Is Flight1 getting into the X-Plane add-on business?

[LAdamson 240]

This is true only in the EXTREME cases like a spin/fall. In XP we can only control to the point where you enter a deep stall. At this point the aircraft/wing basically turns into an uncontrolled falling object. Calculating forces in such a scenariowith lateral airflow, blanking of wings/surfaces from fuselage, turbulent air from all possible directions, passing through your own propwashbackwards etc etc is close to impossible - chaos. As you know, not even $15 mill simulators model this. FS doesn't even attempt to do it. In these extreme cases I agree with you and LA that the FS approach of just "telling" the plane how it should handle in better.However, for the "normal" flight envelope, XP is superior (offcourse depending on the designer capability's). This is nonsense and I will prove it to you soon. If you know what you are doing, you will hit real numbers DEAD ONin the "normal" flight envelope. Yes, it requires plugins and extreme knowledge of the aircraft you are making plussa lot of time reverse engineering, but the end product is superior. M

I can agree with that. Just don't expect a new design to pop out of plane maker, with numbers that will automatically match a completed aircraft after it's flown. That's where it becomes "ballpark" (before revision work). Some even think that Cessna could have saved two LSA aircraft involved in spin accidents..............had the rudder been designed in X-Plane. IMO, that's nonsense. And no.....................the end product is not superior. L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,764]

LarryCan you list the X Plane add ons you have so we can form a truly honest opinion on X Plane's flight model.So far, all you said you have is the Falco and, I think, the MU 2.If that is all you have (in payware), and based on what you said in earlier posts about the Falco, X Plane's flight model is EXTREMELY accurate.

[LAdamson 240]

LarryCan you list the X Plane add ons you have so we can form a truly honest opinion on X Plane's flight model.So far, all you said you have is the Falco and, I think, the MU 2.If that is all you have (in payware), and based on what you said in earlier posts about the Falco, X Plane's flight model is EXTREMELY accurate.

No MU2. Several others (payware) besides the Falco. Desktop flight models are NOT extremely accurate. Let's don't over rate them...

[GoranM 3,764]

No MU2. Several others (payware) besides the Falco. Desktop flight models are NOT extremely accurate. Let's don't over rate them...

Well let's dig deeper into the debate you wanted to have.List your payware so we can analyze and scrutinize. We won't include freeware because in MOST cases, with freeware, you get what you paid for.

[LAdamson 240]

Well let's dig deeper into the debate you wanted to have.List your payware so we can analyze and scrutinize. We won't include freeware because in MOST cases, with freeware, you get what you paid for.

Better yet..................Tell us why your models are EXTREMELY accurate. This debate is not only from my definition of flight modeling. It includes the thoughts of numerous other pilots who have designed and programmed flight sim products over the years; or who have actively tested them over the years. Face the facts.................real pilots who have actively used desktop simulations over the years, are not going to go into a frenzy of satisfaction when they try X-Plane. Like anything else, they'll see the better and worse. And when you find a few that stick with X-Plane, you'll always find others that jump back to MSFS...............or just use both. When I hear it said...................."MSFS has pretty scenery, but as a real pilot I use X-Plane"...................then I always go off the deep end on this subject, or haven't you noticed? L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,764]

Better yet..................Tell us why your models are EXTREMELY accurate. This debate is not only from my definition of flight modeling. It includes the thoughts of numerous other pilots who have designed and programmed flight sim products over the years; or who have actively tested them over the years. Face the facts.................real pilots who have actively used desktop simulations over the years, are not going to go into a frenzy of satisfaction when they try X-Plane. Like anything else, they'll see the better and worse. And when you find a few that stick with X-Plane, you'll always find others that jump back to MSFS...............or just use both. When I hear it said...................."MSFS has pretty scenery, but as a real pilot I use X-Plane"...................then I always go off the deep end on this subject, or haven't you noticed? L.Adamson

If the Falco is all you have, it's ok. I'm actually trying to help you prove your argument by asking what add ons you have. Obviously, you cannot form an honest opinion if it IS all you have, so please, show a list of all your x plane payware. Why are my models accurate? I can't tell you that. I've cut my teeth on add on development for the last 2 years (7 days a week and at least 14 hours a day). And I'm certainly not going to give any of my competitors an insight into what I do. But I will show you this:http://www.x-aviatio...ts_id=59&page=1 Some pilots fly in x plane. Some fly in FSX. I can accept that. Apparently, going by your argument, you cannot. I never used the word "frenzy". You just did. Please don't take my posts out of context. It's unfortunate you go off the deep end when I say "MSFS has pretty scenery, but as a real pilot I use X-Plane". But I do. I was speaking for myself. I'm rated on 5 different aircraft. I consider myself a "real" pilot. Should I apologize for that? Of course not. It's how I feel and it is my opinion. Someone like yourself should be able to respect that. I'm a lot younger than you, Larry. It's a little unorthodox that I can respect your opinion but you cannot respect mine. Especially given your background.I don't really want to degrade this into a heated argument, so respond if you feel you must. I will read your response, but I have said all I am going to say, so, as far as I'm concerned, our discussion pertaining to this debate is over. Have a nice day!

