I have to say after 7 years with FSX and tons of addons, I never had any crashes or omm issues.  Its always been very stable for me and I never had to mess with it much. I think I spent more time tweaking XP.  I guess Im just lucky with it.  However,  I still  have many more "Wow" moments with X-plane 10 and although, XP has its own issues, Whenever I fire up FSX, it just makes me want to go back to X-Plane. It just feels and looks better to me in most scenerios.

 

FSX is still impressive and that's a testament to the wonderful addons by very talented developers. Developers, I hope will someday jump in to XP at some point.

 

Rob

GoranM I have followed almost all the different guides on here, kostas, nicks, pmdg's, bojote's. It took me awhile but it was pretty much trial and error for me. I was about to give up on FSX, but somehow all my hard work payed off and I can really just fly now.I don't have any more crashes, or oom's. There wasn't just 1 method I could tell you that fixed everything for me. I believe it could've been a combination of a lot of things. 

Rob I respect that and other's opinions on here. I was that way to about X-Plane at first, and then I got back to FSX, I was determined to get it to run stable and I managed to do it and now I love it. Both sims has pro's and con's. I just prefer FSX more.

I have my PPL, when I fly in XPX I get the feeling of flight and when I am flying in PD3 it feels like I am flying on rails.

Looks like I'm always going to disagree here. I don't have PD3, but there is always a lot of "flying on rails" mentioned, when it comes to FSX. I too have my PPL, and have flown quite a lot of spirited singles, including aerobatic aircraft. IM0, XP has always been more on the "unstable" side of flight. To me, flying on rails is auto-pilot. I've probably said this a few hundred times already. FSX does not remain on altitude or course, as with an A/P. But is does show more stability. I get more of a sensation of airflow over the surfaces to prevent the plane from wanting to always "dip" from one side or the other. It's often mentioned that XP is more challenging than real flight. Well, it is..........due to the less stability, unless you throw in some artificial augumentation,

or make other changes within plane maker, to give a sense of stability. The "feeling" of fluidness is one thing. To sense an always changing movement, as if the air is constantly rolling or pitching the aircraft is another, which I can find as irratating.

Turbulence is bouncing, smooth calm air is a sense of hardly moving at all. Contrary to some reports, there is plenty of smooth air flying in this world. This is how we plan our cross countries, smooth in the morning, rougher from around 10 to 4, and again smoother in the evenings. As my wife has always mentioned......."It seems like we're not even moving". And yet we're doing around 200 mph, at 4000' above ground level. We call that default FSX days. FSX does default to smooth air, but it's built in mountain ripples feel quite authentic, when they appear on better weather days. We made it a point to always compare real flight to sim flight.

I get CTDs on XPX and also on FSX.

 

As usual it really depends on how you select proper settings among the sims.

 

Goran, can you be more specific? FSX shouldn't CTD unless you have an unstable system or are pushing the limits of its x86 architecture (this why I get them but I know I intentionally do it)

 

Captain420

In all seriousness, can you point me to the fixes you are speaking of?  I get CTD's about 8 times out of 10 with FSX.

If you get NO CTD's and OOM's at all, I'm sure there are plenty of other people out there who could benefit from what you are doing to get these kinds of results.

 

 

Let's be honest here. How many times do you actually use FSX? Not many. And if you do, you would certainly have known how to control it by now. But.........as I've read many times, you seldom use FSX, according to your own words.

Actually, Larry...I AM being honest.  I fire up FSX at least 3 times a week.  Aren't you the one who always said it's ok to use more than 1 sim?  What makes me an exception to this rule?

I just don't have the time to search for all the various fixes that appear to be around.

I've used bojote's site to generate a new FSX.cfg file and I've gone through Nick Needhams suggestions but that's about it.

I can list the payware I have for FSX and FS9 (although I don't have FS9 installed anymore).

I certainly cannot force you to believe me.  So I guess you're just going to have to trust me.

If there is anything else you would like to share about me, please make sure it's fact and not assumption.

 

Actually, Larry...I AM being honest.  I fire up FSX at least 3 times a week.  Aren't you the one who always said it's ok to use more than 1 sim?  What makes me an exception to this rule?

I just don't have the time to search for all the various fixes that appear to be around.

I've used bojote's site to generate a new FSX.cfg file and I've gone through Nick Needhams suggestions but that's about it.

I certainly cannot force you to believe me.  So I guess you're just going to have to trust me.

