I got your Windows Live right here Microsoft! Go Austin!

[Janov 2,383]

I suppose I've followed the X-Plane org. forum too long. I just don't believe the X-Plane flight dynamics program to be that powerful. All I can say at the moment, is that sim aircraft such as the RealAir SF260............can fly rings around anything from X-Plane when it comes to the use of rudder. And that is in an aerobatic sense, as well as the side slipping. X-Plane always seems to fall short.L.Adamson

Hi All, Hi Mr. Adamson,I have read with interest all the discussions about X-Plane and MSFS. I have used both simulators since FSII (on the Commodore 64) and X-Plane 8. I own both FSX with several add-ons and X-Plane 9 in it

[LAdamson 240]

I feel that the flightmodel of X-Plane, and also especially the ground handling, is vastly superior to FSX

[SlowFlyer 78]

Hello :( ,Let me first state: I am not a real world pilot. My whole experience of real flight modeling is what I have experienced flying on commerical airlines and playing FS9 and FSX. However, I have over 400 hours flying the Aeroworx king air 200 in FS9, many hours with the Realair 172 for FS9, and a few hours with the Realair SF260 in FSX.I can appreciate the feeling I get when I use the Realair SF260 plane, but the default FSX planes don't seem to feel as "good". So can we conclude that FSX's flight model suxs? That it will never be "good", since compared to Realair's FM, FSX is not up to that level?? Heck no, since Realair and other companies have demonstarted that the FSX's FM can be tweaked, stretched, and molded into some darn fine flying experiences. So why don't we allow some great plane makers the chance (if they choose :( ) to try to tweak, stretch, and mold X-plane's FM into some great flying experiences before we conclude X-plane's FM is wrong and will never be on par with FSX's FM. If there was no Realair would anyone say FSX's FM is excellent? Again, I am not a RW pilot, so I don't know, but before we throw out the bath water with the baby (X-plane), lets see what could happen if people really attempted to bring their talents to X-plane (hopefully some will) just like Realair has done for FSX.I just supported X-plane because I think we should hope this "baby" develops into a well-formed adult to carry on the FS heritage. Doesn't hurt to have options, eg Xplane and whatever MS next brings to us someday. And quoting from their press release (which I can't locate anymore): We are committed to "flying games". I am committed to flying Sims myself. :smile :( Just my humble opinions

[Peter Clemenko 0]

The only common problems with X-Planes flight model is some funky handling in situations which you shouldn't be in in the first place. 90% of the other common "problems" people have is due to bad control setups or using a crappy aircraft. I even said in my review, the default aircraft suck. The default aircraft have problems in the way they are made, so the flight model suffers. The PERFECT example of this is the F-22 in X-Plane, because Austin doesn't seem to want to listen to criticism about the F-22's thrust vectoring being completely wrong in X-Plane, and because of something that is in the code that makes it impossible to make a correct fix because you have to do a workaround to get the thrust vectoring to work proper, which will remove a feature that the real aircraft has in the process, the F-22 has a uber unrealistic roll rate. You can not say that X-Plane's flight modeling is to blame for most aircraft handling crappy though out of the box. The problem is that as the sim is updated, the flight models get changed around and something that worked right last version might be completely off the next version, and they really don't do all that much to keep the flight models up to date. X-Plane has a LOT of potential if a group such as PMDG or Level D or Wilco, or even Flight 1 were to start developing for it. It can have the capabilities needed to make it realistic, as right now XPFW has a 757 in the works that looks very much like it might be the next holy grail of X-Plane aircraft, and guess what, the flight models of the aircraft out there can be as good or bad as possible, all depending on accuracy of info on the aircraft. The best option for fixing X-Plane right now to be perfect, would be to cross FSX's look up tables, and blade element theory, where that way, you have a safety mechanism to make absolutely sure that the FM is going to stay within known parameters. A perfect example of this is those videos you see online of those snap rolls in X-Plane, and those carrier landings using 777s. The only thing I have to say about that 777 is I'd want to see a little more data on the actual landing limits of a real one, because IRL someone managed to land a C-130 on a carrier, so I would not say it's impossible just yet, just improbable....

