence is a factor, although not in clouds it seems.
How are you trying to compare the sim plane you created with a twin-engine quadrant, Gear lever (Only one model of 172RG had retractable gear) and non-force feedback yoke with the real 172M or SP that has natural force feedback, where the primer is not always required anyway and unpredictable things can happen, like power peaks that blows a fuse, or elevator stuck, or basically anything else?
Flight sim is for fun or procedure practice not for training...
The truth is, C172xx is way more difficult on a flight sim than on a real plane, despite the fact you will survive all of your stupidity, lack of training and knowledge playing on a flight sim and you most likely would kill yourself on a real plane while trying some crazy manoeuvres.
Flightsim is a perfect tool for IFR practice, general navigation and so on. These days it is great sightseeing tool thanks to photogrammetry but cannot be directly compared to a real plane.
I think your overthinking the purpose of the video - it was a 'for fun' video to compare how the flight model loosely relates to the real aircraft. The twin quadrant is just a usb controller that I'm using in place of the typical push/pull style found on the Cessna as the one I have doesn't fit quite right with the home sim build. Same goes for the gear lever, this works with other airplanes, and not for the 172. My home sim is not meant to be a replica C172 in any way. My yoke actually IS force feedback, capable of 24 lbs of pitch and 4.5 lbs of roll force. All that is irrelevant as this is a home based game/sim for fun and not used for any training. I use it to stay comfortable with the G1000's and instrument procedures as well as comms with ATC networks such as Pilotedge, not practicing maneuvers - we keep that to the real thing with a CFI on board.
@@av8rchris The title suggested a comparison between these two.
I just pointed out visual differences, some of them are going to have a huge impact on the comparison, even if it was for fun, and I do believe you as I did compare C172 as well in reality straight after MSFS2020 hit the market.
What I want to point out is the ability to practice procedures of all sorts.
Unfortunately, G1000 on the sim is not good enough for practising as many functions are missing. ATC procedures are also incomplete and wrong. for example, try to make a PAN PAN call on MAYDAY. It is not implemented in the sim yet. Try to request HI-LO right out... And so on...
If you use forced feedback yoke and rudder, you can actually practice some manoeuvres. They should feel similar to a real flight. But general cockpit to compare particular machine is not a great idea, that is my conclusion when I was using generic CH yoke and rudders and power quadrant from sitek...
I did like your video, and I think it is a great idea to compare real views with those from the simulator. Show similarities and differences or even errors (Like Toronto CN Tower that looks more like a rocket...).
It was more so to be a comparison of the MSFS 172 to the real thing, not to my home simulator so to speak, thats just what I used to fly the sim. As for the G1000 - have you tried the G1000 NXi from Working Title? It's a fantastic unit that I've found to match the real world G1000's I've used - with the exception of any of the systems pages of course. The stock G1000 in MSFS is horrible though however! The stock ATC is also horrible - i stick to Pilotedge & Vatsim for my online ATC interactions and procedures! Thanks for watching!
@@av8rchris Just downloaded NXi, it is way better than its predecessor, thank you for this suggestion.
I agree that ATC in MSFS is simply speaking terrible, but there is hope that Asobo will improve it in the future.
I must admit the physics of the C172 feels somewhat similar to the real plane and is not worse than X-Plane 11.
I hope to see more of your videos!
@@michaelksiezopolski I realized I never got back to you - glad your enjoying the NXi!