Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Paul Golding

Maybe the flight modelling isn't that good after all?

Recommended Posts

1. Too late for that.2. There is no money back guarantee or a refund policy. And even if there were, talking about my experiences on the public forums helps me and hopefully others.
There is a demo that lasts for 15 minutes (upped from 10 minutes in XP9). For those that don't have the bandwidth, wait for reviews.
3. After over a decade of my time invested in learning a few of X-plane's quirks and idiosyncracies and having invested countless hours and years over several versions, you've got to be kidding. At the same time I am more open to alternatives like FSX, Prepar3d, etc. than I would have been just a year or two ago.
Good for you! It's always good to expand your horizons and see what else is out there.
4. I have enough scenery developed to completely give up now. Scenery Development has been a passion of mine for a long while now, though less so in past couple of years, in part due to health.
Maybe you could have made a pitch to Austin about adding your scenery to XP10 if you have so much of it.
I am somewhat disappointed based on my posts that you'd come to those conclusions. Austin is a smart man; the problem is he treats his customers as a bunch of dummies. You can perhaps overlook that if he produced a decent enough COMPLETE program that lived up to his hype. And YOU and I along with other like minded users who see the shortfalls need to let him know.Sure I could do it by email. Believe me I did that for almost a decade where I thought it might make a difference. It hardly ever does. A better way to do it is to do it in a Public Forum like here instead of the diehard infested "org" and where not everyone is sold on the X-plane hype.To make a long story short, the thrust is to let Austin know about X-plane's short comings in a Public Forum and hopefully Austin and/or Ben will take notice, thus leading to a better X-plane program, assuming they take the criticism seiously, positively and actually do something about it. At the same time the users and interested parties get to see, know and understand and/or counter any of my posts with their own posts, just as you do at times when you avoid the personal attacks.
This last quote is probably the most lucid one you have ever made. It still harbors thoughts of resentment and bitterness, but it's definitely a lot better than your "We demand a timeline for XP10 development" rambling.I'm sorry you're disappointed in my conclusions regarding your feelings towards Austin, but they are direct responses to your posts as well as your "attitude" in those posts. You have not said one single positive thing about x plane...ever. Not much to conclude after that. To you, and a few others, it's an inadequately incomplete product. To me and a few others, it's more than sufficient and preferable to the alternatives. Is X Plane better than the other sims on the market? No. It's different. The end result is that it's a flight simulator. It will never be "complete". No sim ever will be. And anyone who says that their chosen sim is complete is just kidding themselves. But again, there are those that do get enough out of it. If you don't, then they're your demons that you will have to deal with. But bringing your problems to a public forum is not helping you at all. Telling people how bad x plane is when you convey it as your opinion, is just troll-like behaviour. Ok, we get it, to you it's incomplete, it's got some issues, it's lacking airport buildings, the default aircraft are not ultra-realistic. We get all that. That's why I, along with Morten and maybe a couple of others, have come forward and explained, in thorough detail, WHY the default aircraft are not ultra realistic when X Plane is supposed to make them that way because of it's BET. It is possible to make ultra realistic add ons. But, yes, it is difficult. A few times, very difficult, because you're dealing with variables that are so minute and plentiful, that not even a Level D sim can mimic them. This is where the inertia comes in. The phase-out, the spring force for the landing gear, the thousands of variables involved in making a wing that is not part of a database. You claim to have made scenery. Scenery is a cake-walk compared to making aircraft. Scenery is just objects and textures. Aircraft is mathematics. And not the 1+1 type.You say you've been around for a decade. Surely, in that time, you have experienced many top quality add ons that do take full advantage of the core flight model. I've been here only 3 years and I can give you a list of such aircraft.As for letting Austin and Ben know about the few issues in XP10, there are better ways to do it than your way. If the lack of airport buildings bugs you, email them. If they say they're not adding them, let it go. I want to be able to export an object from an aircraft with more than 1 texture. I can't. So I let it go and deal with what I have. The last part, you can assume people are making personal attacks against you, but it's quite the contrary. You're coming across as less than favorable. People are just making you realize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok... just because you like XPlane doesn't mean you're right in telling someone who finds something wrong that they should go away. Seriously.Because it's clearly 'lost' in this thread... here's the real gist of the OP:The default aircraft in the $50 FSX have more accuracy in flight dynamics than the default aircraft in the $80 X-Plane 10.I don't think anyone's being unreasonable in expecting better than that.