[JasonD210 0]

Regarding the Avsim article on the future of MSFS. All I can say is, I've had it! I will continue to fly FSX as long as MS supports it and allows future activations. That's fine with me, and if they ever pull the plug on that then I'll revert to FS9. However, having said that, no way no how am I gonna buy an XBox to fly any future incarnation of FS, nor will I be forced to pay for every extra plane or scenery area! In my opinion Microsoft has gone way too far here! I suppose that thier thinking is that they could make more money that way, but in reality, again in my opinion, the money made from this move will not be for Microsoft, but rather for Austin Meyer the creator of x-plane. If I were him I would hire whoever he needed to and pounce...pounce hard!!! It will take years for Microsoft to pull any Flightsim out of the ashes of ACES Studios and in that time Austin could pick up 100% of the Flightsim market. Think of that. One guy has the chance to corner a market that he barely had a fingerhold in a month ago, and he could do it virtually overnight! If he doesn't act now he will be missing out on the chance of a lifetime!Austin if you are reading this, I can't speak for the whole community, but i can say this. From what I've seen, all you need is detailed cities,airports and a few more little extras and you have MS beat for good! Don't blow this oportunity to beat the big boys and make a buttload of money in the process!I guess this is a call for support of X-plane and Austin Meyer! I don't even own it yet...but I will if it is developed to modern eyecandy standards. Honestly I am outraged at Microsoft's behavior in this matter Do I seem miffed? I am!!!!

Well said. There's no way I would use a flight simulator on a gaming consul, with a controller! A horrid thought!I've been an MSFS user for 10 years. I bought X-plane v.8 about a year or so ago, out of curiousity, and it's quite a different experience to MSFS. The flight models may or may not be accurate, but you flying them has a different feel to MSFS. It feels more real somehow, very fluid, and a lot harder. It is more like flying.The graphics vary. I'm sure they can easily be improved, and I've seen some great screenshots. The only problem with X-plane is that Austin pretty much does what he wants. Which is fine. I understand that - that's where his passion comes from - so long as 3rd party developers can do their stuff. That's what's needed in it.One nice feature with it is the plane-maker. You invent models and test fly them to get an idea of how they would fly (if at all). I think that was the original concept, hence the title "X-Plane" as in "eXperimental". I've just been over to Austin's site now and he seems very keen to accomodate the new influx of disgruntled MSFS users. He's offering the latest version at the discount price of $39....

[LAdamson 240]

I've been an MSFS user for 10 years. I bought X-plane v.8 about a year or so ago, out of curiousity, and it's quite a different experience to MSFS. The flight models may or may not be accurate, but you flying them has a different feel to MSFS. It feels more real somehow, very fluid, and a lot harder. It is more like flying.

I just have to ask.....What it so much harder about sim flying X-Plane, that makes it more like flying? You probably already know, that I think the opposite. I still compareX-Plane to riding a magic carpet in an airless vacuum. I don't really know what a magic carpet feels like, and that's just it; I haven't figured out what X-Plane is suppose to feel like either!L.Adamson

[JasonD210 0]

I just have to ask.....What it so much harder about sim flying X-Plane, that makes it more like flying? You probably already know, that I think the opposite. I still compareX-Plane to riding a magic carpet in an airless vacuum. I don't really know what a magic carpet feels like, and that's just it; I haven't figured out what X-Plane is suppose to feel like either!L.Adamson

Still the same old Larry I see :-)When it's raining in X-plane you can see a bit more about what's going on. Microsoft Flight Simulator models can also be very good, but, they can also be very bad. In X-plane, there they are consistently good, even if they can be a bit quirky at times. To me, X-plane and Pro-Pilot were the only sims to really convey the feel of flying, and with X-plane I guess it's to do with the blade element model...

[Geofa 108]

"The only common problems with X-Planes flight model is some funky handling in situations which you shouldn't be in in the first place. "Peter,Jason-I would totally diasagree.Take a piston aircraft off at a sea level airport-then go to a 5000 ft. one. I get the same manifold pressure...This is not a funky handling situation-but one of great concern to pilots. Raise the nose-even try a chandelle which is required for a commercial ticket. Take a look at the ball while you raise the nose....There are plenty of things wrong with xplane's flight model, and they are not just funky handling situations-the worst one I have found is a hyper sensative phugoid which although can be dampened is very unrealistic.That being said, perhaps working as much with the xplane model's just as some have with the fs, perhaps something extremely realistic-on the quality of the real air products can be achieved. I am well on my way to achieving it with my Baron, but it is a heck of a lot of work and I bet most simmers just want to fly. I also do-I hate spending all my time "tweaking".Until then, like a tree falling in a forest with no one around to experience it-did it really happen?As a practical matter however-if any conversions from fs are to be had-the default aircraft need to look at least as good and work at least as good as the default fs ones-that is what simmers will compare. That includes good looking 3d cockpits with excellent resolution which fs'ers have been used to for a while, and 2d cockpits with more function.Many of the other differences some will be able to live with-but the basics need to be there to experience.As to xplane being harder-I agree-way too hard. I still can't take off or land a plane very well. Pretty sad for a 20 year rw pilot :-lol. I assure you real world flying, while challenging is not this difficult.

[LAdamson 240]

"The only common problems with X-Planes flight model is some funky handling in situations which you shouldn't be in in the first place. "Peter,Jason-I would totally diasagree.

