I've only just started my learning curve on theQ and know the NGX well.

 

I'm looking at the question of which is better from a different aspect.

 

If I think back to my early days, I was brought up on the iFly 737 which had a few quirks to say the least. Oddly though it felt like it had a personality. Moving to the PMDG was an upgrade and yes it is beautiful and has deep systems but...

 

...what I 'feel' maybe, is, that the NGX is a little clinical. It doesn't seem to have a personality. What I mean is, its a little bit boring, a little bit predictable from a personality point of view.

 

I don't mean this in a derogatory way, I totally am enthralled with it.

 

What I've noticed with theQ is that it is going to have the same learning curve that the NGX had. It does for me however, have something that the NGX is missing for some reason.

 

I've only flown a few short moments in theQ so far, but their is something about it. Once you have done the systems stuff (although badly in my case) and just before that moment you get into the air both theQ and the NGX feel the same. It's from the moment you get into the air you notice something. You feel your in the air! It's subliminal, your still sitting in the same chair but actually your not, your flying.

 

With the NGX it lifts off which is what you expect. But that's it. Your in the air.

 

This does not make one better than the other. The two compliment each other and that is a compliment to both. One additional fact is, it gives those of us who want it a wider choice. Not a choice of a brilliant product over a mediocre product but an equal choice.

 

I'm just happy that new stuff is still happening for this old dinosaur and that dev's are still deving for FSX Ok that's not a word but who cares? It's also driving competition and that In itself is even better.

What everyone has forgotten to mention is that the Q400 uses multiple  processor cores, which the PMDG 737 is unable to do because it uses the FSX FDE. This should result i a considerably better frame rate. But only tie will tell which (if any) is "best", since we are comparing a new aircraft with one we are already familiar with.

 

Henri

 

 

The dash doesn't taxi like most other aircraft (simulated by the joystick rotation/rudder while on ground) and i have no idea why, this is a failure for me.

 

 

The real Dash 8 Q400 is not steered on the ground by rudder control either, hence why Majestic implemented this feature; in pursuit of realism. In the real aircraft, the tiller is the only way to steer on the ground, before rudder authority comes in, at 40+kts.

 

...... so I'd love to know how Majestic featuring this, realistically, is a "failure".

 

What I'm reading from a lot of the posts in this thread (not all) is "The Dash 8 doesn't do it the same way as the NGX, (which I like), so it's not as good". Or people wanting every aircraft to have totally generic features, like the rudder pedals being linked to the nosewheel. I mean, it may well be more convenient steering the aircraft via pedals, but is it a good thing if add-on manufacturers just deliver "convenience" and "similarity" to other planes' features; ....even when they're not realistic!

 

I think a lot of people are in too much of a comfort zone with the NGX and will now only judge other aircraft on whether they can be operated in the same was as a 737NG.

 

...... give it a few months, when we're all virutally type-rated on the Q400. :wink:

 

I'm not bashing the NGX; it's awesome; but it's a lovely change being able to fly something else now, that at least reaches the same levels of fidelity as PMDG do.

 

There are no losers; we're all winners.

Well said. I was trying to say what you just did lol

The NGX is, of course, a jet. It's FMS and Autopilot are capable of putting the plane in a very predictable place at all times, and the whole thing feels really "solid". Sometimes when you're in LNAV/VNAV on approach and even in the transition to an ILS approach, the thing feels so stable that it's almost like it's on rails.

 

Disconnect autopilot and the NGX is very easy to handfly if you came out of the Autopilot nice and stable.

 

Being a Jet, when you open the throttles, you get forward thrust. When you close the throttles you get less thrust.

 

I'm finding on this Q400, that the aircraft still feels very real, but you can tell it's not a jet. When you push the throttles forward you get more thrust, and a little 'kink' in the nose direction as the torque P factor happens and it pushes the nose to the right by a degree or two. The yoke feels nice and solid, and you can really feel it respond to your inputs. 

When you pull the throttles back you get the torque factor coming off and the aircraft wants to move slightly left again.

