The thing thats stopping me is the worry about hardware? Do Saitek panels, go Flight and open cockpits hardware work with Xplane?

 

I really can't help you with this one :-(  I just use a Saitek X52 and rudders...

 

Open a thread at the X-Plane forum. Someone will certainly answer!

Saitek panels all work via Saitek drivers. Available from Saitek themselves these days. The BIP takes a bit of effort to get to work though.

portions snipped

 

This is good because I believe all will agree that, no matter how wide the coverage of FSX or even P3D are, the fact is they're still based on premises of 2006 and before. Nothing new is happening to the core of their simulation, and that means no advances in flight or weather modelling, for instance. If you want, of course you can add the 64 bit stuff, because it does indeed create yet another base for development of more complex add-ons and built-in features of X-Plane.

It's all how you "word" it. Okay, nothing new at the core, but that's certainly not the end of it. There have been plenty advances in flight and weather modeling, since Microsoft dropped out. Of course, all these many advances are due to 3rd party intervention.

 

At the same time, X-Planes core does evolve. But rather slowly. It could still use a heap of extra 3rd party help, primarily to boost sales, which allows quicker advancement. And while that X-Plane core is slowly evolving, it's the 3rd parties that still make advances to the "core" with plugins, that work outside the basic premise of X-Plane.

 

At this stage, it's still all how you look at it. A dead core that still keeps spinning, due to the constant 3rd party changes, or a slowly maturing core, that could use a rush of immediate help, to attract a much larger user base.

 

 

I do have a tendency to get somewhat ticked off, when I see wording such as FSX is dead, as well as ..... no advances in flight or weather modeling, since Microsoft left. IMO, that's nothing but marketing hype from an X-Plane standpoint. And then we wonder..........why I'm like I am.

 

P.S. -- since this IS a FSX forum, unless X-Plane's flight modeling has made gigantic strides in the last few months, since I stopped actively flight simming due to my desire for a super computer....then I still prefer RealAir's ( for FSX) rendition of GA flight. When I'd come home from flying my real life RV6, it was a "RealAir" that felt the most natural and comfortable. And this was five years past 2006.

Larry,

 

I'm not saying it is dead -just that it reached it's stretching limits...

 

In the very same post you extracted those words from, I end saying that  I still think it offers the wider coverage a simmer can look for ( in a civil flight simulator ).

 

Problem is, I, personally, couldn't carry on investing on both sims, my time and my money, so, had to make a choice. The latest add-ons I bought for both simulators were decisive, as well as the latest messages exchanged with the LR team. The same potential I have seen right from the beginning, is, probably slowly, but effectively showing up it's face :-)

 

Last, I really invested in yet another platform mostly because of the rotary wing - DCS World. I like simulating helicopter flying... I can't get the same quality in as far as rotary wing go in FSX compared to X-Plane 10. By far X-Plane offer a much better flight dynamics model for that type of aircraft.

 

Also, the way X-Plane models weather effects is, IMO, ahead of what FSX can do, even with the best add-ons I used, including FSGRW and others... Flying a well desiged aircraft for X-plane can then give you a better experience than flying an equivalent model, also very well designed, in FSX. That's not ( necessarily ) the fault of the flight dynamics model, but most of the time a lack of proper modeling of some weather effects and how they interact with the various surfaces of your aircraft, and it can really make a difference!

 

BTW, and since we're talking alternatives, I still keep an eye in AeroFlyFS. Even limited, compared to what is modellled in X-Plane, it weather effects are even more well done, as well as it's effects on aircraft. The sim has some quirks with the flight dynamics, but so has X-Plane and FSX. Aerofly FS is certainly a simulator not to dieregard in terms of future. Please visit their forum here at AVSIM, and the link to a few very nice "tubes" posted after the release of the first add-on aircraft, this week!

Also, the way X-Plane models weather effects is, IMO, ahead of what FSX can do, even with the best add-ons I used, including FSGRW and others... Flying a well desiged aircraft for X-plane can then give you a better experience than flying an equivalent model, also very well designed, in FSX. That's not ( necessarily ) the fault of the flight dynamics model, but most of the time a lack of proper modeling of some weather effects and how they interact with the various surfaces of your aircraft, and it can really make a difference!