Ed Wilson

Mindstar Aviation
My Playland - I69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't tell anyone who found something wrong to go away. I tell people who have no interest in x plane and have never even tried x plane to go to their forum of choice. If someone finds something wrong, I tell them to file a bug report.There is much more to a flight sim than just the default aircraft. There is no way someone can just sit there and say the value of x plane lies in it's default aircraft. XP10 came out 3 months ago. FSX came out 6 years ago. Give it 6 years, and x plane 10 will be cheaper than FSX.Get your facts straight, Ed. You're the second person who has completely misquoted me. The first one got disciplined by an avsim moderator. Your twist on words is getting boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you know my postion to an extent and I hope I have yours. I'll let it go at that except....Show me where I have attacked someone's character or labeled someone in some sort of derogatory manner.I am not saying I never have ! I am human, therefore by definition, not perfect.Having said that, for every time I may have engaged in a personal attack, I could probably show you twice as many, if not more, against me. I don't know how many times I have been called a "troll" (believe it or not, I don't even know what the darn word means, and have never bothered to "look it up" nor let it bother me; I can surmise it can't be a compliment. But, if I let those kinds of labels bother me, I'd never post anything or get my views across.All I can say is that some X-plane (not necessarily exclusively X-plane) diehards, cant stand ANY criticism of X-plane. These would probably be more at home at the "org".As I have said a number of times, if you don't agree with anything I post, counter it with your own post, without engaging in character attacks. That adds value to the debate and will be more informative for readers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep your posts in the same context as the latter part of post #16, and you'll have far more respect from me and some others. Contrary to some peoples opinions, I welcome criticisms. I've had my stuff reviewed and I was asked if I wanted anything in particular mentioned. I said "Just keep it honest and well balanced". You have never said a positive thing about x plane. You just keep driving in the negatives in almost every post you make. It's not admirable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RV-6a in MS Flight is pretty good, I don't know if it's "top-level" but probably the best default airplane I have ever flown, and I fly a 9 IRL.Also, and I say this with complete humility,: @FS-Av It is clear you are unsatisfied with XPX(I agree it's not quite fully baked), but it seems from your posts that you have been in the sphere of X-plane for many versions. What made you think that this one would be different. Even in my short time in the X-plane world, I have come to understand the we live and die by the whims of a certain(and certainly unique) person. After so many times through this process, why did you think this time would be different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep your posts in the same context as the latter part of post #16, and you'll have far more respect from me and some others.
Excuse me ?Look at 99% of my posts and you will see that they are to the point, albeit, somewhat or mostly critical of X-plane/Austin/Laminar. I am not here to earn ANYONE'S respect or to win any popularity contest. I say my piece based on my experience and let it stand, FWIW. The reader has the option to read it, chew it and decide whether to swallow it or spit it out. The reader also has the option of offering or countering my post with his own. NO CHARGE !Like everyone's posts here, mine are also opinions; in my case, I hope they carry a little more weight compared to the average user, because of my long experience with X-plane over several versions.
You have never said a positive thing about x plane. You just keep driving in the negatives in almost every post you make. It's not admirable.
Neither I nor anybody else is forcing anyone to read my posts. Whoever said I have to say ANYTHING postive ? I am not here to bow down or pray to Austin as if he were god, much as he would have us do.This last sentence is based on fact ! Many can perhaps dismiss it as Austin's poor sense of humor.
After so many times through this process, why did you think this time would be different?
Naive Optimist ? A glutton for punishment ? Or an addict, perhaps ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me ?Look at 99% of my posts and you will see that they are to the point, albeit, somewhat or mostly critical of X-plane/Austin/Laminar. I am not here to earn ANYONE'S respect or to win any popularity contest. I say my piece based on my experience and let it stand, FWIW. The reader has the option to read it, chew itand decide whether to swallow it or spit it out. The reader also has the option of offering or countering my post with his own. NO CHARGE !Like everyone's posts here, mine are also opinions; in my case, I hope they carry a little more weight compared to the avaerage user, because of my long experience with X-plane over several versions.Neither I nor anybody else is forcing anyone to read my posts. Whoever said I have to say ANYTHING postive ? I am not here to bow down or pray to Austin as if he were god, much as he would have us do.This last sentence is based on fact ! Many can perhaps dismiss it as Austin's poor sense of humor.
Then don't expect people to take you seriously. If you're big enough to dish it out, be big enough to take it.You claim you have a decades worth of experience, yet you prefer to remain anonymous. Baseless claims. For all we know, you could be some new guy trying to diss on X Plane while claiming to be so experienced in scenery development.Nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand why apparently bright people spend a huge amount of their short life posting nothing butnegative critics about a product that is supposed to make you enjoy life even more. If it doesn't do it for you,turn your back to it and never look back. Personally I have a great life and this hobby is one of the reasons. I could gointo the FSX, Flight, P3D etc forums and give them 10 reasons not to use it. But I don't, because I know I will ruin the dayfor thousands of people who enjoy it - pluss I myself will get in a bad mood writing it!If you spent 80$ and feel ripped off then;1. You have no case because you SHOULD have tried the demo.2. You have paid for free updates for about 2-3 years ahead - which you can influence the direction of.So in fact none of us knows what we have paid for at this point. If anyone has anything against XP's flightmodel, bring it on - but be prepared to document your claims and do betterresearch than testing the default aircraft. They are not very good - we all agree - but they do in NO WAY representthe potential of XP (unfortunately).Have a great day everybody!M


