Hmmm, but PMDG is coming and soon many others will follow.

I truly expect to see, before the end of this year, RealAir, A2A, and others, announce their entry intro the X-Plane era  :wub:

Huge freaking SMILE has overtaken face before the monitor.....  Bring it on (rubbing hands, and wallet nearby...)

Freeware not equal freeware. You can't compare freeware from today with freeware from several years ago. Many of the freeware of today has the quality of payware from (very) few years ago, and there is also freeware around which equals some payware from today (e.g. sceneries from Chris K, Aerobridge and TruScenery has also great freeware - err ... and LPMA for XP is not this bad, too B)). And the upcoming Santorini freeware for XP will be better than Santorini X (I can assure this :good:).

 

 

Why post, if you don't present your true view and thoughts?!?, but of course, with no need to personally attack, deride, or diminish another's viewpoint and comments. When I see that coming from somebody....I don't bother past that verbiage. I want a post to make me 'chew the cud'....and think 'ying and yang' about what he or she commented upon....whether as an O.P. or as a comment to the thread. I respect more, honesty...than the politically correct, sans attack threads. My thoughts, anyway....

 

Fine, then here goes. Keep in mind, I've already been kicked off the X-Plane forum, just a month ago for this. My statements are not a troll. They are just honest to goodness knowledge on the subject. Perhaps I brought it up too much before, but it was always in response to a flight dynamics subject. I don't personally attack either, I think I'm fairly civil, but I do seem to irratate a few. On the other hand, I've recently read pages and pages of postings on different forums, going back to the last four years. It's surprising just how many developers & other respondants have been the ones to force the irratations.

 

All this searching & reading I've done in the last month, is not to discredit X-Plane as a whole, by any means. I think it's an interesting simulator, and would prefer to see it become even more realistic. I'm not just an FSX user. I have XP 8&9, as well as payware for those, and the XP10 demo. Thanks to research, I've just become much more interested in reading real life pilot reports for a very large variety of aircraft. The internet certainly makes it easy! I might spend two hours every late evening reading pilot reports. But then I always have. I must of aquired tons of aviation magazines in the past. I'm a speed reader.

 

The subject, relates to a sentence that you brought up, in this thread. "You will stick for the main part, and where simulating real world flight models, torque, yaw, atmospheric effects upon your air-frame...all of this, will become more important than the investment within FSX as a whole."

 

And just a few days ago, this comment was made. "Try to fly with the Mitsubishi Mu-2 1.5 or the BAE Jetstream 32 and you will learn very quickly where the trimwheels are located."

 

Besides these two quotes, there are many more, that go along the same lines. A usual response is learn to use trim. Especially aileron trim.

So here's something to make you 'chew the cud'....

 

The heavy senses of torque roll, after rotation, that exist within X-Plane, especially with some very popular models..........DON'T EXIST in real life. I read a sim review, in which a twin turbo prop plane was discussed, that didn't exhibit torque roll, even though it's props turned the same way. The review went on to question it's other flight dynamics, since this one appeared to be missing. Do enough reading, and it's plain to see, that many X-Plane users just accept the phenomenon as real, and quickly start turning those trim knobs to compensate. Some find it more to do, and therefor more challenging than FSX. If I was to test fly a real airplane ( which I've done BTW), I'd be wondering what's wrong, if the wing was still trying to dip towards the runway, after the wheels have cleared the ground. This should only occur in high power, low airspeed situations...........such as you'd find with go-arounds in high powered WWII fighters. In a normal takeoff sequence, the lift provided by the wings, as well as other adjustments such as offset engine mounts, outweigh the effects of torque. Other than that, just some light aileron control with the wheel or stick, should handle any "heavy" wing, until trimmed out. It shouldn't be anything like the forces we see to trim pitch or yaw. I know, that we've seen video's, etc. in support of the torque phenomenon. However, it's the wrong assumption, and I'll challange anyone, to find proof otherwise. I've read countless pilot reports, and talked to many pilots who fly high powered turbine airplanes, as well as those WWII fighters. Unless it's an engine out situation, torque becomes a less consequence of other forces. Do enough reading, and the most you'll find about "torque" as in torque steer or roll, will have to do with flight simulation, and not the real thing. You'll find plenty of references, when it comes to pushing a wing & wheel down on the roll, but you won't see a pilot report about the need to quickly throw in aileron trim to harness the effects of the engine trying to twist the plane in flight. I know that myself, as I've piloted aircraft, in which the torque is very noticeable on the roll.

