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

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

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