[Tierborn 188]

If the Falco is all you have, it's ok. I'm actually trying to help you prove your argument by asking what add ons you have. Obviously, you cannot form an honest opinion if it IS all you have, so please, show a list of all your x plane payware. Why are my models accurate? I can't tell you that. I've cut my teeth on add on development for the last 2 years (7 days a week and at least 14 hours a day). And I'm certainly not going to give any of my competitors an insight into what I do. But I will show you this:http://www.x-aviatio...ts_id=59&page=1 Some pilots fly in x plane. Some fly in FSX. I can accept that. Apparently, going by your argument, you cannot. I never used the word "frenzy". You just did. Please don't take my posts out of context. It's unfortunate you go off the deep end when I say "MSFS has pretty scenery, but as a real pilot I use X-Plane". But I do. I was speaking for myself. I'm rated on 5 different aircraft. I consider myself a "real" pilot. Should I apologize for that? Of course not. It's how I feel and it is my opinion. Someone like yourself should be able to respect that. I'm a lot younger than you, Larry. It's a little unorthodox that I can respect your opinion but you cannot respect mine. Especially given your background.I don't really want to degrade this into a heated argument, so respond if you feel you must. I will read your response, but I have said all I am going to say, so, as far as I'm concerned, our discussion pertaining to this debate is over.Have a nice day!

this is your second time being too busy to reply within this thread .. you are a funny guy. Also, your arguments sound similar to the betamax folks when trying to justify betamax vs.VHS many years ago. With one difference .. xplane flight dynamics are not better ..

[GoranM 3,764]

this is your second time being too busy to reply within this thread .. you are a funny guy. Also, your arguments sound similar to the betamax folks when trying to justify betamax vs.VHS many years ago. With one difference .. xplane flight dynamics are not better ..

I said I'm too busy to make long detailed posts. Short ones are fine. Now you're saying FSX is VHS and X Plane is Betamax? Strange mentality.And you think I'M funny?Maybe if you post something constructive, you might be taken a little more seriously.Betamax was phased out. X Plane is growing with more developers coming over from FSX. I fail to see how your analogy works.This is an x plane forum. If you don't like x plane, don't waste your time in an x plane forum. Do something useful with your time.Also, do you realize you are breaking AVSIM's terms and conditions by not signing your posts with your full name?

[Tierborn 188]

I said I'm too busy to make long detailed posts. Short ones are fine. Now you're saying FSX is VHS and X Plane is Betamax? Strange mentality.And you think I'M funny?Maybe if you post something constructive, you might be taken a little more seriously.Betamax was phased out. X Plane is growing with more developers coming over from FSX. I fail to see how your analogy works.This is an x plane forum. If you don't like x plane, don't waste your time in an x plane forum. Do something useful with your time.Also, do you realize you are breaking AVSIM's terms and conditions by not signing your posts with your full name?

like i said .. funny guy. Also, you should try to be taken more seriously as well. Please learn avsims terms and conditions ..

[rightseater 0]

Everybody just calm down and be civil. And no, there is no rule saying that you have to sign your name. That is only for the PMDG forum.

[LAdamson 240]

X Plane is growing with more developers coming over from FSX.

Just to clarify. They still develope for FSX. Will probably offer models for the next Microsoft sim too. BTW--- I do have two additional payware X-Plane models. But since they're not from your 3rd party company.........I'll let it go at that. L.Adamson

[GoranM 3,764]

Just to clarify. They still develope for FSX. Will probably offer models for the next Microsoft sim too.

I never said otherwise. However, let's not throw assumptions into the mix. They MIGHT (not probably) develop for the next Microsoft Sim.

BTW--- I do have two additional payware X-Plane models. But since they're not from your 3rd party company.........I'll let it go at that. L.Adamson

If you only have 3 payware add ons, then we cannot have an informed discussion about flight models. So your entire debate is invalid because it is purely based on your own personal opinion.Thanks for clearing it up.

[JSkorna 137]

So how many payware X Planes does one need to purchase before one can have a valid debate? Or is that only certain payware planes need to be purchased, like yours?

[GoranM 3,764]

So how many payware X Planes does one need to purchase before one can have a valid debate? Or is that only certain payware planes need to be purchased, like yours?

You're part of a development team, Jim. I would think you could answer that question yourself considering you have been around for a while. It's disturbing you actually have to ask that.Can I judge FSX's flight model on 1 payware aircraft I purchased from Abacus? The masses of the FSX world would give off a resounding NO. Can I judge it based on 1 purchase from A2A or PMDG? Absolutely! That's why I want to know what add ons Larry has. If he has the Abacus equivalent of x plane payware, then his opinions on the flight model are invalid. If he has any of the payware listed below, then he would have a more complete picture.A short list (by no means a complete list) would be:BK117Yak 40FalcoMitsubishi MU2CRJ 200SeamaxCorvalisDuchess(Based on customer feedback) Challenger 300Piper Archer III (Freeware) The more products one has, the better and more informed one's opinion can be.No-brainer.

[JSkorna 137]

Ah... I see it's kind of like one person playing the role of lawyer, judge and jury. They get to ask the questions, evaluate the answers, and then make the decision as to whether or not an opinion is valid.