What a stupid argument to waste half a dozen pages on.
"Is/isn't a sim" is a daft distinction to try and make. The ED environment simulates things. That's what virtual environments do. The argument is really about the fidelity of the simulation, and whether that fidelity is sufficient - which is where things get subjective.
In terms of the flight model in open space (normal space only, that's the only environment where we have non-simulated "reality" to compare to so it's the only aspect of fidelity we can evaluate) we've a number of aspects to consider. Let's start with the simplest. FA-off.
Linear and angular acceleration are applied according to our control inputs. The mechanics of the game dictate limits to the flight envelope in terms of absolute linear and angular velocity but within those limits Newtonian mechanics are largely respected. It would be hard to envision any way in which FD could make FA-off flight a more faithful simulation of space flight unless future developments alter the underlying mechanics such that the available envelope gets larger.
But what about FA-on? Enabling this fly-by-wire system obviously departs radically from Newtonian flight. That's ok, it's supposed to. As we can see from the comments of RL pilots like 777Driver, it doesn't even require any handwavium to draw the parallels between the behaviour of RL FBW systems and ED FA-on.
All-in-all, this leads me, personally, to conclude that the folks DEMANDING greater fidelity in the flight model to "qualify as a sim" are full of thick brown stuff. But it is subjective and YMMV. It's certainly not worth squabbling about.
"Is/isn't a sim" is a daft distinction to try and make. The ED environment simulates things. That's what virtual environments do. The argument is really about the fidelity of the simulation, and whether that fidelity is sufficient - which is where things get subjective.
In terms of the flight model in open space (normal space only, that's the only environment where we have non-simulated "reality" to compare to so it's the only aspect of fidelity we can evaluate) we've a number of aspects to consider. Let's start with the simplest. FA-off.
Linear and angular acceleration are applied according to our control inputs. The mechanics of the game dictate limits to the flight envelope in terms of absolute linear and angular velocity but within those limits Newtonian mechanics are largely respected. It would be hard to envision any way in which FD could make FA-off flight a more faithful simulation of space flight unless future developments alter the underlying mechanics such that the available envelope gets larger.
But what about FA-on? Enabling this fly-by-wire system obviously departs radically from Newtonian flight. That's ok, it's supposed to. As we can see from the comments of RL pilots like 777Driver, it doesn't even require any handwavium to draw the parallels between the behaviour of RL FBW systems and ED FA-on.
All-in-all, this leads me, personally, to conclude that the folks DEMANDING greater fidelity in the flight model to "qualify as a sim" are full of thick brown stuff. But it is subjective and YMMV. It's certainly not worth squabbling about.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
