What AddOns can u recommend me?

[Glynn 405]

>but really, how can you compare?

HelloSimple really just buy both, I did and can tell you that they are both good, not a lot wrong with either but the PMDG is not as far ahead as some would have you believe.

[CoolP 283]

My question is this: as REX already has a weather engine incorporated, would there actually still be a need to purchase ActiceSky?

Good question, but only you can answer it. If you got used to the Active Sky features and options, you may miss some of them with the REX engine.As far as I've experienced her, she does not come with any downside on the actual weather representation, but the interface and the options to 'tweak and fiddle' are far less than on the current ASE release.This could be a big pro of course since she starts up and works for example. As REX almost is a must have for FSX (FEX would be too though) and comes with a weather engine included, you may test this engine first and then decide if you want to spend extra Dollars on ASE.

[trisager 2]

The best 737-800 for FSX is the one by PMDG, no contest. The iFly product has a lower price, more variants, but overall less system depth (yes, I've used both products). Like Bryan pointed out, there is a huge gap between the default airplanes and the ones from iFly and PMDG, so come prepared to study the manuals and ask questions on the forum

[Kaly 22]

Its not a 737,but the 767 from Lvl d is brilliant.

[Gazzareth 808]

My essentials would be: Aircraft:1. PMDG 737NGX2. RealAir Turbine Duke (the Piston version is very nice as well)3. Eaglesoft Citation X v2 Scenery:1. FSGenesis World base mesh2. UTX / GEX (version depending on where you want to fly) Add-Ons:1. Radar Contact2. ASE3. FSUIPC4. Plan-G (which is FREE) For most Aircraft I like to start Flights with IDEAL FLIGHT, although it doesn't appear to work correctly with the PMDG.... G

[maximus92 0]

Ok, I see a key thing in the OP's post "I am pretty new in the FS scene." I understand almost everyone loves the PMDG NGX, and it's the state of the art in flight sim, but throwing him in that is like telling a ten year old to drive a car before he learns to ride a bike. Let's ease him in to the sim. Check out some "lite" sim aircraft. Overland's planes are a good start, even CLS would be a slight step up. Check out Project Airbus's freeware planes, or Project Opensky (now defunct but their downloads page is still up.) Going after the freeware offerings will also teach you how to install a plane and manipulate the aircaft.cfg file. Learn some basic systems in these planes, like setting up the autopilot, landing using the ILS. Flap settings, find out what V1, Vr, V2 means. Baby steps, people, baby steps.

[Gazzareth 808]

Ok, I see a key thing in the OP's post "I am pretty new in the FS scene." I understand almost everyone loves the PMDG NGX, and it's the state of the art in flight sim, but throwing him in that is like telling a ten year old to drive a car before he learns to ride a bike.

He also asks about the best 737-800 add-on .. .. .. G

[sonofswa 0]

I have Ultimate traffic 2, and It's great. I would reccomend also Ultimate terrain Europe, and North America, as well as REX, which is an amazing addon. If you want a cheaper 737-800, I would go for the iFly 737 NGX series, which is really realistic, and has the -600,-700,-800,-900 too.

[slait 169]

I keep seeing references to systems depth missing from the iFly that exist in the PMDG. Can anyone be more specific? What exactly does the PMDG model that is missing from the iFly?

[CoolP 283]

I think your question points in the right direction. This 'system depth' talk sounds like a repeated thing at most ends and also lacks of the fact that you currently get a 'well tested' but wrong landing plane, with features like the advertised SFP being there in the model, but not in the air file or the FMC speeds. Strange 'depth'. I've found the LNAV and VNAV together with the IAN features to be amazing and fun to use. Obviously a big amount of work went in there and the outcome is great.The iFly is lacking the IAN and struggles a bit on the VNAV on the approaches (because this isn't implemented at this time, from the official statements, although it works ok so far, on the approach).I don't give much on the airflow show and temperature features of the NGX, but this is personal preference. The HUD is nice and well done, but I had all my freezes with the HUD on, and so did a friend of mine. So I don't know if this, currently, is a pro or a con.The optics are without a doubt amazing and I think that quite some guys are happy with those alone and therefore can forget about some other flaws.The sounds add to that and although I was very happy with the iFly sounds, the NGX ones are even better. But, is this the 'system depth' they were talking about? Just asking because I still fly the Maddog with big pleasure. Now one part of this system depth thingy may be the panel freezes and CTDs at quite some ends. And that's actually the thing which really stresses the need for a SP1 to fix those, while the other flaws are acceptable with the mentioned preference in mind. Seeing people with activation problems even after nearly two months after release is another thing for the SP1 to rule out, obviously of course. So, as a user of all three addon 737s, I sometimes ask myself if the Avsim PMDG review with the 3 hours flight time and the award maybe represents this new 'system depth' view.I for one didn't buy the name on the outside, but was looking for even more details and accuracy, which, from the experience with e. g. the MD-11, could be associated with 'PMDG'. But this shouldn't lead to an automatism where the letters on the box suddenly form up the outcome. I'd like to see her in the detail which this strange myth seems to form up. And I think that SP1 may add something there.This 'you can't compare this or that' talking is more or less a communication bubble. Personal viewpoint. Comparing the different 737 addons is a very normal and helpful thing since a reader can pick his favourite items from the different viewpoints.And I also have great faith in readers getting to know if somebody is talking in a fan way or just presents some arguments to think about.