737A.jpg
Morten Melhuus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok... just because you like XPlane doesn't mean you're right in telling someone who finds something wrong that they should go away. Seriously.Because it's clearly 'lost' in this thread... here's the real gist of the OP:The default aircraft in the $50 FSX have more accuracy in flight dynamics than the default aircraft in the $80 X-Plane 10.I don't think anyone's being unreasonable in expecting better than that.
As a person who is enjoying X-plane a lot, I would have to agree with this statement. The FSX default planes were a lot better than the default planes in XP10. After downloading the XPX demo, back in Nov/Dec, I played around with it for a week and then I un-installed it. The default Cessna (The one I spent the most time with) just felt like an Extra 300 in the way it turned.Now, I know this can be adjusted, but it was beyond me how to do it and I think its un-realistic to think the average user will be willing or able to to this. They will play with the demo, and promptly un-install it, which is a shame because the sim has so much to offer outside of the default crappy planes they give you. Later, I decied to give it another try and I bought a few good quality XP aircraft, Carenado stuff, Duchess & the CRJ to name a few and I saw what Xplane was all about. It was eye opening for me. Now Im hooked on it.But I wouldnt expect someone to purchase planes for a demo, just to see it its good or not. I do agree that LR needs to either put some time into including at least one or two high quality native XP10 aircraft in with the demo or strike a deal with one of the payware developers of the high Quality Stuff to be included with just the demo version and Copyright it somehow, so it cant be copied from the demo to the full version. Either that or make better default aircraft, otherwise people will get frustrated and walk away from it.Just my 2cents.Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that if you removed the default aircraft from MSFlight there would be no aircraft. In other words they'd better well make it right or Flight is dead in the water (if it isn't already). My point is comparing default MSFlight to FSX XPX etc is pointless.

The RV-6a in MS Flight is pretty good, I don't know if it's "top-level" but probably the best default airplane I have ever flown, and I fly a 9 IRL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,last time I bought xplane, it was v8, then I played with the v9 demo and now the v10 demo.I tried hard to elllect xplane as my preferred flightsim, but just like you, everytime I start trying it, including a Carenado add-on for v9 that now works in v10 too, it simply feels like you say... No momemtum (yes I know, you can tweak the MOIs, just like in MSFS, just as you can tweak about everything... but then, what about that sophisticated blade element theory???) , that irritating roll moment on prop aircraft, a sophisticated AirplaneMaker where you can do a myriad of things but still have to cheat if you want to get, for instance, the realistic effects of lowering flaps on a low wing aircraft, like the default RVs...Back in v9 I exchanged many emails with Austin. I was then devoted to jet engine tweaking for FSX, including those for a well known Airbus.... and tried using the exquisite AIrplaneMaker to get some good results... Nah, no way... (maybe that's why PMDG can't really consider airliners for xplane yet...). Xplane does not even model simple jet engine basics like fan windmill, very important for inflight restarts... Check the rather irrealistic N1 you get when your engine quits... I was never able to make my point, so, it simply is no good for me, even if there are loads of excellent add-ons, and I respect the work of many freeware / payware developers (I used most of Jason Chandler's collections in v9...).It's a shame, but I really can't find it any better than plain vanilla MSFSx or fs9, and, no better than FLIGHT either in what concerns to Flight and World Physics...

