Just curious, of the people posting about the advantages of X-Plane here, especially as it pertains to the flight modeling, how many are real pilots? I know Geoff and Larry are, and we all know where they stand, and I also know some myself that feel the same. I haven't though seen too many real pilots backing up the X-Plane claim, so I was wondering are there any here? I'm just a simmer like most others here (Although I do have 1 hour in a Mustang, and 2 in an AT-6) so I'm not qualified myself to make a judgment on the FM, but the real pilots are.

Nothing wrong with Austin promoting his product. Many of us now have X-Plane on the brain with the recent news. It is possible that X-Plane will be the last remaining flight sim. I picked up a copy at my local Best Buy on a whim. I must admit, I'm not impressed with these "ultra realistic" flight dynamics. I'm still looking for a freeware plane that flies reasonably well. Everything is so twitchy, and nothing seems to have any weight to it. I've tried configuring my controls. Helicopters are a blast with it though, which was worth the price for me. X-Plane has a lot going for it, but it still feels so incomplete after all these years still. I owned one of the earlier versions and things seem to be way behind in some areas. There are many things that someone coming from MSFS would expect, and be really disappointed with. However, if it got widespread developer support, who knows what it is capable of.

Just wait for the GNS WAAS to be released! this will be our first product on this platform. The learning curve is high, but the capabilities to interact with XPL at any stage of its rendering pipeline, as low level as any single pixel, is simply outstanding and exciting for me! imagine the benefits of what are 3d gauges in the VC in FS, but in 2D too?

This is very exciting news JeanLuc! It would seem that the X-Plane9 "platform" is very powerful for developers where as FS9/FSX has many limitations.There is a real momentum building for X-Plane and the release of your product(s) will help win many converts.I think many MSFS users and developers will soon realize that "FS11/FS-NEXT" is already with us. It's called X-Plane!

From what I've seen of the 9.22 demo, it's more technically more advanced than FSX in many areas, especially with regard to scenery and visuals.

I do have X-Plane 8 & 9. In regards to scenery, it just depends where. Someplaces FSX is the best, and X-Plane in others. Since I live in the Mountain West, it's the mountainous scenery that gets most of my attention in either sim. Personally, I like the X-Plane topography more than it's flight dynamics.As to your prior question regarding the X-Plane 172. It's okay. I've already mentioned in another thread, that it's a lot better than some simmersgive it credit. The same goes for the default FSX 172. Both of these planes will get you from point A to B with reasonable piloting techniques. A year ago or two, there was a comparison test between the FS9 172, the FS9 172 with the RealAir enhancement, and the X-Plane 172. Overall, the RealAir version got most things right. L.Adamson

This is very exciting news JeanLuc! It would seem that the X-Plane9 "platform" is very powerful for developers where as FS9/FSX has many limitations.There is a real momentum building for X-Plane and the release of your product(s) will help win many converts.I think many MSFS users and developers will soon realize that "FS11/FS-NEXT" is already with us. It's called X-Plane!

Are you kidding? With simconnect and FSUIPC you can do things in FSX that people have never though about. Look at PMDGs products complexity and how well modeled it is. There are no limitations with that, the only limitation PMDG had with FS was FS9 because on the forums they said that FS9 had to many limitations with the number of polygons and lights but in FSX they were able to do what they wanted.Also there is new verizon of an add-on for FSX being developed that is called EZDOK camera. You have to see it its amazing and it does stuff with the camera that you would never think are possible in FSX. I'll give you the link: http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=238642Also I think Geofa is right. All though I have never used X-Plane except getting the demo and then canceling the download. FS has a well developed SDK with lots of documentation and it makes it very easy for people to make add-ons or modify thing in the game. Look all the guages, instruments, FMS, avionics, etc. that people have been able to develop for FSX. The variety shows that it is possible to develop ANY avionics system.I also want to show everyone the screenshots from the RealAir scout pack. The 3D gauges in the package look AMAZING just by looking at screenshots. Also look at the screenshots from Eaglesoft's planes. It's amazing what you can develop with FSX. From a small Cessna 152 to a huge Boeing 747.Some interesting projects and already developed planes for FSX that look VERY nice:NLS A380 (In Development, looks like the most advanced A380 simulation so far!) http://nextlevel.wepax.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=5http://www.airsimmer.com/Eaglesoft Cirus SR22: http://www.eaglesoftdg.com/CSR22G3Tss.htmPiper PA30: http://www.eaglesoftdg.com/PTCss.htmReal Air Scout Pack w/ amazing 3D models: http://www.realairsimulations.com/scout07/...07_screenshots2