 

 

I've read probably everything you've wrote on every public forum, since about 2009. I do know that you highly favor X-Plane over FSX, since you switched years ago. And that's just fine. You are an X-Plane developer, and that's fine also. But you certainly are not into FSX enough, to even deal with many of it's addons, or the time to make them run properly. Since I do read a lot, and I mean a real lot, it's also obvious, that X-Plane is going to be a time consuming operation to have everything the way we would like. And that's okay too. However, you've done lots of complaining about FSX CTDs as if it's the normal nature of the sim. If it was that bad, across the board, no one would use it, and it would really be "dead".

Of course I favor X-Plane over FSX.  Just like everyone else has favorites.  You favor FSX over X-Plane.  Yet you say that you occasionally fire up X-Plane.  Just like almost everyone else in here occasionally fires up FSX or X-Plane.

If you have a problem with my own personal preferences, then I really can't help you. 

If you have truly read every single post I have made since 2009, then you would know that the common theme in my posts is that I have ALWAYS told people to go with what they are comfortable with.  Freedom of choice.  I've always respected that.  I choose to open up FSX 2-3 times a week...yet it seems you don't respect that.

Shame.  I held you in much higher regard than that.

I thought the same, however I switched back to FSX and can't really get myself to like X-Plane. Things just look bad in general no matter what I do. Performance is about the same to me as my tweaked FSX. I had a lot of faith in X-Plane but now that I have things almost perfect in FSX, I'm enjoying it much more. The graphics on FSX feel a lot nicer in terms of overall visuals. I am not happy with the awful looking clouds, horizon, and water, and lets not forget the awful looking colors during daytime flight. It just doesn't look or feel right, this is just my opinion though. The only thing I like in X-Plane is the night lighting, that's about the only decent thing as far as visuals go.

To be fair to XPX, have you tried the "must haves" tweaks? please scroll down to the section on the "stuffs you must have" to tweak the "dull" XPX from this page:

 

http://forums.x-pilot.com/topic/5180-dsf-scenery-packages-cytz-toronto-island-airport/

I am a professional IT support person with over 30 years in the business, as well as automotive management. I built my own PC (see the list of components under "MY PC"). I was a HUGE fan of FSX and especially so of PMDG's 737NGX, which I greatly miss when I fly in XPX. Someone mentioned the "wow" moments, and I have to concur that IMHO, there seem to be more of them in XPX. That said, I do freely admit many things about XP that need to get better, principal among those are the lack of airport buildings (FSX has default airport buildings, the famous "red brick" construction), and the fact that XP hides your view to the horizon, with haze, fog, or clouds when you are at altitude (say FL330). The default jets in XPX are unsatisfactory after being spoiled by the 3D cockpit and instrumentation of the 737NGX. There finally are a couple of nicer jets, principal among them is FlightFactor's Boeing 777 Worldliner, which has a very good FMC, on a par with NGX, and it can run on your iPad or Android Tablet quite easily without adding a 3PD connector application. Another huge plus of XPX is that you can use Garmin Pilot and have the GPS data from XPX sent over to your Tablet, so you can use a wide range of incredible functions, like Charts, Flight Planning, and SAFE TAXI. Safe Taxi is the RW equivalent of the wonderful AivlaSoft Electronic Flight Bag, long-promised to XPX pilots, but still in development.

I can honestly say that I have experienced far fewer issues with XPX, but I have to be honest and say that you CAN overload it. This can happen if you go wild with Photo-real scenery packs (think San Diego) and a complex airport and airplane. It has to do with TEXTURES. In XPX, the developers have taken advantage of today's incredible discrete video cards. (Knock: They do NOT support SLI) A nVidia GTX690, the 'flagship' card has only 2GB of VRAM per-GPU, which means no more than 2GB of ram available for the texture mapping. What can happen is the VRAM floods with data, and a brief freeze can happen while the VRAM buffers are flushed and new data brought in. Normally, this is seamless, but you can choke the sim if you have piled heavy scenery in there. Of course you just can't resist doing it, because it looks so INCREDIBLY GOOD! So you begin to have thoughts of the GTX 680 TITAN with 6GB of VRAM on the card (but only ONE GPU processor instead of two).

My point is that as so many have put forth: Pick a sim you like and fly it. Nothing is perfection, and whichever one floats YOUR boat is subjective. Many still love FSX, and I greatly miss my VRInsight hardware, which sadly, has NOT been ported over to XPX. OTOH, having a wide array of tools on my tablet that are RW products brings the realism up several notches, and being able to program my 777 FMC off my touchpad screen blows the doors off mouse-clicking or trying to make a stand-alone FMC interoperate properly.