Having been poking around at this new install of X-Plane 10, I'm starting to wonder what all the fuss is about regarding the flight modelling.I know that Laminar haved dropped one almighty bollock with the overall quality of the many default aircraft; compared to FS, the X-Plane aircraft are really, really poor. But, I did at least expect to find something different in the flight models. My biggest gripe at the moment has to be the roll momentum.............add control input to bank and it starts to bank, release control input and it stops.....immediately. There's no momentum at all, to the point that it reminds me of an arcade game!I've tried this with 7 or 8 of the aircraft, as well as a freeware Archer that was apparently good (looks good, though no VC).I've messed about with the control settings and made sure everything is as realistic as I can, but this is starting to annoy me.So, anyone got any ideas? Anyone seeing the same thing? Anyone want to suggest the most realistic default flight model?On the plus side, X-Plane 10 does look bloody nice and I can imagine how this will look in the future!
Sorry,if you can, buy ELITE - nothing really can compare to it - may feel like flying on rails, but man, the engine, FM, etc parameters are there closest to real thing than any other PC-based sim can provide (well, there was once RTS-Pro, but it didn't last for long and turned into ALSIM...)
I feel the same way. I have yet to find an X-Plane aircraft that is smooth and stable enough for precise IFR flight. Back to Fly! 2K v88 for a smooth and stable IFR experience for me...

Limited only by Imagination... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then don't expect people to take you seriously.
I don't ! Just don't chracterize my posts as babble or engage in any kind of personal character attacks.I present my opinion FWIW. It's up to the reader to decide what to do with it, if anything.
You claim you have a decades worth of experience, yet you prefer to remain anonymous. Baseless claims. For all we know, you could be some new guy trying to diss on X Plane while claiming to be so experienced in scenery development.
Nice try, GoranM, not falling for that. I am afraid you will have to take my word for it.If not, you are a reader amongst many, and like eveyone else, you have a choice on what to make of my posts.Since you make a baseless claim on my experience, all I can say is : You don't have a clue and I don't need one; because I already know ! i.e. you don't know what you are talking about.BTW, have you ever wondered why I prefer to remain "anonymous"? (and I am not alone !) I think I am pretty sure you have. What bothers you is that I seem to know enough about what I am talking about and most, if not all of it, is based on my personal experience, hence true from my standpoint. Additionally, it bothers you that you can't get any information about my background or what I may have developed. Since I am not willing to talk about it, let it go. What's more, I don't see why that has any bearing at all on what I post.Aren't my knowledge, familiarity and experience not enough to warrant a, shall I be bold and say, constructive criticism of X-plane ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The default aircraft have their inertia set at default values. Which are not realistic. I'm assuming that's what you mean when it comes to the handling in the roll. The inertia can be set correctly in the roll, as well as the yaw and pitch movements as well.There are 2 areas in Planemaker where the inertia and handling can be set correctly.
So my thoughts are correct? The default aircraft have flight models that have faults; big faults about the way an aircraft moves. I don't doubt that this can be improved, but, to me at least, someone promoting things along the lines of "most realistic flight modelling" should at least be including default aircraft that demonstrate this.....very disappointing because I was just assuming I was doing something wrong till now!
This is the aircraft developers responsibility to get correct..not x-planes. Unfortunately, X Plane cannot calculate the inertia of every aircraft that is out there.
Absolutely agreed there, which is why I'm surprised the defaults are so wrong.

Cheers

 

Paul Golding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So my thoughts are correct? The default aircraft have flight models that have faults; big faults about the way an aircraft moves. I don't doubt that this can be improved, but, to me at least, someone promoting things along the lines of "most realistic flight modelling" should at least be including default aircraft that demonstrate this.....very disappointing because I was just assuming I was doing something wrong till now!Absolutely agreed there, which is why I'm surprised the defaults are so wrong.
It seems you are twisting my reply around. X Plane outputs the developers information perfectly. It doesn't guess the data. It's up to the developer to enter the correct information.
Aren't my knowledge, familiarity and experience not enough to warrant a, shall I be bold and say, constructive criticism of X-plane ?
Ummm...No. Because the knowledge you have, that I have seen, on scenery, is about on par with my knowledge on scenery. Very little.The knowledge you have on flight models, that I have seen, is absolutely zero.Summing it all up, I think this says it all...fs_av.pngEnjoy your day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...