Went multi-platform...

[Geofa 108]

Here is why i go "multi"-right now xplane,fsx, and aerofly...

 

Same flight-on two sims and then one completely different.

 

Takeoff from San Diego,Ca.(ksan) to Ramona (krnm) where I presently live, in a Baron which I have about 500 hours in.

 

Xplane:

Since I have downloaded freeware ksan airport/city and Tom Knudson's osm update the airport and city environment is very, very good. Real weather downloads does a nice approximation of the real thing. Takeoff in the Carenado Baron which is the best Baron available now for xplane. It rotates like a Cessna, and just doesn't have the correct "feel", heaviness, or momentum. Flying at correct airspeeds such as vy, cruise climb gives fairly real performance, but go to an "inappropriate" speed and it is all over the place. Reduce the power to 25", 2500 shortly after takeoff-what is wrong lol-whoops because the instruments are so blurry at a pilot viewpoint scale I actually pulled the power back to 12" cause I really can't see the gauge. Zooming in on it, I get the power right, however due to the general instability of xplane barely contain a crash while doing so (zooming is also very jerky and slow on my 3 year old computer). The looks of the aircraft are stellar (other than the blurry instrument limitation of xplane) and for an xplane aircraft it flies fairly close to the numbers-as long as you don't defer from them. The Carenado Baron is my second favorite aircraft for xplane after the f33-but there do seem to be limitations in the fm for various phases of flight just as there is with fsx.

 

The roads look absolutely fantastic and add considerable realism for me-there is never I time I fly without looking at the poor cars on the road-thinking some are looking up at me while in their traffic jam wishing they could escape their earthly bounds!

 

I start following highway 8 which is easily found- the "plausable" world with the add ins looks great in the downtown San Diego area-only wish the rest of the xplane world could look so. Lake Murray is the first thing that just doesn't look quite right, and now that I am getting into the suburbs things are starting to look less "plausable" with office buildings that don't belong and endlessly the same autogen. Upon leveling out the plane continually banks to the right-even trimming it doesn't really take care of it and I resign myself to having to hold continual left bank. I also trim the plane for altitude-it does great for a few seconds-then starts climbing again-and the process contiinues over and over. Finally resign myself to having a sore hand from continually pushing down on the stick and to the left to maintain my exact altitude-something I am a stickler for.

 

Over Gillespie field (ksee) another dose of reality due to a nice freeware add in. I start to head for the mountains-first thing I notice are dark ugly spots on the earth. On closer looke these are power lines-they are exactly where they belong. Ever wonder why they put those colored balls on power lines? Because the lines themselves really can't be seen from the air-not at all what xplane depicts.They definately need work in xplane where they stick out like a sore thumb-though I appreciate they do appear where expected.

 

I start heading up the canyon but start having a little trouble doing it vfr-the resolution of terrain is not quite what I have experienced and now probably due to missing osm data-lots is missing I am having trouble finding my exact way by landmarks! The default terrain textures of xplane though do a very credible rendition of what the terrain looks like for generic textures.

 

Head up to where I live-a community of 10,000 people-and there is nothing-a smattering of roads-again very hard to fly vfr with so much missing-no trees or houses-nothing-looks like a nuclear event happened. The distant mountains again look convincing due to excellent terrain textures but I wish they had a little more resolution. I decide to do a couple 45 degree turns-then remember in xplane this is a recipe for stall spinning-almost impossible to do one and 100 times hards than real life. The plane again really doesn't show any momentum that I am used to.

 

I head over to krnm-boy is the "plausible" world a mixed bag here-the default housing of xplane works real well here because that is how it looks-however there are lots of office buildings-even at the generic airport which kind of destroys the looks. There is a 747 on the runway as I approach-don't think there ever has been one at this airport...

 

Set appropriate power settings-the plane flies pretty close to what I expect but again just doesn't really have the right feel-dropping landing gear/flaps don't really produce the correct effect. I have found in xplane-all the planes kinda "feel" the same, and don't really show the different "personality" different aircraft have.