I still recall the huge amounts of trial-and-error I invested into FSX, and I'm still not over the anger I feel about all those lost hours spent on trying to smooth out the system and improve the frames. I got so angry I erased FSX entirely! That's angry! The stuttering at Orbx airports... the final blow was when CYVR got upgraded (by Orbx) and the memory crashes became a daily occurrence. It just simply blew my mind.

So at that point, I took another look at XPX, and realizing there would be some pain during the learning curve, I bought the Global edition and away I went. A few stellar payware airports and the Triple 7 airplane by FlightFactor were all I needed to get happy about flying again. Then I stumbled across PilotEdge, and I guess you could say my life was finally wonderful. Now (after PilotEdge added KSFO to their 15-hour-a-day real-time ATC) I fly with ATC every single step of the way, changing radio frequencies from clearance to ground to tower to departure to center to approach to tower and then ground... ON EVERY FLIGHT! Worlds apart from Vatsim, but that wonder is available to FSX pilots and XPX pilots in your choice of 32-bits (FSX) or 64-bits (XPX).

The 3PDS need to bring it to XPX. I think many are waiting for the XPX platform to fully stabilize. Because it is still under development, X-Plane is constantly morphing. That complicates things immensely for a developer. FSX and P3D are for practical purposes, "STATIC" (no longer growing or changing), which leaves everything in the developer's hands, meaning they "know what they're dealing with" or "what they're building on" there is no 'moving floor' with respect to the environment they are building for. So XPX is in a bit of a conundrum, because dev's are reluctant to build for a world that changes month-by-month. The solution is for the devs to partner with Laminar, so each side can put forth their ideas and requirements. FlightFactor has one of their principal programmers (Philipp Munzel) now involved directly with the Laminar Research staff in working on XPlane 10.30 (not released yet). Each of them benefit. XPlane gets input from a guy who builds killer payware for their platform, and Mr. Munzel can get Laminar to address concerns and requirements that make current and future products for FlightFactor easier to build and maintain (support). Collaboration- it's mandatory, and just plain common sense.

I think XPX captures people's imagination, because it's clear that over time, the pretty new girl with a small case of acne will gradually turn into the ravishing beauty that will turn heads around the world. She's not grown up yet. FSX is like the beautiful woman who maintains her looks with frequent trips to the plastic surgeon for the latest facelift or collagen injection (think "add-ons"). Dr. Orbx has done a great job on her! Of course, the good doctor doesn't come cheap! You pay for that beauty... with frame rates.

I think XPX has to stabilize for a few years, before LR starts working on version 11. Authors needed so many years to create planes like PMDG or scenery like UTX or ORBX. If we'll have v11 before we see the glorious add ons, we will never see them.

Imagine where XP9 could be, if it still would the most rescent version. LR moves faster than the 3d parties can catch up.

Just my contribution to the thread...

Well, you know how unstable I've been regarding choices in flight simming... I have probably found what we mathematicians call the "fixed-point operator" for PC-based flight simulation: DCS World... It is rather minimalist regarding the features I try to find in a flight simulator, but what it does, it does perfectly! It's, together with ELITE, probably the only simulator I haven't been installing / uninstalling in sequence...

Then, there is ELITE, that rather basic (graphics-wise) flight simulator, but extremely precise and useful in terms of simulating the main characteristics of the GA aircraft included. That's why I recently upgraded it to the latest version - 8.6 - and also extended European GenView scenery database - for those who tend to complain about "poor" scenery, or a sensation of flying on rails, ELITE would be their paradise for criticism :-) Why do I like it so much? Simply because contrarily to any other sim, it gives me by-the-poh feedback on all engine parameters, power, speeds, even aerodynamic effects like the famous prop effects :-) It does it on an IFR/IMC-oriented proficiency / learning / practice environment, with 2D instrument panels that are easy to use and read, and a non-distracting set of out-of-windshield features. The World outside is 3D, but landclass types are very very limited... There are vector roads (main ones) and water courses, to the level required for VFR, and weather effects (based on downloaded METAR data or set by the user) are rendered just about as perfect as they could be for the purpose of this sim.

Finally, I had to opt between FSX/P3D or X-Plane10. It has been very difficult, specially because as Robert describes, I too miss my PMDGs, my A2As, even my RealAirs... but, when I put both sims side-by-side on a features table, and even forgetting about the something special there is in X-Plane10 when it comes to the sensation of flying when the weather is not calm ( IMO much better simulated in X-Plane 10 than in either FSX or P3D even using the weather injectors I tried... ), there are a few aspects in X-Plane 10 that put it ahead of the other two, although I am well aware that I'm able to find that ordering because I am really not worried about not having AI or seasonal textures in X-Plane 10...

An aspirated prop aircraft with a CS prop will never be properly modeled IMO if there is no realistic relationship between setting your MP and your Prop RPM. Even worst, it can't be good when you lean and your fuel flow increases!!! Even the best add-ons for FSX suffer from this bug / limitation, and contrarily to X-Plane 10, forget about it ever being fixed! In X-Plane 10 we have that irritating roll torque bug, but heck, I'll buzz around Austin so many times that I am sure he will eventually get tired of it and decide to do something about it :-)

BTW, anything we can complain now about being "unfinished", not correct or not even modeled in X-Plane 10 has at least a chance of being addressed sometime in the future. Not true about FSX, and I believe nor about P3D, even V2, unless the external FDM solution is used, but time will say if the concept works when V2 get's released...

Then, in X-Plane 10 I can have a better experience scenery-wise than I do with FSX without spending a penny! I never bought any add-on scenery for X-Plane8, 9 or 10! yet, my scenery thanks to the freeware community that embraced this simulator and is providing us users with excellent examples of scenery, comparable with the best (and very expensive) in the FSX / P3D world...

Weather ( RW ) is another area where, to give you an example, until today ( literally ) I was not having the chance to profit again thanks to the contribution of freeware designers for X-Plane 10. I just installed and am happily using the NOOA GFS plugin for X-Plane and finally having excellent winds aloft, cloud coverage, turbulence and temperature for my long haul flights! Whow!!!

This is what, IMO, made me decide to keep X-Plane 10 and continue to, carefully invest in it - future perspective, being a lot less expensive, having some very nice characteristics.

Flight dynamics-wise X-plane 10 is also powerful. As I open the various default aircraft files and start to play with the plane-maker and airfloil-maker settings I am able to get very plausible reactions to control inputs, flight configurations, near limit situations, etc... Contrarily to what some may think, there are lot's of parameters that, if carefully used, preferably based on RL experience, although not necessarily in RL data, because X-Plane 10 is not really that "ultra-realistic", and if you think that feeding it with exact flight data and detailed blueprint measurements will produce an accurate model of the real thing you'll soon find out how wrong you are, but, as I was saying, if you take the time to use those tools to their most powerful extent, I believe you will be able to come up with very plausible flight models for your airplanes.

I have decided to embrace X-Plane 10 again. I could have decided to seat and wait for P3D v2, but X-Plane 10 is here already, and when I feel the need for perfection, sorry, I start DCS World, or when I find the need for a bit of serious IFR practice and flying exactly by the POH my Cessna, Piper, Beechcraft, Socata, I start ELITE ;-)

To be fair to XPX, have you tried the "must haves" tweaks? please scroll down to the section on the "stuffs you must have" to tweak the "dull" XPX from this page:

 

http://forums.x-pilot.com/topic/5180-dsf-scenery-packages-cytz-toronto-island-airport/

I'll check those out too. See, if new people could find these links right away we'd be more inclined to run both sims...

 

Of course I favor X-Plane over FSX.  Just like everyone else has favorites.  You favor FSX over X-Plane.  Yet you say that you occasionally fire up X-Plane.  Just like almost everyone else in here occasionally fires up FSX or X-Plane.

If you have a problem with my own personal preferences, then I really can't help you. 

If you have truly read every single post I have made since 2009, then you would know that the common theme in my posts is that I have ALWAYS told people to go with what they are comfortable with.  Freedom of choice.  I've always respected that.  I choose to open up FSX 2-3 times a week...yet it seems you don't respect that.

Shame.  I held you in much higher regard than that.

 

 

Just so you know, your name or user names just came up as consequences of different Google tags such as X-Plane versus FSX, torque, and all of that stuff. I was never specifically looking for your postings. In fact, I'd end up reading many forums I had never heard of. Except for different issues on forums such as Avsim & Flightsim.com, I've never bothered to join these other forums. Most of this reading was actually done in the last three months. Instead of a good novel, I just Google some word combinations. But now, it says I've visited these different pages many times or so...., so I'm probably done..