cbff33 wrote:No but physics are physics. And that does not change. The only thing that changes is coding depending on what one uses as a base code. But the physics that need to be coded, those do not change. Between TS, and now TSW, it is very apparent they are taking an MSTS approach to arrive at some form of nutty physics coding that they hope will simulate the feeling. Don't know how these programmers after what, 9 years, can't even begin to get close with the physics. The only people close to getting it right are the 3rd party devs.
Well....could it have something to do with the fact that the "physics" of actual trains in the world and the "physics" of light-emitting diodes are actually simply NOT the same. You do realize these are simulations. There aren't actually any heavy objects moving around on our computer screens. This is a simulation, a representation of something that is of a radically different kind of being. It is one thing to say that the inertia of a given mass is known and can be calculated, but the simulation doesn't actually have anything to do with inertia or mass. It's all about moving pixels around. I can't think of any simulation that gets that right, not flight simulators, not driving/racing simulators, nothing.
You can't "code" physics. You "code" representations of physics, and that's a voodoo world, if you ask me. EVERYONE "arrives at some form of nutty physics coding they hope will simulate the feeling."
And that's even before you add in the fact that WE aren't actually moving either. We watch simulated movement on a screen. Part of the reason that never "feels right" is that in the real world, movement of the sort simulated has effects on our bodies. That's the "physics" that no amount of coding can simulate.
The best anyone can do is try to simulate the motion of visual data to prompt the kind of kinesthetic experience we all have in the actual world. The more successful the visual model, the more likely it will be to call on our memories in ways that suggest the lived experience. That means slowing or speeding up the movement on the screen in particular ways. Programmers can try to tie that change in motion to calculations about what is happening in simulated mechanical systems, but all such efforts are algorithms of a sort, approximating without replicating the physics of the world being modeled.
A2A tries to do this, with some interesting success, in FSX/P3D with their hydraulic and propeller physics engines. But trust an old GA pilot when I tell you it ain't that close!
Expecting anything other than this betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of physics.
It actually runs smoother than TS2017.
