Let me start by saying that I use and enjoy FSX, P3D and X-plane and that I didn't start this thread to have a debate over which sim is superior to the other.

 

The reason I did start this thread is that I am very curious as to a comparison (graphics/flightmodel/performance/immersion) between an FSX Carenado aircraft and an XP10 Carenado aircraft of the same type.

 

The only reason I chose Carenado is that as far as I know they are the only developer who has a few of the same aircraft products for each sim.

 

Personally I'll have to wait for Carenado to release the B200 or the B1900D for Xplane before I could make the comparison for myself.

 

Very curious

 

 

I'd like to help, but as an FSX user I never bought any Carenado :-/

 

I have 3 Carenados fo X-Plane 10 and I really find them all very good, the only aspect lacking being, IMO, the GPS unit which is uncomparably inferior to even the default GPS ( GNS 430 - type ) in FSX.

 

Version 10.30 will bring a good surprise in this area for X-plane users. Then we will be able to really pout both models ( FSX and X-Plane ) in a totally fair comparison...

The reason I did start this thread is that I am very curious as to a comparison (graphics/flightmodel/performance/immersion) between an FSX Carenado aircraft and an XP10 Carenado aircraft of the same type.

 

I am not sure what your goal is:

 

1. Do you want to know which simulator is better, and want to use Carenado as benchmark, because they have the same models available?

 

2. Do you want to know which Carenados are better -- those for FSX/P3D or those for XP?

 

Because the problem is that the XP Carenados may look like their FSX/P3D counterparts, but their flight model as well as their systems have been re-created from scratch. So if (1) is your goal, this won't give a just comparison.

 

If (2) is your goal, flight model and sound of the XP Carenado's are better. The FSX/P3D Carenado's still have more complex avionics (although these are heavily based on FSX/P3D standard).

 

The differences are esp. visible in the C90B King Air. Its fuel system logic is more complex in the XP version than in the FSX version, and you can even damage the engine. It has rain effects on the windshield, and the interior lighting is extremly well done. On the other hand, its Avidyne misses features the FSX/P3D version has (due to FSX/P3D coming with a default terrain map mode).

Someone who once posted here regularly, and was a moderator at one time.........owned both a single engine Beech, as well as the Beech Baron. He really liked the Carenado single engine Beech for X-Plane 10, over the FSX version. However, he seemed to prefer a 3rd party version (not Carenado) of the Baron for FSX.

 

 

My opinion as a pilot, plane owner, plane builder, etc,........is that there is still no true defining edge in the flight dynamics department for either sim. Just depends on how much knowledge and time, the creator wants to put into the project. Some people think that XP seems more like flying because of it's fluid smoothness. Perhaps that's true. It's just not what I actually look for, when it comes to flight dynamics. But then it certainly doesn't hurt, either.

Version 10.30 will bring a good surprise in this are for X-plane users. Then we will be able to really pout both models ( FSX and X-Plane ) in a totally fair comparison...

 

So, what are they adding that will make it fair to compare FSX and X-Plane?

 

 

So, what are they adding that will make it fair to compare FSX and X-Plane?

Brandon,

 

If you read the article by Ben Supnik that J.C. provided the link in this forum, you will know that Ben allude to an update and much better default GPS in 10.30.  For GA aircraft the default XPX GPS just does not cut it.  So at least in the basic NAV avionics, they will be at comparable set.

To the OP:  I own both Carenado FSX model and XPX.   The Beech F33A model that is.  Despite the inferior GPS in XPX, I still prefer the XPX version.  It simply feel better as LAdamson said because the sim is smoother. I have high 30+ FPS with the FSX F33A and I have the same with XPX or more, but in XPX I do not have the dreaded stutters on approach that FSX gave me.  Also if you have complex sceneries like ORBX in FSX, flying low near those sceneries is a source of stutters for me and ruined the sim experience completely.  I hope you get what you are asking for. 

 

 

Someone who once posted here regularly, and was a moderator at one time.........owned both a single engine Beech, as well as the Beech Baron. He really liked the Carenado single engine Beech for X-Plane 10, over the FSX version. However, he seemed to prefer a 3rd party version (not Carenado) of the Baron for FSX.

 

Hi Larry, I though he'd be back by now. He certainly contributed a lot of useful comments over the years. Hope he reconsiders.

 

Regards

Hi Larry, I though he'd be back by now. He certainly contributed a lot of useful comments over the years. Hope he reconsiders.

Regards

Me too.

Thanks for the input guys.

 

What's got me curious is:

 

 If a single talented developer goes about  trying to achieve a realistic functioning aircraft product for both sim platforms, working from the same data set, how similar and/or different will that aircraft feel and perform?

 

I'm hoping they would be quite similar.

Excellent question laserit, you've focused your "laser" on it :-)

 

Well, unfortunately, on both sims, the access to detailled data, although very important, can't by itself ensure a realistic representation of the aircraft characteristics by the FDM...

 

On each sim, designers have to use their "magic" to come up with an acceptable compromise between the limitations of the FDM and the intended behaviour of the model. There are certainly

many aspects to take into consideration, not only the aerodynamics, but the engines, various systems, etc...

