X-Plane vs. FSX

[wb5okj 26]

Do a search for Bojote, that will probably get you about a thousand hits. (More or less), also NickN I thnk has a lot of excellent tips. Just Google fsx stability issues about 10 pages comes up the first time. Google all thise guys and you will be reading for days, if not months :(

[Alan_A 1,650]

Not to hijack the topic but just a quick note - the Bojote mods are more about performance than stability, and they don't work for everyone. They're a miracle for some users (especially those on older systems) but can cause stability problems for others. All worth trying but be warned. NickN's guides are more about basic FSX setup and can produce a good mix of performance and stability. They can be confusing to read because he's been writing and cross-linking them for years. Start with this one but be sure to follow the links. He posts exclusively on Simforums (in the hardware section), by the way.Now back to regular X-Plane programming, already in progress...

[Johnny Thunder 0]

^^ I'll look into that more, thanks.Although...I sware, FSX must have some type of magical hex cast on it by Bill Gates and his fellow members of the illuminati.I just set everything up to max and FSX was running perfect with the new configuration file. Then I flew over my home town again and looked at the defult senery, FSX still seems to have better senery then X-plane 10, landmarks are visable, and far away mountains render far more realisticly. I knew where I was and where I wanted to go, and was not lost unlike in XPX where everything looks the same. Not to mention the trees look far, far better in FSX then XPX.However right when I made this judgment call that FSX defult senery is still better then X-plane 10 senery, I stall out and crash into a house in one of those zero-G, no lift, stalls that plage FSX. It was like the exact moment I thought "Man, FSX is way better then XPX at senery"This is by no means an uncommon accurence. Everytime, I think I'm about to say FSX is better then X-plane, it somehow magicly proves to me that it is not better then x-plane by driving me insane with one of it's meny problems, usally ending in my computer crashing or my plane crashing and me swareing at my computer like it's possesed by demons. So then I switch back to X-plane because I have a much more stable expirence, and genaraly more fun flying in that game. However X-plane feels incompleate and the lack of content that should be their for the price tag drives me back to FSX after awhile and it starts all over again.So basicly we have two flight simulators that both have problems and both have advantages. One will drive you insane because of that lack of content for what you paid for, and the other will drive you insane because of it's possesd by evil spirits for the underworld!Chose your poison.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Johnny Thunder

[Tom Wright 438]

I know how you feel!With FSX I'm plagued with artifacts and autogen spikes. In X-Plane I just get an embarrassingly low frame rate! Can't win!

[LAdamson 240]

However right when I made this judgment call that FSX defult senery is still better then X-plane 10 senery, I stall out and crash into a house in one of those zero-G, no lift, stalls that plage FSX. It was like the exact moment I thought "Man, FSX is way better then XPX at senery"

Over the years, I've seen just a few models that have unrecoverable stalls....................but they've been very few. I don't remember any for FSX either. However, there is no stall problem that plagues FSX. Use shift Z to see your airspeeds if it helps. Figure that turns will raise the stall speed. Lower the nose, add some power. It should work, as it always has for me.

[Alan_A 1,650]

I just set everything up to max and FSX was running perfect with the new configuration file.

I don't know of any computer, not even the latest overclocked Sandybridge rigs, that can run FSX with all sliders maxxed in every geographic area. Some will run well, but several of the major cities (New York in particular) and some of the add-on areas like the ORBX sceneries will grind your frame rates down to the single digits if you try to set all sliders to the right, load up lots of AI traffic and weather, then add a complex airplane to the mix. Some of the options, like light bloom and high water settings, are absolute performance killers. You've got to back things off if you want smooth performance. Nick Needham's (NickN's) guides are all about getting smooth performance across the board. If you read his instructions, you'll notice there are detailed recommendations for setting sliders, tuning autogen, etc.I'm not nearly as versed in the technical ins and outs of X-Plane, so I'll defer to those who are, but I wouldn't think of maxxing out settings on my current rig, which is pretty decent though not the absolute latest. I'm not sure that even my next computer - a projected midyear build that'll be based on an Ivy Bridge processor and a Kepler video card - will be able to handle max settings in either program.The sliders aren't there so you can turn everything on. They're there so you can make choices depending on your style of flying - by rough example, lots of trees and houses for low-and-slow flying in decent weather and with light traffic in a simple airplane, or IFR in a complex airliner and heavy weather, but with ground scenery turned down. Not everything at once.You haven't told us anything about your computer specs or your settings, or what you're flying, but I'm wondering if your stalling program might be the result of poor system performance. It's much harder to control an airplane in FSX (or X-Plane) when frame rates are low and/or erratic.Hope this helps. Edited February 1, 2012 by Alan_A

[Johnny Thunder 0]

My system is an Intel quad core Q9550, with 4 gigs of DDR3 and 3 X 9800GTX+ in an SLI configuration. Windows 7 x64bit.

Over the years, I've seen just a few models that have unrecoverable stalls....................but they've been very few. I don't remember any for FSX either. However, there is no stall problem that plagues FSX. Use shift Z to see your airspeeds if it helps. Figure that turns will raise the stall speed. Lower the nose, add some power. It should work, as it always has for me.

