Ground effect is not modelled in X-Plane as simply as in FSX, which uses a table...

 

But both approaches can be equally valid, table or not.

 

 

But both approaches can be equally valid, table or not.

 

True!

Although I've never had a satisfactory explanation about how XP converts from 2-D to 3-D loading - the best I've had is "it uses standard methods than can be found in a text book"

 

 

"it uses standard methods than can be found in a text book"

 

Ask again :-)

 

Sometimes AM is just too busy to give the kind of explanations we would like to get... ;-)

I like GA prop planes , which is the most realistic one (payware dont matter)

ELITE v8.6, any model :-)

I like GA prop planes , which is the most realistic one (payware dont matter)

 

For which platform? FSX, P3D, X-Plane, other?

 

For me, I still find the "on-raills" way of simulating flight dynamics of a GA prop aircraft in ELITE v8 the best I have ever found in a flight simulator when it comes to prop effects, precise engine parameters, flight inside of the "normal envelope". Ground physics are very very limited though, but, it's meant to be used "in the air" :-)

 

Then, there are excellent models for FSX or P3D and for X-Plane 10. Name one in one of the platforms, someone can easily nema another for the other sim. It depends on how they were designed, implemented... mostly.

 

In X-Plane 10 ( and also in FSX, but with less impact ) some prop effects are poorly modelled, and we have to adopt alternative strategies to overcome those limitations.

 

I also have my attention focused, even if at distance, in Aerofly FS. Their approach looks good!

 

 

Ask again :-)

Sometimes AM is just too busy to give the kind of explanations we would like to get... ;-)

 

I did via email and that was the answer I got from AM - one of his team having first said he didn't know.

 

 

I did via email and that was the answer I got from AM - one of his team having first said he didn't know.

 

:-/  Oops! I'll ask him :-)

I would be interested in Prepar 3D planes.

:-/  Oops! I'll ask him :-)

 

Thanks.

Just a point of view from a student PPL.

 

X-Plane flight models are way above FSX or P3D in terme of realism. Do a crosswind landing in both sims and compare to a real life one and the best flight model will be obvious.

But the flight environment in P3D is incredible. That's a big problem with X-Plane.

And I need a good flight environment, the more important factor is the Weather and I cannot live without OpusFSX.

I found a fix for the P3D flight models : RealAir. Theirs planes are spot on, I really don't know how they do it. That's the only planes I use in P3D.

 

In short, if X-Plane had more payware editors that would my sim of choice.

 

 

But the flight environment in P3D is incredible.

 

And is the same ad FSX!

And is the same ad FSX!

 

That's not the point of this thread.

I could try to explain why the immersion in P3D is better but I think that will go into another thing A vs thing B. So let's stay on topic.

 

The flight model in P3D is the same as FSX because they didn't what to break the compatibility with FSX add-ons (at least not much). The consequence of this decision, for me at least, is that the X-Plane flight model is better than FSX/P3D. I really hope that will change over time.

I can remember I read some info from LM that they had done some things to flight dynamics but to take advantage of the new features the plane had too be developed native for P3Dv2 and not ported over from FSX... Correct me if Im wrong... So maybe we could see some intresting things the day we get native P3Dv2 developed planes...

 

I hope devs soon will start too develop addons that only works in P3Dv2, only then I think this sim will really start too shine. Porting scenerys/planes over I think will give us half baked products that will not be perfectly optimized for P3Dv2. I actually now start too think that keeping backwards comp maybe wasn't such a good idea and will only bring us issues that shouldn't have been there in the first place..I have already seen this with Orbx NIR, I would call that a bad port...(Maybe it's just me)

I think some people over estimate the differences between P3D and FSX. There really aren't as many as people would like to believe. The differences between the models is neglible. In fact the only differences are "utilizing 32-bit indices instead of 16-bit, addition of material z-biasing, as well as some additions to MouseRect's for ISimObjects" (quote from p3d2 sdk). For most situations these differences are not going to be noticeable at all.

 

In addition, from my testing, compiling a model with the P3D2 xtomdl program produces a model that performs no better than a portover from FSX (although the mdl file is larger no doubt due to the 32bit indices instead of 16bit).

 

There have been a small number of changes with some new variables opened up with Simconnect but for the most part I'd say from a developers perspective 99% of P3D is still the same as FSX.