Are you kidding? With simconnect and FSUIPC you can do things in FSX that people have never though about. Look at PMDGs products complexity and how well modeled it is. There are no limitations with that, the only limitation PMDG had with FS was FS9 because on the forums they said that FS9 had to many limitations with the number of polygons and lights but in FSX they were able to do what they wanted.

I understand Simconnect/FSUPIC is used to extend the FSX/FS9 platform and is used by 3rd parties such as PMDG, LDS, HiFi etc etc.But from what Ive seen of the X-Plane SDK docs (plugins/scenery) it would seem XPlane9 is technically more advanced than FSX/FS9 in many areas. I think more 3rd party developers will start to appreciate that X-Plane is a very powerful "platform".I think it is an amazing effort that Austin (and his team) can release a major X-Plane version (almost) every year with several updates during the year.Also the MSFS franchise will never be updated. ACES are gone and there will never be a FS11, TS2 or ESP2. IMO if the flight simulation experience is to progress to greater heights then that future now lies with X-Plane.

It's amazing what you can develop with FSX. From a small Cessna 152 to a huge Boeing 747.

Yes FSX has thousands! Have a look at the add-ons available for X-Plane. http://x-plane.org/Also the Utility section is very interesting, there are tools to convert FS9/FSX scenery to X-Plane, a "Tile Proxy" type utility for Google Earth photo scenery, you can import Google SketchUp models into X-Plane, and so on... great stuff!

Why does everybody forget that MS has laid off it's workers, not Austin. He might well be looking for the ACES guys comming to work for him . Future is bright for X-plane. Sure a lot of work needs to be done to get it to the graphical level of FSX, but it can be done and probably will. Bad timing? Microsoft has bad timing. Bad timing to layoff people who are making profit. Ballmer is the guy you should be pointing at. He is the monster that has the nerves to get rid of people because there's is a deppresion going on, he's taking advantage from that. Nobody notices 1400 people while millions world wide lose their jobs. Thats imoral guys! And all this because the MS capo's are placing their bets on Xbox not because FS(X) doesn't make a profit (what if that strattegy fails?)

I understand Simconnect/FSUPIC is used to extend the FSX/FS9 platform and is used by 3rd parties such as PMDG, LDS, HiFi etc etc.IMO if the flight simulation experience is to progress to greater heights then that future now lies with X-Plane.

Yes, .......................maybe Austin can junk his 15 year old "blade element theory", hire some MSFS staff, and finally get some betterflight modeling with MSFS's "lookup tables!" :( And yes.............I'm serious!L.Adamson

It would seem that the X-Plane9 "platform" is very powerful for developers where as FS9/FSX has many limitations.

And I always hear that X-Plane has many limitations..............from the old timers. I give------------who has the most limitations? :( L.Adamson

As to your prior question regarding the X-Plane 172. It's okay. I've already mentioned in another thread, that it's a lot better than some simmersgive it credit. The same goes for the default FSX 172. Both of these planes will get you from point A to B with reasonable piloting techniques. A year ago or two, there was a comparison test between the FS9 172, the FS9 172 with the RealAir enhancement, and the X-Plane 172. Overall, the RealAir version got most things right.

I found the review you are talking about.Flight Dynamics: FSX and X-Plane battle it outThe response by Austin makes interesting readinghttp://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/xplane-news/message/1412As do the 6 pages of comments on the articlehttp://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?optio...mp;limitstart=0After getting a better understanding of the differences between MSFS and XPlane modeling, I prefer the way X-Plane does things. It would seem that X-Plane is actually modeling a lot more than MSFS can. Maybe its not perfect but neither is the MSFS approach.

Future is bright for X-plane.

I absolutely 100% agree! The future is X-Plane. FS9/FSX will die a slow death for sure because the MSFS platform WILL NEVER EVOLVE whereas X-Plane will continue to evolve.It's a simple matter of evolution and survival of the fittest!

