Hey
lefthanddownabit:
Some people seem to think sims like X-Plane are inherently more realistic because shape determines aerodynamic characteristics. This simulation method is actually no more likely to produce a better result than the data table model. The difference in performance is almost certainly due to the more complex aero model and equations of motion used in X-Plane. MSFS is highly simplified.
With the exception of your 2nd and last sentences, your quote here (the underlined part) is the crux of the issue. That is, whether a more accurate and more realistic simulation can be achieved through the use of a complex set equations of motion, modified by coefficients derived directly from flight test of the subject airplane – OR – if one can be provided via a set of look-up tables, populated with what someone
thinks (or for that matter, has knee-board data to prove) is representative of the airplane under varying sets of circumstances. Several decades ago the simulation industry went to the aerodynamic model; and quite frankly, I think that is why X-plane has a pretty nice product. Whether or not a COTS X-plane package can be used with flight test derived coefficients (or public domain values in the same areas), and provide the necessary accuracy and realism for a regulator to accept the result as adequate substitution for the airplane, I think remains to be seen – although it probably won’t be terribly long before someone does just exactly that and some regulatory authority somewhere around the world will be confronted with making that decision.