X-Plane vs. FSX

[Bartbear 10]

If FSX was the more accurate candidate for real world flying, airplanes would be falling out the sky so much, no one would be allowed to fly them.

:( I suppose this is about X-Plane 10 where aircraft at this stage of the 'beta' or 'release candidate' are blown away by a breath of a deer or rollercoaster through the sky by the slightest turbulence?

[ryanbatc 12,803]

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.

Sorry this is just not right for every aircraft or situation... For instance the stall recovery in a CRJ2 is to apply full power and fly out of the stall condition.Oops I should clarify... in some airlines procedures. It does seem counter intuitive to not apply nose down pressure I admit.... Edited February 6, 2012 by ryanbatcund

[Johnny Thunder 0]

This is a maximum load loop in the default (unmoded) Boeing 747 for X-plane 10.Entered the loop going 360 knots at 1000 feet, recovered at 600'.If you tried this in FSX you would not have the same results. The 747 would fall like a rock during the second half of the loop. That line would have gone almost straight down.

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.

In FSX this is true, In X-plane, this is not true. The plane will right itself, I suspect this is how it works in reality too. Edited February 6, 2012 by Johnny Thunder

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

I'll just quote Morten, a few posts higher:

Those who claim to know how an airliner behaves in a deep stall most likely have no idea what they aretalking about unless they work in the inner circles of Boeing or the like.So how an airliner deep stalls is only of pure academic interest with regard to airliner simulation.(unless you have some bizarre interests)

[Johnny Thunder 0]

Here I made a video, this is with the default 747-400 that comes with X-plane and all the realism options set to on. As you can see, they are smooth loops to keep the G-forces low.http://youtu.be/x_3z1OlhYyM

[GoranM 3,762]

You have a LOT of time on your hands. Obssessed with making loops in a 747 AND making videos of it. I only have one complaint. THAT IS THE WORST MUSIC I HAVE EVER HEARD FOR A VIDEO! Gave me a migraine after the first 15 seconds!

[Johnny Thunder 0]

^^ I'll change the music.

[wb5okj 26]

I guess that is what flight simulators are for, to do things that you can't do in real life. I once flew a Mustang under the Golden State Bridge, upside down. Can't do that in X-Plane. The bridge isn't there yet.I'm off now to fly through the St Louis arch. :(

[woweezowee 10]

http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/x-planestore/Detail?no=331

[GusRodrigues 1]

Sorry this is just not right for every aircraft or situation... For instance the stall recovery in a CRJ2 is to apply full power and fly out of the stall condition.Oops I should clarify... in some airlines procedures. It does seem counter intuitive to not apply nose down pressure I admit....

this is approach to stall recovery. the same thing for the 737.deep stall is a different thing.

This is a maximum load loop in the default (unmoded) Boeing 747 for X-plane 10.Entered the loop going 360 knots at 1000 feet, recovered at 600'.If you tried this in FSX you would not have the same results. The 747 would fall like a rock during the second half of the loop. That line would have gone almost straight down.In FSX this is true, In X-plane, this is not true. The plane will right itself, I suspect this is how it works in reality too.

last time I've tried stupid things in the FSX (fs9, fs2k2, fs2k, fs98...) was to land a full loaded 747 in RW20L in santos dummont.and I made it.so, default airplanes are not supoused to be realistic in all areas. they are more likely to be a small display of the real capabilty. also, goran is right. You have too much spare time to try, capture images and edit a video of a default airplane making loops in the simulador (and I second the music. geez) Edited February 7, 2012 by Omykron

[WarpD 824]

In FSX this is true, In X-plane, this is not true. The plane will right itself, I suspect this is how it works in reality too.

Remember the regional jet that crashed in upstate New York a few years back? Severe icing and pilot error was involved... and the aircraft pancaked into a home. That's reality. The aircraft will not "right itself".

[Johnny Thunder 0]

Remember the regional jet that crashed in upstate New York a few years back? Severe icing and pilot error was involved... and the aircraft pancaked into a home. That's reality. The aircraft will not "right itself".

Yes, pancaking. That's what it should be called. Still, as you said, this case involved severe icing; It makes sense that if the wings get covered with enough ice, they will start to stall in any condition. As it stands, I believe it is far too easy to pancake in FSX, and I suspect they do this intentionally to make you a better pilot.I found out last night you can loop the 747-400 in FSX, the same way one would in X-plane, but it only gives you the same results if you never let the stall indicator go off:

http://youtu.be/Jf8OoCpsitA

Once you start to stall, X-plane and FSX have wickedly different philosophies on what happens during that stall.Edit:This is what it looks like in X-plane 10, when I try (And I mean try really hard) to pancake the 747-400:

In FSX I would have probably started to fly backwards, until I pankcaked to my death. Edited February 7, 2012 by Johnny Thunder

[Johnny Thunder 0]

By contrast, every plane in FSX can do this pancake effect, even the Cessna 172:http://youtu.be/rkH0PeUSx4UYet, it is basically impossible to pancake anything in X-plane. Dose anyone know which one is more realistic? I bet an Aerobatics pilot would know.I think this is the number 1 biggest difference between X-plane and FSX. It drives me insane in FSX, and yet in X-plane I can't help but wonder if this lack of pancaking is a real problem?

[Johnny Thunder 0]

Here is my best effort to try and repeat the same death stall in X-plane:

The problem is that once one of the wings starts to stall the plane just flips to one side, if I correct I can sorta do this strange para-shoot maneuver (I guess we can call this Pancaking right?) that's basically like the death stall in FSX, but I can only do it for a little bit before it flips over or builds up enough airspeed to move straight and level again. Edited February 8, 2012 by Johnny Thunder

[GoranM 3,762]

Here is my best effort to try and repeat the same death stall in X-plane:The problem is that once one of the wings starts to stall the plane just flips to one side, if I correct I can sorta do this strange para-shoot maneuver (I guess we can call this Pancaking right?) that's basically like the death stall in FSX, but I can only do it for a little bit before it flips over or builds up enough airspeed to move straight and level again.

I'm guessing you don't fly rw aircraft. If the aircraft flips to one side, it's because airflow over that wing is slower than the other wing. This can be caused by something as small as moving the ailerons, slight rudder (which will yaw the aircraft and make the airflow over the wing you are yawing towards further disrupted) or even variances in the wind. When learning to fly, a student pilot is taught to NOT move the ailerons approaching or during a stall (using the yoke) but instead to use the rudder pedals to avoid the wing drop. It happens more often than you would think.