Well I just ordered another copy of xplane last night to give my support. My wife had thrown the copy I bought last year out because it was sitting on the shelf collecting dust-I think it may have been even 9.0 because it was less than a year old.I'll give it another look as I have the demo the last few days-but the way I see it it has at least 3-4 years to catch up to anything close to what we have with fsx. I still don't like the flight models and since the way they are derived is unlikely to change I don't anticipate improvement there.Atc, cockpit instruments-both function and looks, 3d cockpits, outside/inside aircraft visuals, amount of available high quality add ons are all lacking right now. An add in market and a freeware base like fs is just not there yet. I find the user interface very clumsy and awkward but perhaps that is just me.Add the things in fsx that are just beginning to be explored now-such as missions and high res textures down to cm's and xplane has lots of catching up to do in almost every area, imho. Fsx has built in great potential for growth that leaves years of improvements to the core-even if not by microsoft.So I'll happily support it, and hope the best for it for the future. I suggest for the present $35 is it in everyone's interest to at least buy a copy. If you are not satisfied with it as I presently am not-think of it as an investment perhaps for the future.I would do a compare of the 1 Beech Baron for xplane that appears to be available, and the two shots I have above and the default Fsx Baron-but I see the link is broken and no one seems to know where it has gone.

After getting a better understanding of the differences between MSFS and XPlane modeling, I prefer the way X-Plane does things. It would seem that X-Plane is actually modeling a lot more than MSFS can. Maybe its not perfect but neither is the MSFS approach.

Happily, to make my own judgements; I live next to an airport, keep an airplane in a hangar at this airport, and usually fly it several times a week. I'll tell you right now, that the RealAir Marchetti SF260 can fly rings around anything from X-Plane! The RealAir has excellent rudder control which translates to excellent slips, spins, and aerobatic ability. Since I find the RealAir to be very believable and X-Plane usually annoying; then it must be MSFS that somehow models a lot more than X-Plane. To be blunt....................if I was stuck with only X-Plane, I'd quit simming altogether. But hey..................it's just my opinion! :)Lucky for me, I don't have to believe all the crap I read; since so much is just someones opinion, and perhaps biased. I just simply make comparisons to real life experience. IMO......MSFS wins!L.Adamson

So I'll happily support it, and hope the best for it for the future. I suggest for the present $35 is it in everyone's interest to at least buy a copy. If you are not satisfied with it as I presently am not-think of it as an investment perhaps for the future.

I bought X-Plane 8 from X-Plane org. & X-Plane 9 from Walmart. I figured that Austin needs 100LL money for his airplanes, and support it for that reason...L.Adamson

I'll tell you right now, that the RealAir Marchetti SF260 can fly rings around anything from X-Plane!

It sure does. In my opinion though, the RealAir flight model has been achieved with the help of years of experience on FS. I wonder what the same amount of experience would give once applied on XPL flight models. Even comparing stock FSX Baron and stock XPL Baron might not give a good sense of what the sim are capable of. I'd guess comparing a top-of-the-line flight model done in XPL and a best-of-breed flight model in FS, for similar aircraft a real pilot can judge with, would be a better test scenario.Nonetheless, there is one sim with potential to evolve, and another one now stuck where it is, and some comments in other threads about the capability for FS to scale and run on upcoming Windows OS/CPUs/GPUs show a potential limiting factor in the long run. When larabe hits the market, a sim capable of using it naively will shine.

Happily, to make my own judgements; I live next to an airport, keep an airplane in a hangar at this airport, and usually fly it several times a week. I'll tell you right now, that the RealAir Marchetti SF260 can fly rings around anything from X-Plane! The RealAir has excellent rudder control which translates to excellent slips, spins, and aerobatic ability. Since I find the RealAir to be very believable and X-Plane usually annoying; then it must be MSFS that somehow models a lot more than X-Plane. To be blunt....................if I was stuck with only X-Plane, I'd quit simming altogether.

Amen! Glad to hear from someone who actually FLIES a REAL airplane. I also fly but not as much as you and I remember testing the xplane c172 and it was horrible, around all of the axis, especially yaw and roll. Xplane would be good except the lack ofA) quality ATC:( VC details and gauges that look believableC) airports that are alive like FSX's