Pathetic story.

 

In what way?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Ok, I agree :-/ ...

 

You were the biggest XPX cheerleader and all of a sudden you changed your mind ?

To make things easier for those of you who have difficulty understanding my change of mind, I will just list a few good reasons for me... This will at least help you understanding that it wasn't anything really deep... Just frustration with some aspects that I couldn't really live with... A simulation game is a game after all, and no flightsim will ever be perfect, but:

 

1) Prop aircraft do not have the irrealistic torque effects that X-Plane prop aircraft all suffer from, and if there are many other positive aspects on the way X-plane models flight, for me this was too difficult to forget about... and... I don't think this is the sort of thing that will get fixed throughout v10 (I may be wrong....)

 

2) Aircraft don't weathervane the moment we release parking brakes on a mild 5 knot crosswind, not even at 20 knots... Yes, as you start rolling you will have to use your rudder, but the lack of proper friction in X-plane really kills the realism for such things as taxiing, taking off under medium crosswind components well bellow the max dem x-wind for the model you're using...

 

There are ways around these bugs... but they require the use of what I might call "cheats". You have to use augmented artificial stability, invisible wheels and tires of irrealistic dimensions, etc... Using trim tabs works (take the Carenado Baron 58 as a good example...) but! the moment you change power settings from max to lower regimes you will have to fight right bank, and every time you adjust power you're using aileron trim... Sorry ... no way! And.... instead there is just a mild, if even perceptible, yaw from slipstream effects when hiting the various aircraft surfaces... There should be yaw, where there is excessive, intolerable bank!!! Then we would be using the rudder, not the ailerons or their trims, to counter it.... at least in a huge class of prop aircraft... Of course there are examples where torque roll is huge, but not in a Baron, a Q-400, etc...

 

3) When a simulator includes the Globe fro flight, and let's you set the time of day/month/year for your flights instead of having a generic day/dusk/dawn/night situation for flight, then I expect it to show realisting lighting, and at least sunrise / sunset times - it's important for something as simple as VFR flight, and that's why in RL we have the tables for sunrise sunset times at our aerodromes...

 

Then the tile-based approach for geographical reference of position, navaids, etc..., up to the limitation of not being able to use your Map View beyond the limits of the current tile you're flying in. Also the sudden change in wind direction when you cross tile limits... Irritating for me at least

 

The weather depiction, with a very limited set of cloud types, and where a cloud layer has, in the minimum,to have a thickness of 2000' and the abcense of any plausible model of fog are also things that I could not accept.

 

Believe me - I really tried hard to accept X-plane just as it is now...

To make things easier for those of you who have difficulty understanding my change of mind, I will just list a few good reasons for me...

...

Believe me - I really tried hard to accept X-plane just as it is now...

 

That makes it easy for me to understand! I can totally relate to your points!

Thanks

I agree, my X-Plane is also getting dust here. They say it's flaws are easy to fix, but nobody do it... I will give MortenM Piper Archer a shot when it comes out, I believe it can be the most realistic GA simulation to date for a desktop simulator! But until that happens, I will stay flying FSX.

Alec

They have fixed MANY problems.

When X Plane 10 first came out, I couldn't run it with HDR at all. Now, I can run HDR very comfortably and still maintain close to 40fps in a complex add on with settings at near max..

Turbulence has been turned down.

Andreas has included free scenery packs.

64 bit has been worked on for many months.

And I don't even remember all the other problems that have been addressed.

For a complete list on what has been worked on, fixed, added, etc...

http://developer.x-plane.com/

I havent been on here much lately because I was building a new system and busy re-installing stuff. Now with Huricane Sandy, Im busy cleaning up my yard, but im still very much into X-plane.

 

However, I can totally understand why people drop in and out of a sim or out of flightsiming altogether. I get bored with it from time to time and get into something else for a while, but I always come back to it. Right now Im also into DCS combat sims and from time to time play a little BF3. Im also trying to ween myself off the computer a little more. Thats mainly my wifes request (lol).

 

Its just a cycle that repeats and sometimes its good to walk away from something for a while and find a new hobby or interest but flight siming is always the hobby I return to. X-plane is still my flightsim of choice, but I enjoy others too.

 

Rob

X-Plane 10.11 became final today

I also understand why and sympathise.

I'll shortly be adding SSDs to my system and XP will not be going on (FSX and P3D will).

As a mainly heavy iron user the lack of a decent ATC and a AI traffic system, seasons etc makes it a poor choice over other alternatives, although I do appreciate some of the things it does well.

Austin got my 80 bucks, I hope he spent it wisely!