 

So there it is. Food for thought. And I've highly thought out this subject myself. It's for the betterment of X-Plane to solve the problem. Win the WED prize, if that's what it takes. Unfortunately, I'll now sit and wonder about getting the boot again. I wasn't happy about the situation last time. I had made a response to a comical portion of the thread, which looked like it was written for me. My wife and I, both got a chuckle. I had to add my own cellphone generated smiley, since there is no access to the built in ones. Then all **** broke loose. There was no smirky smile on my face. I just signed off my cell-phone that very moment (at the lake), with it having the only current password. I didn't know about being "off" this board, until getting a new password, a few weeks later.  I hope this is taken for the improvement of the sim, and not considered as a troll. But then you never know. At 62, I just don't get a real kick, of being annoying. As someone who's been involved with the experimental aircraft side of things for decades, I just care about getting things right. IMO--- it's just not a good thing to continually harp on the XP versus FSX thing. You know me............I'll always find something wrong with XP if need be. Just like I did, when I highly favored Pro-Pilot over FS98. Back then MSFS "sucked".....

 

L.Adamson

When I read his post it was just the CTD's that stuck in my mind and it didnt really worry me, of course it didnt mean all fsx users get CTD's and would find XP a better alternative because of this.

 

Larry, I always agree with you on a number of points but it is just the way it goes around here. You are put in to a 'camp'.   You are either us or them. It's a shame that we are not more mature to see it differently.

Most people dont see us as people who use a number of sims and can't be fenced as a xpx or fsx or dcs user so when you say something you are just a fsx troll.

 

Jcomm is the only person I have seen who can get away with it because of his obvious usage in a number of sims and unbiased view across them all.

 

I am with you though, flight model myths are still around and generalisations like you quoted are wrong but I can hardly be bothered entering the conversation anymore.  At the end of the day it will only cost a fsx user the cost of downloading the demo to find out for themselves.    If they are not a pilot and dont know the difference but like xplane then there really isnt any harm done and another happy user.

 

I agree, it's frustrating seeing wrong stuff posted as fact but it's a conversation that cannot be had over here.  Most people here use one sim only and cannot carry on a conversation with people who have a view coming from multiple sims,.

I agree with LAdamson :smile:

Larry is absolutely right! But even worse, people in this torque "war" have completely forgotten that X-Plane isn't the only sim to model rolling moments from torque in a somewhat overdone way...

Guess what other sims have the same problem? FSX and FS9, MS FLIGHT (very criticized when a patch for the Maule was released and according to some made it unflyable because of the roll torque, FlightGear with even it's best FDM - JSBSim!!!

Yesterday I was playing with the Flight1 PC-12, one of the best GA turboprops designed for FSX. Talk about roll due to torque after takeoff and during climb! Whow!!!! It is there in all of it's "force".... I'd say it is not as pronounced as in most XPX props, but it's very easy to feel and does require right aileron / aileron trim!

Even ELITE v8 has some roll due to torque on some aircraft.

And of course, my preferred simulator in terms of flight dynamics - DCS World - has it too...

The big difference between this simulators is in how these tendencies are compensated by other forces, including asymmetric slipstream effects and dynamic pressure when your speed gets higher and thus your coefficient of lift gets lower... and even the use of rudder/rudder trim to compensate (instead of aileron trim, not used for instance in the P51d for takeoff / climb). DCS World has probably the best / most realistic way of simulating how this happens in RL.

And of course I am sure Austin agrees with us too. After all he is a pilot with a lot more of hours than most of us here (me at least who have 0.0 hrs on prop aircraft...) His only problem has to do with the amount of code necessary to introduce those other effects that, IRL, compensate for the prop torque. I strongly believe he want's everything crystal clear in is code/fdm, and the only way to solve this is to correctly model those other forces / factors, something that has certainly a lot of nasty math interactions with his BET approach ( similar to the one used by DCS World, btw... ). Before some point along X-Plane9 series, there were no such torque effects, but Austin was being told that it was unrealistic, and he was aware of it, so he programmed those effects into X-Plane, and we started having roll due to torque. He even took care to calculate additional lift at the root of the left wing (assuming a clockwise rotating prop...). Now he just has to bring in the other components, but that is certainly not an easy task, and X-Plane10 has already taken a few not so easy tasks, including the bigest so far - going 64 bit...

 

Honestly, if I were Austin, I would already have explained this ( or any other reasons ) to his users. I believe it would stop this constant need that I myself, Larry and others have to debate the torque roll problem, specially when some sentences that tend to consider it as the rule are posted at the forums... He could acknowledge that he is well aware of it, he intends to fix it, and even explain why it is not absolutely correct the way it is now... 