 

I'm really liking the simulation (only flown it twice so far, both for around 1 hour) and the little details like this are making it really immersive. (of course a 737 Jet wouldn't do the torquing thing in real life either).

 

I'v been flying 737 addons since Flight1's 737-300/400 in FS2002, PMDG's 737 for FS2002/FS9 and of course the NGX. Also at worldflight.

 

I'v not flown a Dash-8 (especially a Q400) before so the differences are big, and I'm still at the bottom of the learning curve. I'v had over 10 years of knowing my way around the 737 FMS, and about 2 hours of experience so far of the Q400 systems... so still a ways to go! But what I'v seen of it so far, I can tell that this Q400 is a really good quality product.

We should be thankful devs are still producing highly detailed and realistic addons for a rather dated and memory limited flight sim known to all as FSX.  I have been flying the NGX for some time now and most likely will get acquainted with the newly released Q400.....hopefully it is more forgiving in the VAS/OOM department!

Silly comparison is silly.  This is like comparing a pickup to a luxury RV.  Both are nice, full of features, can haul stuff, and are built to drive on a road, but they are different beasts bred for different duties.  If you want a comparison, put it against the j41, or the Carenado King Air.  

Silly comparison is silly. This is like comparing a pickup to a luxury RV. Both are nice, full of features, can haul stuff, and are built to drive on a road, but they are different beasts bred for different duties. If you want a comparison, put it against the j41, or the Carenado King Air.

 

I agree you should get both since they are different

Both, no question.

 

It's apples and oranges... get both and get the best of both worlds. The Q400 outshines any other turboprop simulation out there. The NGX is a class act.

 

I have both and enjoy each on the same level.

 

A

We should be thankful devs are still producing highly detailed and realistic addons for a rather dated and memory limited flight sim known to all as FSX.  I have been flying the NGX for some time now and most likely will get acquainted with the newly released Q400.....hopefully it is more forgiving in the VAS/OOM department!

 

It IS more forgiving as far as I can tell so far. I understand that a lot runs outside FSX. I can run it from FTX/OrbX's EGFF Cardiff in overcast/rain generated by OPUSFSX and still get 29.5 - 30 (when locked to 30 in sim). The NGX manages around 25 or so under the same conditions. This is on HD resolution with an overclocked i7-2700K @ 4.8GHz and a GTX670 2Gb card. I do not use 4096 or 2048 resolution textures, I have no AI, but I have settings otherwise generally to the right, other than autogen, which is set to dense.

 

A

Both PMDG and Majestic should be congratulated. It's too bad, though, I'll only be able to experience the Dash 8 in P3D once Majestic releases the P3D version (which will be soon according to the developer). Me thinks PMDG needs new lawyers. ; b

 

I will say this - it's a good thing these companies push each other in terms of code and software development. This can only be a good thing for our hobby.

 

Todd

 

I will say this - it's a good thing these companies push each other in terms of code and software development. This can only be a good thing for our hobby.

 

 

 

Exactly. This is a good time for FSX.

Why are people comparing the NGX and the Q400 as to which is more convincing? Convincing in what way? How do you know that it is convincing? Have you flown a real 737 or Q400? Even sat in the cockpit of one? The Q400 is a Q400 and the 737 is a 737. If you want to do a comparison, compare them against their direct rivals. The only comparison that can be drawn is the "realism of flight" As I had stated before the FDE of the Q400 is a bit more complex and it "feels" more like an actual aircraft flying. Is it perfect? no, is the NGX perfect? no. Systems wise, yes the Q400 has an edge in some areas while the NGX has an advantage in others.

 

One of the features that some have not gotten use to ( and perhaps think its a bug ) is the way you taxi the Q400. But in real life this is the exact way you taxi the aircraft love it or hate it. If some would read the manuals you would see that the option is available to use the tiller in harmony with your yoke or joystick and to have it independant. Let's not forget that there are other websites that  provide manuals  for the Q400 with lots of added information.

 

This post  says it all , the new detailed tutorial is  out now  for download,  all 71  pages of  it in great detail.