Where is the wear?
-
I looked through the manual and still have questions about how the persistant wear is implemented. The publicly released blurb is that the caravan has "persistent wear, MTBF, or scheduled failures." How can you see the wear status "for nearly every component in the aircraft" and how is it implemented? On the tablet, MTBF and Scheculed failures seem to be the only two options. So how does the persistant wear work? For me this the gold standard of sim. Lowering the flaps out of limits, increasing failure risk. Aggressive control inputs degrading control surfaces. For nearly every component of the aircraft. This seems like an instant buy; however, where is the wear?
-
Black Square planes don't have this kind of wear. It's just a limited amount of mismanagement failures plus purely random failures (with the probability based on the MTBF).
-
Black Square planes don't have this kind of wear. It's just a limited amount of mismanagement failures plus purely random failures (with the probability based on the MTBF).
@Tadeus72 And also engine condition and consumables, like oxygen. I have wanted to add enhanced persistence and other aircraft ownership features for years, but, as you may have encountered, MSFS's state saving isn't consistent enough within the simulator to make this reliable, which I think would be quite frustrating at the moment. I've been asking Asobo to look into state saving consistency for years, but to no avail, sadly. It seems to be a local phenomenon, however, since some users report no problems, while others have found their virus checkers or router settings to be the culprit.
-
I was considering also mentioning the engine status actually, but my experience is that it's also more "tear" than "wear". Most of my piston BSQ planes have it still on 100% despite having many hours logged and being flown in demanding conditions, often on the edge of safe limits. It's only the turboprop ones that have it slowly degrade, but only because of the MSFS weather that loves to suddenly change during cruise, which immediately exceeds the temp limits, so it's kind of a natural process with time because it's hard to avoid
And I know about the limitations and your efforts, just making it clear, because the author here clearly looked for a different kind of wear. Still, there are many deep simulation aspects that only BSQ provides, so I'm positive even people loving wear and tear will sooner or later make the jump
And when it comes to state saving. The "Restart" trick seems to work consistently for me for many flight hours now, everything gets nicely saved (well other than the frequencies that never worked for me despite what the manual says)
-
Black Square planes don't have this kind of wear. It's just a limited amount of mismanagement failures plus purely random failures (with the probability based on the MTBF).
@Tadeus72 Darn this is frustrating based on the marketing. The Blurb I quoted is from almost every news website that has an article on the Caravan. And the other quote is from page 9 of the manual "The
failure system allows for persistent wear, MTBF, and scheduled failures for nearly every component in the aircraft." -
That quote is also on the product page.
-
@Tadeus72 Darn this is frustrating based on the marketing. The Blurb I quoted is from almost every news website that has an article on the Caravan. And the other quote is from page 9 of the manual "The
failure system allows for persistent wear, MTBF, and scheduled failures for nearly every component in the aircraft."What can I say, I came to BKSQ planes from planes with very advanced wear/ownership and maintenance features, which I loved, both in MSFS and xplane before. It was hard to lose some of it, but there is so much more in those planes that you won't find anywhere else that nowadays I'm still flying Black Square more than anything else.
And coming back to the text, I understand it as the persistent wear being the engine status and the rest not being wear related (although a failure is going over to the next flights if you don't fix it. For a time I was flying a very damaged and quirky Starship through South America!). But yeah, could be clearer
-
What can I say, I came to BKSQ planes from planes with very advanced wear/ownership and maintenance features, which I loved, both in MSFS and xplane before. It was hard to lose some of it, but there is so much more in those planes that you won't find anywhere else that nowadays I'm still flying Black Square more than anything else.
And coming back to the text, I understand it as the persistent wear being the engine status and the rest not being wear related (although a failure is going over to the next flights if you don't fix it. For a time I was flying a very damaged and quirky Starship through South America!). But yeah, could be clearer
@Tadeus72 Indeed. I love Blacksquare aircraft. The best GA in MSFS currently. But the MTBF has always bugged me a bit. When I saw the promotional material I jumped because persistent wear implementation would be a game changer. That could put Blacksquare above peak FSX A2A. Just sad to see it being advertised as such. The quoted sentence has a specific meaning, its not about being stated unclearly. Thats why I posted the initial question because I was sure I was missing something.
-
@Tadeus72 Indeed. I love Blacksquare aircraft. The best GA in MSFS currently. But the MTBF has always bugged me a bit. When I saw the promotional material I jumped because persistent wear implementation would be a game changer. That could put Blacksquare above peak FSX A2A. Just sad to see it being advertised as such. The quoted sentence has a specific meaning, its not about being stated unclearly. Thats why I posted the initial question because I was sure I was missing something.
@Tadeus72 said in Where is the wear?:
although a failure is going over to the next flights if you don't fix it.
That's a good point, too. You could not repair the aircraft until every system has failed, which be quite an entertaining challenge to see how far you could get.
@steveonatorer said in Where is the wear?:
Just sad to see it being advertised as such. The quoted sentence has a specific meaning, its not about being stated unclearly.
I understand how you interpreted that sentence, but the meaning was that failures of each type are possible, rather than all failures being capable of all types. I sometimes find it difficult to fit descriptions of all the features in my aircraft into my advertising, especially when various marketplaces impose character limits. Although it's not what we're talking about here, the MSFS Marketplace administrators have actually re-written my descriptions, often choosing words and phrases that I would never use! Sorry you feel like the description was not adequate. When system descriptions in my manuals have been confusing in the past, I always ask my users how they would rewrite them for clarity, so please feel free to share your thoughts.