I am currently on holiday in the greek sun, so fully relaxed  B) - nevertheless my thoughts about the discussion "comparisons FSX - XP10 ... why?": comparisons have to be made. And they were (often) made by FSX users - some of them trolling - chiming into the X-Plane forums.

So, why aren't XP users allowed to make comparisons? They are doing it in the X-Plane forum, and never go to the FSX forum to make comparisons or even trolling there.

 

There should be equality in this (and all other regards).

 

Ok, and now back to the greek sun

I'm jealous!  Say hi to my Grandparents

Guess what other sims have the same problem? FSX and FS9, MS FLIGHT (very criticized when a patch for the Maule was released and according to some made it unflyable because of the roll torque, FlightGear with even it's best FDM - JSBSim!!!

 

Even ELITE v8 has some roll due to torque on some aircraft.

 

And of course, my preferred simulator in terms of flight dynamics - DCS World - has it too...

 

Looks like it's the real world that has its physics wrong... :lol:

 

 

Yesterday I was playing with the Flight1 PC-12, one of the best GA turboprops designed for FSX. Talk about roll due to torque after takeoff and during climb! Whow!!!! It is there in all of it's "force".... I'd say it is not as pronounced as in most XPX props, but it's very easy to feel and does require right aileron / aileron trim!

 

My latest "Flying" magazine, and a PC-12 report, reveals nothing about trim ( unfortunately). Just advance the throttle, feel the airplane accelerate quickly, and rotate when it reaches flying speed. The latest "Plane & Pilot" has more info with it's TBM 850 report, also a single turboprop.  For takeoff, use right rudder trim and right aileron deflection. Rotate at 85 knots, and once the gear is up, turn on the yaw damper. The TBM needs a lot of rudder to keep the ball centered in it's various configurations, and the damper takes over all rudder inputs, easing the pilot workload.  The article then talks about other phases of the flight.

I agree with LAdamson :smile:

 

I cast the first vote for a lifetime ban from all aviation related forums :lol:

 

Seriously though LA's post above regarding torque etc is an interesting read.

Hmmm... it's now thursday... I'm becoming XPX fan... so I think I'll be on the XPX side for a while now...  By saturday I should be back on P3D, maybe FSX...  So, either that thread becomes available right now, or you'll miss a few good arguments in favor of XPX :-)

lol

I'm jealous!  Say hi to my Grandparents

 

If you would tell me where they live ... :lol:.

It might be hard, though - as I am currently in Santorini (for - obvious reason - vacation B), but not only; the second reason is research for Santorini X-Plane).

Unfortunately, XP10 is addonwise at place FS was 13 years ago, few payware quality addons and lot of great freeware quality addons with great community. That's a dealbraker for me.

 

At the other side FS freeware community is at life support, and that's a shame. Today everyone wants to run a business.

 

And that's one of the many reasons for me to use X-Plane. The community consists of many enthusiastic users with their heart in it and contributing high quality freeware and advice - like in the old days of MSFS.

Now, unfortunately, the MSFS community is often divided in e.g. FS9 vs. FSX, iFly vs. PMDG NGX, this weather addon vs. that weather addon, this traffic addon vs. that traffic addon etc.

Recently I read in a german FSX forum a request for help, as one had difficulties to register FSX. Two of the (all very similar) answers: "You've gotta be fuc.ing kidding us?", "You are only playing dumb, right?". That's a dealbreaker for me .

 

 

And that's one of the many reasons for me to use X-Plane. The community consists of many enthusiastic users with their heart in it and contributing high quality freeware and advice - like in the old days of MSFS.

 

There were those good days of "FLY" as well. At some point, many freeware developers will become payware, if they stay in it year after year.

 

When it comes to reality, finances and family life have to be taken into account. What was fun as a hobby , becomes work, at some point. The real advantage of these type of people, is that vast amount of experience they've built over the years.

 

In regards to that forum you mentioned, I won't even bother with those.

Well, two of the main reasons I would really like to be able to embrace only one sim is exactly time and money.

 

I know that if I use more than one sim at the same time, managing add-on acquisition will become a problem. Not that I tend to buy many add-ons ( I am rather selective ) but with more than one sim at the main time it sometimes becomes difficult. That is also why I adhered so well to the MS FLIGHT model...

 

I have thought to myself more than just a few times - jose, let's keep it simple... X-Plane10 has future, it is good already, multi-platform, 64 bit..., the user and devs community is great, yes it has it's problems but the team at LR is working hard, let's concentrate on it ...