 

Come in for landing-this for me is where xplane really shines! The whole landing procedure just feels extremely real in every aspect-really love it! This area of flight is what keeps me totally interested in xplane with of course a well behaved aircraft.

 

Fsx: I takeoff from ksan in the Milvitz B55-which is frankly the best Baron I have flown on any sim. Part of this may be that the plane was crafted from real shots of my real plane,but it isn't just the looks that do it.. I accelerate on the runway-momentum feels right-like the real plane when it gets to redline it wants to lift off (the xplane version will lift off way below redline). Like the real plane I hold her down till 10 knts over redline-gently pull the yoke-and like the real plane she leaps off the runway like a bucking bronko. This is the first fm of any Baron I have ever tried that takes off in this realistic fashion (I beta tested one for fs9 and they were just not able to do this). Lower the nose in ground effect to blue line-airspeed does what I expect-climb out and reduce to 25 and 25 easily due to the sharp and crystal clear gauges I can glance at without zooming in. The default ksan airport, city look about the same quality with generic scenery as the xplane with the freeware add ins. Airtraffic at ksan very real due to ultimate traffic. Roads not as good as xplane-they look like lines with cars on them-but they are still there with moving cars. Every once in a while I will get a little stutter-it is true xplane just gives a much more "smooth" experience. I level off-reduce the power settings and again get that great feeling of momentum changing that xplane doesn't have. The plane trims nicely in all axis's, however is still harder to fly "hands off" than the real thing-still have to be more on it than real life to maintain an exact altitude/heading.

 

Now I have before flown this route in fsx. The powerlines are there,-the generic airports looks better than xplane, and there is a greater variety of autogen. Not only is my area populated with approriate houses, buildings, golf course, but there are even palm trees on my property where they exist (a coincidence I know but still pretty cool).

 

However-I have to say-it all doesn't look real! In other words-I feel like I am simming over a computer model of what is supposed to be there-but I just don't feel like I am really doing it! I have always thought the autogen in fsx looks cartoony and I am sticking to my story!

 

Luckily-with one swoop I load the simsavvy photoreal scenery-wow! Instantly this changes in a flash. Every rock, bush, house, landmark appears in total reality and since I am at altitude it looks real-cause it is! I wish this scenery was available for xplane now-I have tried photoscenery for other areas that are available but really did not find it as convincing as photoscenery available for fsx in similar areas. I see Nothern Ca. may be coming out and will give that a try when it does, though it may be a wait or never for Southern Ca which is what I really want.

 

I try a couple 45 degree turns-the controls feel just right and heavy. Still harder to do than real life-but I am able to complete them with no trouble though holding a perfect altitude while doing so is still much harder than rw.

 

I head over to my airport, reduce to landing settings-and it just "feels" real-the controls, momentum, and airspeeds right on. Drop the landing gear and get my approx. 500 fpm descent that Bonanza/Barons are famous for from drag of the gear(xplane seems to do nothing when the gear drops) and get in the pattern with the other Ga aircraft that are flying around the field. Come in to land-the controls again feel appropriate to this aircraft. The landing-well fs seems to luckily seem to think any kind of landing is acceptable. Even with the wonderful Milviz fm the actual "feeling" and control of landing doesn't compare to xplane's-and it is certainly much more forgiving to not corrected for crosswinds properly or even hitting the nose gear.

 

Areofly-obviously I can't compare ksan as only Switzerland exists. However, upon starting the sim a big smile comes on my face-somehow the entangibles are there that make me feel like I am actually flying and not simming. Could be the creaking from the Cessna while taxiing (by the way the Carenado Baron has gotten rid of the awful brakes screaming and xplane and replaced it by creaking-very nice except I don't recall ever hearing creaking in a Baron-but a Cessna-yes!). The autogen is the most realistic I have seen and totally customized for each area-where it exists. Taking off one is greeted with the most awe inspiring realistic scenery-because it is real. The cockpit shadows/lighting are the best I have seen in a sim-amazing how much immersion this adds.