[slait 169]

Anyone? I really am interested to know what iFly is missing in terms of systems depth.

[spilok 1,132]

Anything from ORBX (especially the Northwest), REX, Active Sky Evolution, and Carenado airplanes. I like the Seneca and Bonanza 58. I love also the Real Air Turbine Duke (as well as the normally aspirated Duke). There are way to many great addons to mention...but you have to start somewhere. Fly GA planes in the Pacific Northwest and you will think you are in Heaven. I do. Stan

[Timmer 2]

Hello together!I am pretty new in the FS scene and until now i just flew with the standart scenery and free planes. The starts getting me bored and so i thought about getting some AddOns i often see in youtube videos or stuff. But i can't really deside which AddOns to choose since there are to much of them. You can send me both: freeware and payware AddOns. :) What i'm looking for:-The best boeing 737-800 addon-scenery-ai That should be enaugh :DThank you :)

This sounds like me when I first started. I created a list of recommended add ons and put them into categories and got one of each to start out with. I think most of the good ones have been mentioned:- Scenery: GEX, UTX (I also use Genesis Mush and it is nice but I feel the other two would be more important -- some areas are worse with a mesh, especially hilly cities like San Diego).- Weather: ASE, REX- ATC: Radar Contact or VoxATC (voice communications)- Airplanes (GA): RealAir Scout is great, Carenado F33 was my starter and I still fly her a lot- Airplanes (GA-advanced): RealAir Duke, Carenado C340, Aerosoft's Twin Otter, BN-2 Islander 2- Airplanes (Small airline): feelThere ERJv2 (ERJ135/145) -- a great intro to larger planes- Airplanes (light): I hear the QW757 is a great medium-depth plane and so with the CLS MD81/82- Airplanes (adv): PMDG's MD-11 is my favorite airplane simulation hands down. I hear Leonardo's MD80 is fantastic, too but have not flown it. I don't think you can go wrong with either of the 737-NGs out (iFly or PMDG). Finally, let me seriously recommend three utilities which are hard to purchase but are very worth it:- TrackIR- EZdok- FSUIPC... those changed everything for me when I finally got a yoke, pedals and throttles. Which reminds me, if you really get into this make sure you get those. Especially the pedals; it's easy to disregard them if you've never flown before but they are vital, especially in non-airline flying.

[trisager 2]

Anyone? I really am interested to know what iFly is missing in terms of systems depth.

It is a combination, I guess, of the NGX having more features and a more thorough simulation of what is there in both products. Examples in the first category are IAN approaches, a HGS, terrain display, a vertical simulation display, and a much more complete failure simulation. Examples in the second category are implementation of fuel-saving features in the APU, a much more detailed and accurate VNAV implementation (including RETARD annunciation at TOC and energy reduction with delayed descent), a much better sound set that uses FSX sound cones, and winglets that actually decrease drag and reduce fuel consumption. These are examples only, there are many, many differences and I do not have to time nor inclination to do an extensive side-by-side comparison.But generally speaking, there is a much better match between the various airplane systems and the Boeing documentation in the NGX than you find in the iFly product. One of the first differences I discovered was when I tried to disconnect the autopilot by pushing on my joystick. In the iFly (depending on your settings) the engaged autopilot will simply disconnect. In the NGX you have to push hard enough to break the shear pins, which will disconnect the autopilot and - correctly - prevent you from reengaging that autopilot for the remainder of the flight (unless you choose to clear the failure). Do I think the NGX is a better product than the iFly? Not necessarily, you may prefer the wide range of models and the lower price of the iFly product and not care about the finer details of the systems implementation. But personally I do not see myself going back to the iFly, not unless they do something really dramatic with the feature pack they have announced.

[CoolP 283]

Examples in the first category are IAN approaches, a collimated HGS, terrain display, a vertical simulation display, and a much more complete different failure simulation.

Since details were concerned, I've added some notations to your detailed view. They now make more sense in my eyes. The HGS is there in the iFly, same goes for the VSD, failure events also are, but you are right, the PMDG system seems more advanced there.Preferences obviously differ, which is a good thing, the 'depth' of detailed views obviously does too. I once again think that slait's question was spot on since 'system depth' just seems to describe something different at all ends, but gets used as a fixed 'nuff said!' phrase for whatever reason.You won't get a bad 737 representation with any of the current detailed offers, that's my conclusion so far. Even when looking closer. Wait for SP1 still stays a recommendation for the PMDG, since the 'system depth' on the landing attitude, the FMC and e. g. the Short Field Package may then be able to take make a point. If it takes the panel freezes, CTDs and activation problems away too, that would be perfect.Since there is no refund option at PMDG, those last three issues maybe gain a bit of weight, at least for those affected. So if there's more than the letters on the box for people, the package contents have to be taken into account, in their whole range, which may included the price point, the models included and the vital part of service and attitude.

Finally, let me seriously recommend three utilities which are hard to purchase but are very worth it:- TrackIR- EZdok- FSUIPC... those changed everything for me when I finally got a yoke, pedals and throttles.

Absolutely! Count me in on those recommendations.