 

Even IRL each aircraft, of the same model,  is an aircraft :-)

 

I tried to model gliders on both sims, using the more sophisticated tools I had available a a lot of manual editing of tables, etc... Never came up with a good glider model, or at least one that would, under various flight situations, replicate the true glider :-/

 

Anyway, both sims can render models very plausibly. Each has it's strong and weak points.

 

The only reason I chose X-Plane 10 in terms of future is exactly the fact that there is live in it's core, and LR is trying to improve it in different areas, while in MSFS and P3D the core FDMs are closed. Only through the use of external flight models can those simulators offer better performance and a closer to real bahaviour, I believe.

Thanks for the input guys.

 

What's got me curious is:

 

 If a single talented developer goes about  trying to achieve a realistic functioning aircraft product for both sim platforms, working from the same data set, how similar and/or different will that aircraft feel and perform?

 

I'm hoping they would be quite similar.

 

 

Up this point it is my experience that the two are as different as night and day.

To my senses, X-Plane far more accurately conveys the feeling of flight motion through the air, the movement of the aircraft and the control inputs required for corrections and flight control.

Even on the ground XP does a superb job of following the contours and imperfections of the runway.

Not smooth as a billiard table feeling like MS FS has.

 

Consider the locked down you have when driving a car. You're glued to the ground with not much sensory input unless you're a spirited driver.

That is feeling I've always had in MS FS. Locked in "on the rails". Even in turbulence the aircraft does not react to the unstable air like I perceive when I'm flying a real aircraft.

Up this point it is my experience that the two are as different as night and day.

To my senses, X-Plane far more accurately conveys the feeling of flight motion through the air, the movement of the aircraft and the control inputs required for corrections and flight control.

Even on the ground XP does a superb job of following the contours and imperfections of the runway.

Not smooth as a billiard table feeling like MS FS has.

Consider the locked down you have when driving a car. You're glued to the ground with not much sensory input unless you're a spirited driver.

That is feeling I've always had in MS FS. Locked in "on the rails". Even in turbulence the aircraft does not react to the unstable air like I perceive when I'm flying a real aircraft.

The part I highlighted in bold....

 

I think my high quality 3rd party aircraft for FSX did a better job at flight control. I'd honestly get annoyed rather quickly with X-Plane. In about 5 minutes to be exact. I'd come home from a real flight in the Vans RV6, and do some recreation of the event. Much has to do with mountain topography that I liked with X-Plane. It was FSX that was more believable in sense of flight control. The torque issue, and much of the constant retrims has a lot to do with it. I was happy that my real plane was rigged much better than my X-Plane examples. Perhaps this has changed in the last eight months. I don't know.

Which is what always gets me in these conversations. We tend to defer here to the real pilots...... Who then disagree with each other, leaving us pretty much back where we started! :-)

Hi Larry, I have the exact opposite experience concerning FSX to XP.

I modded my airfiles in FSX to give the aircraft a looser feeling and some degree of realistic stall behavior.

I just completed a flight tonight in the incredible FlyJSim 727. The flight control inputs and aircraft behavior on final into gusty Lake Charles was so realistic I couldn't believe it was sim.

Since I purchased the bird three nights ago I've since lunched three engine by not monitoring epr properly and almost lost the aircraft once when I got slow in a clean configuration doing a photo shoot. 

You have to actually FLY this aircraft and fly it by the numbers. This is what I want from a simulator, not a locked in and no matter how sloppy you fly you'll always be in good shape type sim.

This 727 model comes from very gifted hands and if you don't own it I highly recommend you try her out.

I also highly recommend the Carenado King Air.

We all perceive things differently but to me I am regretful that I didn't discover XP sooner than I did.

I wasted a lot of time and money in FSX trying to get what I've found in XP..

Hi Larry, I have the exact opposite experience concerning FSX to XP.

I modded my airfiles in FSX to give the aircraft a looser feeling and some degree of realistic stall behavior.

I just completed a flight tonight in the incredible FlyJSim 727. The flight control inputs and aircraft behavior on final into gusty Lake Charles was so realistic I couldn't believe it was sim.

Since I purchased the bird three nights ago I've since lunched three engine by not monitoring epr properly and almost lost the aircraft once when I got slow in a clean configuration doing a photo shoot. 

You have to actually FLY this aircraft and fly it by the numbers. This is what I want from a simulator, not a locked in and no matter how sloppy you fly you'll always be in good shape type sim.

This 727 model comes from very gifted hands and if you don't own it I highly recommend you try her out.

I also highly recommend the Carenado King Air.

We all perceive things differently but to me I am regretful that I didn't discover XP sooner than I did.

I wasted a lot of time and money in FSX trying to get what I've found in XP..

I'm not really into airliners, but I did highlight once again. I doubt I would have enjoyed any plane for the other sim, if they were just sloppy with good outcomes. The other sim aircraft I bought, certainly were not like that. I have no use for arcade type flight. My perceptions are based on my RL experiences in the numerous GA airplanes I flew. I discovered X-Plane back with version 8. Actually, I used the demos far before that, since I knew about the program around 1994. It was advertised with a pilot shop, that I often bought from. Owned version 8 & 9. I'm just going by my honest thoughts, as the title suggest. However, once I do invest in flight simulation again, I'll certainly consider some of those you've suggested. I do believe I'd enjoy the KingAir. I won't get into flight simming again, if it's limited. Will end up with two or three sims at the least.