 

None of the instruments are adjustable-in a way good ridence for me. I have always found mouse clicking things to be not only unrealistic but disturbing to the flight part (reason I bought an elite avionics panel-unfortunately it only works in fsx though).

 

 

Cessna flight model-no density altitude modelled-but I love the landing/takeoff. From the creaking landing gear to the fact if you hit the nose wheel you will get in real trouble like rw I love it! This is the most "fun" I have had in a sim since the Flight Unlimited series was out.

In a nutshell:

 

Xplane-I use only now to do pattern work. The realistic landings, smoothness, and fact in the pattern trimming for level flight is not such a factor in the pattern makes this my procedure trainer for this phase of flight.I use the Carenado F33 as I find that it still is the most nearly realistic plane for xplane-even with its faults

 

Fsx- when I want to experience scenery (which is why I became a pilot and still enjoy the most about the flying experience) it is going to be Fsx. Due to better generic defualt scenery with landmarks, greater variety of autogen-it is my sim to explore places I have never been before. Using Fsdiscover with fsx has taught me much about my new area of the country-really great little program that gets little mention. Of course-if I want a jaw dropping experience of the West of the US with all the subtleness that can not possibly be recreated by generic textures-I enable Simsavvy photo real. I only fly the Milvitz B55-it is not only the best rendition of a Baron on any sim, but it also offers me the oppurtunity to revisit my intense 7 year relationship with what becomes family member to a flyer!

 

Aerofly: When I want to just have fun, and feel like I am flying (not simulating and maintaining skills) I fly Aerofly! In so many aspects for me this does cutting edge stuff many of us have been waiting for on a sim. Did I mention I never get below 60 fps on my 3 year old computer with jaw dropping visuals?

 

So no one sim can possible do it all for me right now. Would I like there to be one? Probabl,y as it would be less costly to purchase/keep up with one. I keep hoping but since it hasn't happened in my 31 years of simming I kinda doubt it will ever happen.

 

Besides, as a flight/flight sim enthusiast I like to support and use them all.....and none of them do it all...yet...

[PingPong 60]

Well Said Geoff, I am poly-platform myself, XPX, FSX, and P3D. I'll have to give Aerofly a try.

[jcomm 5,974]

Geofa,

 

delightful reading! Thank you :-)

[Phantom88 3,288]

Funny Geofa you mention how unstable X-Plane is,I find the Exact Opposite for me,X-Plane 10 is Rock Solid Steady but FSX on the other hand is as unpredictable as The weather,You never know when it will Freeze,Crash or just plain Quit!!

[RWFeldman 159]

unpredictable as The weather,You never know when it will Freeze,Crash or just plain Quit!

 

You must have a different copy than I have? maybe FSIX?

[Murmur 3,944]

X-Plane is certainly capable of extremely crisp gauges as well!

 

 

 

And this image is resized and compressed!

 

 

Marco

[jcomm 5,974]

X-Plane is certainly capable of extremely crisp gauges as well!

 

Yes, while I agree with most of the points on Geofa's post, I find (specially now that I am back on FSX Gold too) X-Plane's instrument panels more crisp and fluid than the best panels I am using for FSX - RealAir SF.260 and Citabria/Dechatlon.

 

The Baron 58 and the Sundowner, and of course the DC-3 have very crisp panels, like nothing I found so far in FSX. But I didn't buy any Carenado for FSX or the Milviz B55, which appears to really be a very high quality product.

 

Guys, to be honest, I am above all VERY HAPPY not because I could trash one of the sims and use just one, but rather because I have found the way to enjoy the many good aspects they both have (and ELITE too...). It all depends now on what I am up to, and, instead of trying to find and weigh what I do not like in one, compared to the other, I enjoy the excellent aspects X-Plane10 and FSX Gold BOTH have!

