Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest cliffie1931

How Does X-plane V9 Compare With Fsx?

Recommended Posts

I tried X-Plane version 7 some while back but soon returned to FS.Has anybody tried the latest Version 9? If so how do you rate these two Sims?Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I tried X-Plane version 7 some while back but soon returned to FS.Has anybody tried the latest Version 9? If so how do you rate these two Sims?
X-Plane................sensation of flying on a magic carpet, at least that's my impression. Some think this is better flight dynamics, but most are not pilots. I do fly and own an airplane.X-Plane seems to have little in the sense of 'feel", when it comes to dampening, interia, and mass. Feel is a combination of whats seen on the screen, combined with ajoystick/yokes spring resistance. Small delays impart that sense of feel. However, X-Plane seems to react to immediate stick movements. I just don't sense differences betweensmall and large aircraft. But this does give X-Plane an advantage. Since there is little in the way of interia, and X-Plane model can be more realistic when leveling out from a high speed roll. The interia of MSFS can be a bit too much, and you have to judge when to release the stick.I do own and use both X-Plane as well as FSX. In some areas, X-Planes beats FSX's topography and visa-versa. I have a great interest in flight simulation throughout the Mt. West.I'd also rate the default X-Plane Cessna 172 and default FSX 172 as being rather close. Both have good VC's and get you from point A to B with realistic control. Personally, I prefer planes withhigher performace.X-Plane can usually beat FSX in ground performance, because MSFS dumbed the simulation down a bit after FS2002 for a frame rate increase. This is mostly the action of air over the horizontal tail while still on the ground. However FS9/FSX's flight models can actually portray known flying qualities of a real aircraft, using lookup tables, better, than can X-Plane with it's blade element theory. X-Plane works well for basic design, but needs brilliance in tweaking to achive known results. Many if not most of X-Plane designers don't seem to have that brilliance. In short, the myth of X-Planes superior flight dynamics, is only that.............a myth. If this wasn't so, I'd have left MSFS years ago.MSFS is years ahead of X-Plane when it comes to FMCs & GPS. This is 3rd party software, and X-Plane just doesn't have the user base to support the investment and time required to program realistic products. I don't know if they'll ever cath up.The bottom line for me............is that I own and use X-Plane 8/9, FS9, and FSX. The software is just to cheap to quibble about it. Each sim has some definate advantages.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
X-Plane................sensation of flying on a magic carpet, at least that's my impression. Some think this is better flight dynamics, but most are not pilots. I do fly and own an airplane.X-Plane seems to have little in the sense of 'feel", when it comes to dampening, interia, and mass. Feel is a combination of whats seen on the screen, combined with ajoystick/yokes spring resistance. Small delays impart that sense of feel. However, X-Plane seems to react to immediate stick movements. I just don't sense differences betweensmall and large aircraft. But this does give X-Plane an advantage. Since there is little in the way of interia, and X-Plane model can be more realistic when leveling out from a high speed roll. The interia of MSFS can be a bit too much, and you have to judge when to release the stick.I do own and use both X-Plane as well as FSX. In some areas, X-Planes beats FSX's topography and visa-versa. I have a great interest in flight simulation throughout the Mt. West.I'd also rate the default X-Plane Cessna 172 and default FSX 172 as being rather close. Both have good VC's and get you from point A to B with realistic control. Personally, I prefer planes withhigher performace.X-Plane can usually beat FSX in ground performance, because MSFS dumbed the simulation down a bit after FS2002 for a frame rate increase. This is mostly the action of air over the horizontal tail while still on the ground. However FS9/FSX's flight models can actually portray known flying qualities of a real aircraft, using lookup tables, better, than can X-Plane with it's blade element theory. X-Plane works well for basic design, but needs brilliance in tweaking to achive known results. Many if not most of X-Plane designers don't seem to have that brilliance. In short, the myth of X-Planes superior flight dynamics, is only that.............a myth. If this wasn't so, I'd have left MSFS years ago.MSFS is years ahead of X-Plane when it comes to FMCs & GPS. This is 3rd party software, and X-Plane just doesn't have the user base to support the investment and time required to program realistic products. I don't know if they'll ever cath up.The bottom line for me............is that I own and use X-Plane 8/9, FS9, and FSX. The software is just to cheap to quibble about it. Each sim has some definate advantages.L.Adamson
Just the sort of review I was hoping for and, for my purposes, better than reviews I've read in magazines. Thank you very much.Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites