I decided to just do a comparison of the default Cessna's flight models, I set both planes to their maximum weight of 2550lbs, both trimmed for take off, full throttle no elevator input. I only used Aileron & Rudder to keep the wings level.Both take offs from Wolverhampton City Airport, commonly known has Half Penny Green. Same runway both real world weather same day and time (near enough).Take a look at the results, video is about 4.5 minutes for each plane.

FSX wanted to drop to the left a lot more than X-Plane did, I don't know how realistic that is as I'm not a real world pilot so maybe someone can enlighten me.CheersMartinPS. I think both Flight Sims are great and would prefer it if we kept the discussion to flight model and realism only none of this 'FSX is better' or 'X-Plane is better', cus that is just a waste of time and not at all constructive. Thanks. :(

I think FSX really over-exaggerates left-turning tendencies, and it doesn't feel real. When I fly real-world single engine props they certainly don't "feel" anywhere near how FSX acts. I imagine that this issue only exists with default planes and Carenado planes, which seem to exhibit that same behavior. I have no comment on X-Plane since I don't use it.

I think FSX really over-exaggerates left-turning tendencies, and it doesn't feel real. When I fly real-world single engine props they certainly don't "feel" anywhere near how FSX acts. I imagine that this issue only exists with default planes and Carenado planes, which seem to exhibit that same behavior. I have no comment on X-Plane since I don't use it.

Hi AWACSYes I thought the left turn was a bit harsh, I have only had a one hour lesson and that was in a Piper Archer II some years ago now but I don't remember any bad left turn issues so I think X-Plane may be a bit more realistic with that one, however everything else was very close if you watch the video.Thanks for the input.CheersMartin.

I just finished viewing your video, they are pretty close. It's interesting, because I have every intention of trying XPlane 10 when it's released, and hope it will be able to compete with MS Flight.

I think FSX really over-exaggerates left-turning tendencies, and it doesn't feel real. When I fly real-world single engine props they certainly don't "feel" anywhere near how FSX acts. I imagine that this issue only exists with default planes and Carenado planes, which seem to exhibit that same behavior. I have no comment on X-Plane since I don't use it.

Does reducing the P-Factor and Torque realism settings in your opinion make it any more realistic? I usually keep mine in the middle. I'm also not a pilot, so I'm not qualified myself to give an opinion on the subject. I do find the X-Plane C-172, more squirly then either FSX or the real world C-172's I've been in.

I decided to just do a comparison of the default Cessna's flight models, I set both planes to their maximum weight of 2550lbs, both trimmed for take off, full throttle no elevator input. I only used Aileron & Rudder to keep the wings level.Both take offs from Wolverhampton City Airport, commonly known has Half Penny Green. Same runway both real world weather same day and time (near enough).Take a look at the results, video is about 4.5 minutes for each plane.

FSX wanted to drop to the left a lot more than X-Plane did, I don't know how realistic that is as I'm not a real world pilot so maybe someone can enlighten me.CheersMartinPS. I think both Flight Sims are great and would prefer it if we kept the discussion to flight model and realism only none of this 'FSX is better' or 'X-Plane is better', cus that is just a waste of time and not at all constructive. Thanks. :(

I don't see how you start a thread with a comparison of an FSX plane, and X-Plane plane and not expect it to descend to a FSX vs X-Plane thread? Threads like this have inevitably descended into such in the past, this is just dangling the hook!

Does reducing the P-Factor and Torque realism settings in your opinion make it any more realistic? I usually keep mine in the middle. I'm also not a pilot, so I'm not qualified myself to give an opinion on the subject. I do find the X-Plane C-172, more squirly then either FSX or the real world C-172's I've been in.

That's something I never thought about, haha, good on you for figuring that one out. I just expected that if I turn realism all the way up, I'd be closer to reality, guess that's not the case.

:( Interesting video !Did both aircraft designers get the same feedback and data when they made test flights and when they fine-tuned their flight models ? Of course, settings may explain what happens: realism options, joystick sensitivity and calibration...I would love to see a similar comparison with add-on planes from the same company. It's possible today since Carenado released the Mooney, the Saratoga, the C152 II and the Archer II for X-Plane.

I don't see how you start a thread with a comparison of an FSX plane, and X-Plane plane and not expect it to descend to a FSX vs X-Plane thread? Threads like this have inevitably descended into such in the past, this is just dangling the hook!

Pointless post

Yuk, doesn't xplane have VC? 2D makes it look so fake

Pointless post

We'll see!!!

We'll see!!!

See what?

Hi AWACSYes I thought the left turn was a bit harsh

That's not an FSX issue, rather an aircraft design issue (the air.cfg file).Cheers,- jahman.

That's not an FSX issue, rather an aircraft design issue (the air.cfg file).

Well, it was a comparison between the default Cessnas in the two sims.It would be more interesting to see a comparison between addon planes that exist for both sims, where the flight modeling has been given some attention in both cases. I don't have X-Plane, though, so I don't know if two such addon aircraft exist.The problem with the Carenado planes is that some of them have not so great flight models.

The problem with the Carenado planes is that some of them have not so great flight models.

OK, then we'll have to ask RealAir Simulations to build an add-on for X-Plane !!! :(