 

Strangely FSX is running smooth as silk on my system, just as X-Plane10. Even more strange - today I had the opportunity to install X-Plane10 on a high-end i7 (I have an i5 2500), and maybe because it has an ATI card, I was surprised with how worth X-Plane10 performed on that machine. It also has Windows7 Professional 64bit while my home machine is running Win7 Home Premium...

[Phantom88 3,288]

You must have a different copy than I have? maybe FSIX?

 

FSVIIII? :Big Grin: Honestly Rendi,I'm very Happy it's running stable for you,It is very satisfying completing an hour+ long GA flight over very detailed scenery such as Orbx PNW,I keep trying :Praying:

[airlinejets 709]

Luckily-with one swoop I load the simsavvy photoreal scenery-wow! Instantly this changes in a flash. Every rock, bush, house, landmark appears in total reality and since I am at altitude it looks real-cause it is! I wish this scenery was available for xplane now

 

Geof,

 

Make your own with photosceneryx. Also, I believe simsavvy is working on the X-Plane version of his files. He has some available files on his site,

[CarlosF 1,243]

Wow Geoff very well put and I can respect that.

 

@RWFeldman

I have had so many crashes in FSX that I lost count. So far I have NEVER experienced one single crash in XP9 or XP10.

 

Funny Geofa you mention how unstable X-Plane is,I find the Exact Opposite for me,X-Plane 10 is Rock Solid Steady but FSX on the other hand is as unpredictable as The weather,You never know when it will Freeze,Crash or just plain Quit!!

 

I couldn't agree more Patrick!!!

[Geofa 108]

I think there is a misunderstanding. The unstability I was speaking of was not system wise-it is aerodynamic! My point was that when I zoom into the rpm/manifold gauge for a few seconds so that I can see them-and then adjust, invariably I am in an unusual attitude by the time I zoom back out-due to aerodynamic instability.

 

Also-re the instruments...I just took a screenshot of the Carenado Baron in both xplane and fsx.

 

I'd post the shots but can't figure out how to attach them here anymore.

 

However, the clarity I am speaking of is when sitting in the pilot's seat being able to see your basic instruments without having to zoom in. I can see all the engine instruments clearly in fsx, but can not on xplane. The default gps looks blurry even with my glasses on.

[GoranM 3,772]

I'd post the shots but can't figure out how to attach them here anymore.

 

When making a reply, at the lower right of the reply box, click "More Reply Options". You can attach files from there.

[Geofa 108]

Thanks Goran! Trouble is jpg compression blurrs them both-I'll mess with it later and see if I can get a good image.

[Geofa 108]

Ok-here are some shots-all Carenado B58-by the way love the glass on xplane (along with the reflections on the glass). You can also see the point about the terrain not being as detailed in the first shot, and the plausable office buildings at the airport.

 

 

 

 

[HiFlyer 9,371]

Strangely FSX is running smooth as silk on my system, just as X-Plane10. Even more strange - today I had the opportunity to install X-Plane10 on a high-end i7 (I have an i5 2500), and maybe because it has an ATI card, I was surprised with how worth X-Plane10 performed on that machine. It also has Windows7 Professional 64bit while my home machine is running Win7 Home Premium...

 

Its because you have not weighted it down with gigatons of crap, yet.

 

I think we finally have machines more than capable of running FSX..... and then we load the poor sim down till it breaks! I guess it took MSflight to make me appreciate again that it wasn't necessarily all about adding stuff until my HD groaned; relearning that let me come back and look at FSX with new eyes.

 

In the meantime, I'm still watching Xplane and Aerofly too. When I asked the Aerofly folks recently, they said they'll be offering the sim on Steam asap, and I think that will push their product into a lot of peoples hands very very quickly if the price is right.

 

I wish that Xplane would have followed suit, at least with their North American scenery but.... Oh, well.