 

I never seemed to find that. Some simmers believe that air is constantly moving, and that we as pilots are always making constant corrections to remain level in pitch and yaw. That's a myth. Many times, within five minutes, my pleasure of X-Plane flying had expired. It could just become irrating, as I've mentioned before. It was a combination too many trim changes. The "infamous torque bug" is certainly one of X-Planes long, long lasting problems, that may finally get looked at. While X-Plane DOES have that certain feel of being airborne, within the limitations of a desktop, it's that constant out of trim condition.......that always left me wanting for something better. I found it within numerous 3rd party products for FSX. There are several real life airline pilots that agree with me........as they are well aware of the X-Plane torque fiasco.

 

And note: My real life RV6, that I make sim comparisons with, was a high performance single. It was semi-aerobatic, and required a much more nimble stick operation, than a Cessna or Piper. Yet, it was stable. You could feel airloads of the flight surfaces on the controls, and it was not twitchy, or a device that required constant trimming attention.

 

Since, I'm no longer flying the real bird, I've gotten back into R/C after a 20 year lapse. Unlike desktop simulation, R/C actually uses Mother Natures physics for flight. They work just as a full size plane does, without any human designed electronic physics. Scale of flight surfaces will usually differ, because air molecules are the same for both R/C and full size. I can say, that moving those undersized sticks with R/C............really IS realistic.

 

 

 

 

Many times, within five minutes, my pleasure of X-Plane flying had expired. It could just become irrating, as I've mentioned before

 

It has considerably changed, a few releases ago. I believe you haven't been using X-Plane 10 for quite a while...

The "torque bug" is being "fixed" by Austin himself :-)

As a glider pilot, I can only say I prefer by far the feel of flying in X-Plane when it comes to weather effects, although I still think that the turbulence scale should be tunned down a bit under some circumstances.

 

 

I'm not saying it is dead -just that it reached it's stretching limits.

 

Except there is absolutely no basis in fact to back that statement up. Look at all the new advancements just this year, and more is coming, like ASN which totally replaces FSX weather system, and all it's limitations. True weather radar is promised as well as a lot of other advance features.. FSX isn't going to go away any time soon, no matter how much the XPer's say it is.

Use both, and X Plane not bad option if your lacking money.  Think it has room for improvements and potential.  Not married to fsx nor X Plane,. use both of them.  X-Plane is alive while FSX is corpse. FSX is obsolete but X-plane needs time and it will start to make inroads with FSX users.

If this is xplane-10 then I am not impressed..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJsxCdNHHxo

Yes,

 

if this is FSX, then I'm not impressed either :-)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqZ8-zBg-0Y

 

or this one by myself, a few years ago :-)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoJTuDzIC8g

Yes, you are right, but I was not talking about the flightmodel.

But out of the box FSX is as bad, sometimes even FS2004 looks better.. :-)

For me its not about how much better FSX looks compared to X-10 default.

 

Give me a flight sim platform where I have plenty of addon sceneries and evniroment addons like REX  and some good addon planes... Thats all.

 

Its like the VHS vs BETAMAX debate... BETAMAX maybe better but ultimately its the software that counts.. In this case of Simming, its the addons (the software)... 

 

Even the expected LM P3D depends on how many addon sceneries can be ported over. 

 

 

Give me a flight sim platform where I have plenty of addon sceneries and evniroment addons like REX and some good addon planes... Thats all.

 

On that I can only fully agree!

 

But I decided to give X-Plane 10 it's time... and hope that in the near future more and more real good add-ons can join what I already have.

 

Until then, I am surely missing even the default AI, my beloved PMDGs, A2As, etc...

Give me a flight sim platform where I have plenty of addon sceneries and evniroment addons like REX and some good addon planes... Thats all.

This is a trade-off of sorts.  Add-on revenue is the the fuel for the scenario you are asking.  If everybody waits for the market to become mature with add-ons, that only stalls the very market they are waiting to mature.  In the case of the rise of MSFS, there was no real competition so all revenue went into the same fire...easy-peasy.

 

What is needed is for flight simmers....not MSFS'rs.....to support x-plane with purchases of quality add-ons.  By purchasing quality add-ons, they enable the devs to continue to develop quality add-ons, hopefully devoting more and more time to it and grow the market.  Many markets have some type of catalyst event that kicks off the growth and for x-plane, I believe that will be the high-end airliner simulation market, which is just now coming into its own.  With more folks buying the airliners and becoming x-plane users, that creates a bigger market for other devs to tap into and so on and so on.  It will get there.

 

TomK

Two things that I need to get me to use XPX more often. I good traffic program like My Traffic X or UT2 an a good ATC program. I have the 777, A32neo, Dash8-400 and the CRJ-200. I know things like better cloud textures and seasonal textures are in the works. It's just going to take time.