An opinion of "real experience"! :)And seriously, I do look forward to your in depth study and improvements for the X-Plane flight model. As I've previously mentioned, I do own the last two versions of X-Plane. L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

When it's raining in X-plane you can see a bit more about what's going on. Microsoft Flight Simulator models can also be very good, but, they can also be very bad. In X-plane, there they are consistently good, even if they can be a bit quirky at times. To me, X-plane and Pro-Pilot were the only sims to really convey the feel of flying, and with X-plane I guess it's to do with the blade element model...

All you wanted to know about the Feel of flying..........FS98 ---- Not reallyMicrosoft's Combat 1 & 2 --- most certainly (the best ground handeling for takeoff, there ever was! But might groundloop too easy on landings).IL-2 Sturmovick (spell?) ---- yesPro-Pilot --- yes (this is the first sim, where I actually was reminded of real flight)FLY ---- Once the models were revised by the designer who is RealAir these days ---- yesFS2000/FS2002/FS9/FSX --- of courseX-Plane --- not at this time. Thank goodness it's being worked on! :( L.Adamson

[JasonD210 0]

LarryI agree that X-plane has a long way to go before it can come close to Microsoft's regading cockpit graphics and systems simulations. It is true this is what people will look at. Scenery can't be hard to fix though. X-plane clearly has potential to show decent scenery.Just needs a few developers to work on it. It will be interesting to see what developers will do next. Some predict a flood of add-ons for FSX. Because FSX is the last one they're saying there'll be plenty of time for developers to make stuff and that it won't go out of date.But they could also take the view that the FS franchise has no future and therefore it's time to turn to another platform that does have a future. There seems to be signs of this happening too. For example, UK2000 scenery designer Gary Summon's has stated that he is starting this year on creating scenery for X-Plane. Jason

[LAdamson 240]

LarryI agree that X-plane has a long way to go before it can come close to Microsoft's regading cockpit graphics and systems simulations. It is true this is what people will look at. Scenery can't be hard to fix though. X-plane clearly has potential to show decent scenery.Just needs a few developers to work on it.

Jason,It's actually the scenery, that keeps me buying X-Plane. I like realistic mountain topography. I live and fly in a mountainous area. The global scenery disks are certainly worth it, and especially for $39.00. It's still the basic "flight model" that I don't like-- as of yet. And I've even tried models from very respected X-Plane designers. They just are not up to the standard of those from RealAir, such as the Marchetti SF260 & Spitfire..............when it comes to handling. I have a semi -aerobatic airplane that's somewhat similar to the Marchetti, and have flown the Marchetti as well. The RV's that come with X-Plane 9 are not even close to my RV. They pitch up and balloon with flaps, instead of pitching the nose down, and the airspeeds are not even in the ball park. They are simply quite disappointing. Yet a non-pilot, or someone not familiar, probably wouldn't have a clue about the flight dynamics. In fact, if all your info is from comments made on X-Plane org, you'd usually assume that MSFS flight models suck, and that X-Plane is perfection. This..............isn't always the case, and is reversed, more than not. However, it's hardly ever disputed there.L.Adamson

[JasonD210 0]

Jason,It's actually the scenery, that keeps me buying X-Plane. I like realistic mountain topography. I live and fly in a mountainous area. The global scenery disks are certainly worth it, and especially for $39.00. It's still the basic "flight model" that I don't like-- as of yet. And I've even tried models from very respected X-Plane designers. They just are not up to the standard of those from RealAir, such as the Marchetti SF260 & Spitfire..............when it comes to handling. I have a semi -aerobatic airplane that's somewhat similar to the Marchetti, and have flown the Marchetti as well. The RV's that come with X-Plane 9 are not even close to my RV. They pitch up and balloon with flaps, instead of pitching the nose down, and the airspeeds are not even in the ball park. They are simply quite disappointing. Yet a non-pilot, or someone not familiar, probably wouldn't have a clue about the flight dynamics. In fact, if all your info is from comments made on X-Plane org, you'd usually assume that MSFS flight models suck, and that X-Plane is perfection. This..............isn't always the case, and is reversed, more than not. However, it's hardly ever disputed there.L.Adamson

There are plenty of pilots who vouch for Xplane. I also fly rw, I started out on Cessna 150s and 152s, and later Piper Archer. Haven't done much of it lately though. I certainly don't fly any acrobatics.I haven't got the global secnery disks for X.plane. Is the scenery for Europe good? How about UK?

[LAdamson 240]

I haven't got the global secnery disks for X.plane. Is the scenery for Europe good? How about UK?

I've seen screenshots that look good, but I've never loaded those parts of the world.L.Adamson