It's not that I can't recover from stalls in FSX, I can. It's just that compared to X-plane it's massivly more diffculy to recover, X-plane gives you a lot more feedback when you are in a stall and it's genaraly easyer to recover. When I was looking at senery I was flying really low and slow, I was also flying the 737 which is not the best choice for low and slow travels. Still, In X-plane when I get into the stall I can useally just flick the noise down, add power and recover rather quickly, maybe I'll drop 400 feet but that's about it. In FSX unless I recover the instent I hear the stall buzzer, I will general fall 500 to 1600 feet before I recover. I think it's because FSX stops genarating any lift when you fall bellow your stall speed, so you need to speed up to above your stall speed in order to get any lift at all. X-plane keeps genrating lift off the body of the plane all the time, even when stalling. So when your in a stall the airplane is still genarating some amount of lift bellow it's stall speed which feels more realistic IMO; It's also a lot easyer. Edited February 1, 2012 by Johnny Thunder

[WarpD 824]

My system is an Intel quad core Q9550, with 4 gigs of DDR3 and 3 X 9800GTX+ in an SLI configuration. Windows 7 x64bit.It's not that I can't recover from stalls in FSX, I can. It's just that compared to X-plane it's massivly more diffculy to recover, X-plane gives you a lot more feedback when you are in a stall and it's genaraly easyer to recover. When I was looking at senery I was flying really low and slow, I was also flying the 737 which is not the best choice for low and slow travels. Still, In X-plane when I get into the stall I can useally just flick the noise down, add power and recover rather quickly, maybe I'll drop 400 feet but that's about it. In FSX unless I recover the instent I hear the stall buzzer, I will general fall 500 to 1600 feet before I recover. I think it's because FSX stops genarating any lift when you fall bellow your stall speed, so you need to speed up to above your stall speed in order to get any lift at all. X-plane keeps genrating lift off the body of the plane all the time, even when stalling. So when your in a stall the airplane is still genarating some amount of lift bellow it's stall speed which feels more realistic IMO; It's also a lot easyer.

First... nose down to recover is most likely not correct. I suspect it should be center stick, apply power to power out of the stall.Second... the 737 fuselage isn't going to generate enough lift to prevent the aircraft from literally falling out of the sky. FS does not stop calculating lift once an aircraft is in a stall condition. However, if the wings are not generating lift at all (which a poorly designed FDE can cause)... then the aircraft will drop like a rock.It is quite easy to get an airliner into a stall condition where it's no longer moving forward but rather falling vertically or even tail first despite the fact the aircraft is level.

[GoranM 3,762]

Nose down to recover is the first thing that should be done. A stall is a result of excessive AoA (beyond the critical AoA). That AoA needs to be reduced. Then smoothly apply power, and if a spin is happening, apply opposite rudder.

[WarpD 824]

Nose down to recover is the first thing that should be done. A stall is a result of excessive AoA (beyond the critical AoA). That AoA needs to be reduced. Then smoothly apply power, and if a spin is happening, apply opposite rudder.

Incorrect. A stall is a result of not enough lift being generated. It can happen at any angle of attack. You've just made a mistake a great deal of (real world) beginner pilots make.

[GoranM 3,762]

Incorrect. A stall is a result of not enough lift being generated. It can happen at any angle of attack. You've just made a mistake a great deal of (real world) beginner pilots make.

Sorry Ed. You are not correct. Lift stops when the critical AoA is exceeded. The AoA is the angle between the direction of the airflow and the chord line of the wing. If that angle goes beyond the critical angle, the wing stalls. Stalls cannot happen at ANY AoA. It happens ONLY when the critical AoA is exceeded. Not really sure where you're getting your information.Here's a graph I found to show as an example."In fluid dynamics, a stall is a reduction in the lift coefficient generated by a foil as angle of attack increases. This occurs when the critical angle of attack of the foil is exceeded."

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

First... nose down to recover is most likely not correct. I suspect it should be center stick, apply power to power out of the stall.

Incorrect. A stall is a result of not enough lift being generated. It can happen at any angle of attack.

Wow, some dangerously wrong assertions here, I'm glad we fly in a virtual world !Pascal

[woweezowee 10]

http://youtu.be/j_z2GpmuHQI

http://youtu.be/2I7M9r7xQK4 Edited February 2, 2012 by woweezowee

[WarpD 824]

duplicate post

[WarpD 824]

Sorry Ed. You are not correct. Lift stops when the critical AoA is exceeded. The AoA is the angle between the direction of the airflow and the chord line of the wing. If that angle goes beyond the critical angle, the wing stalls. Stalls cannot happen at ANY AoA. It happens ONLY when the critical AoA is exceeded. Not really sure where you're getting your information.Here's a graph I found to show as an example.

Ok... clearly you have a basic and I really do mean basic grasp of aerodynamics.That chart doesn't even come close to covering the full range of lift versus drag in an aircraft. A stall can happen with the aircraft at a low angle of attack. Before you toss in yet another reply about how I'm wrong... take the time to ask an aerodynamics professional (not just a pilot) as to why I would even dream of saying such a thing.As for the example videos... very nice... but incomplete. Please note in the second one, which he clearly and repeatedly states is to represent a stall upon takeoff (we're actually discussing a stall in level flight in this thread but...) he doesn't tell you to push the nose forward... in fact, because he's maintaining coordinated flight... the aircraft's nose drops on it's own.In the discussion of this thread... we're talking an airliner in flight going into a stall condition and dropping ~1500 feet before recovering. That's the description we have on what's happening. My response was that pushing the nose down was not a correct procedure... and I'm pretty certain I'm correct. Since none of you responding are ATP certified... I'll not take you as an authority to state I'm wrong on that one. Nothing personal.In the KingAir C90, the procedure in a stall is to release the controls (let them return to center), apply full power and build airspeed. The aircraft will literally accelerate out of the stall.