I can understand, I am keeping an eye on XPX but it's not quite 'alive' for me when flying with lack of ai, other aircraft etc. It's a bit like flying in the aftermath of a zombie apocalypse sometimes.

 

I jump around sims as well, I spent a lot of time flying DCS lately but it's had it's share of multiplayer issues for a little while.

 

Any time I have had lately for simming has been in iracing, another good genre to play when you're a bit burnt out from other stuff.

AI, and the fact that it is completely irrealistic and has huge impact on the performance of the sim, because it is supposed to use the same detailled FM as your aicraft, is another serious limitation of X-Plane10 just as it is now. I have allways set it at Zero (only one airplane - mine ) after a few completely hilarious experiences...

 

For me it is really sad that X-Plane10 can't start following a track based a lot more on the accuracy of it's flight and systems and environment models, which have the right ingredients but lack stability in all aspects of the term, instead of giving users the interesting effects of traffic semaphores, etc...

 

Good autogen, at least plausible autogen is also really needed. Apparently 10.20 may bring good news in that area. For me that's not a MUST, because in ELITE I have nothing but a few water courses and the rws with generic taxiways, so... As I pointed out in the OP, I started by removing OSM altogether because of the impact it was having on my system at some denser areas around towns like Madrid, Paris, London, etc...

 

ATC is another area really requiring at least a little bit more of attention.

 

Weather - cloud variety mostly, low visibility situations with the well known "curtain effect", and the lack of fog / haze are also aspects that should get a lot more attention from LR.

Wow.......

 

I saw you selling your copy in the classifieds forum and went "What the heck?"

 

Came here to see if there was more info.

 

All I can say is that I am sorry to see you leaving the XP world behind, even if only temporarily. You've become a strong voice in that community, and seemed well positioned as an advocate for the sim. I had hoped such a voice might help pull XP a little more out of its bubble.

 

:-/

It is a cycle many of us go thru with each release. This version was the best and held me the longest in the in cycle.

It is a cycle many of us go thru with each release. This version was the best and held me the longest in the in cycle.

 

Wise statement. I see the only posrible benefit in a superior flight model compared to FSX if you are able to ignore the nuked world. But does XP model it really better than RealAir and Milviz?

It depends... In some aspects yes it does, in others no it doesn't.

 

In those that depend directly on the core limitations of MSFS, such as the poor reciprocating and turbine engine models, the wrong way mixture works as compared to RW, the necessity of introducing some abnormal coeficients in order to get proper sideslip (but having it's nasty side effects such as an abnormal need to use rudder for turn coordination...) , X-Plane10 outperforms FSX Gold, even with RealAirs (it's not a fault of RealAir but rather something tied to the core of FSX, just like it is impossible to properly overcome the unrealistic roll due to torque forces on prop aircraft, or the poor ground handling on the presence of crosswinds in x-plane without cheating...),

 

On other aspects such as the modelling of torque and slipstream effects, X-Plane stands clearly behind MSFS. Ground handling under any wind component, even taking into consideration runway type and contaminations is IMHO a LOT better in FSX then in X-plane, mostly due to the rather irrealistic friction / drag that wheels and their supporting structures have in X-Plane.

 

I am yet to test the latest A2A models, and I have never used a Milwiz, but I read the best about their products...

 

When it comes to rotary wing, X-Plane certainly outperforms FSX.

 

When it comes to weather, I believe FSX, specially when used with good weather injectors, performs way better, way more realistically then X-Plane...

 

When it comes to the plausible default World, I end up preferring, by far, FSX, specially now that I can use it at max settings. If I ever decide to spend money on good add-ons for landclass / mesh, then it will most certainly feel even better. FSX also includes a perfect model of daylight transitions depending on geographical place and date, down to the minute, an area where X-plane stands well behind...

 

Included map and flightplanning tools are also a lot better IMHO in FSX then in X-plane.

 

Then there is AI, and ATC. Default AI in FSX outperforms X-plane's offer. ATC is a question of taste... They're both not very good, but I end up preferring FSX implementation of default ATC.

 

MS FLIGHT does most of this (weather, flight models of the Carbon Cub, RV6, Stearman and Maule, world plausibility) even better than FSX, In most aspects of usabiltity from a GA aircraft type sim perspective MS FLIGHT is my preferred among the three. Aerofly FS, if you don't mind bringing yet another one to this discussion, is great, really very good in many aspects, even with it's limitations regarding what is modelled. What it models it models very well and very plausibly, at least in as far as the gliders and weather modelling goes.

 

I ended up getting back to MS FLIGHT, using Aerofly FS and enjoying FSX Gold again... That's the truth...