X-Plane for a long time FSX user?

[Murmur 3,941]

So im thinking about giving xplane a try with their demo. I got a very good system 4770k paired with gtx 780 and 16gb of fast ram so I guess I could crank all sliders to the max.

 

Hi Oscar!

 

If you have problems using X-Plane demo or tuning performance, let us know. It's unlikely though you will be able to crank all sliders to the max and still have good performance, especially in the most demanding conditions (high density urban areas + high clouds cover).

 

X-Plane has a better feel of flight. FSX actually has the better flight dynamics for aircraft. X-Plane has been faking out would be pilots for years. It's still happening.

 

Oscar, for your information, be advised that 99% of LAdamson posts here are exactly the same as the one he just wrote above. Just so you can put it into perspective.

[Anxu00 176]

Oscar,

 

Get the demo alright, but also please read the free add-ons and enhancements pinned topic in this forum.  Then you will see XPX as it should be.  Some habits in FSX will need to be undone for XPX, but after a while, it will be become less of a culture shock.  I tried XPX, uninstalled it twice, before I installed once more and was willing to spent the time to appreciated it.  Like you, I am a FSX user, the final push for me was when I realized that all the crashes and issues I had with FSX was due to all the expensive add-ons that I bought for it. FSX without these add-ons is still flyable for me, but the thought that I may have a an OOM or crash near the end of a flight just put me off from even starting it up.  I am now at the fifth stage of grief with getting over FSX, after all, who would not with all the money invested!  Good luck.

[bk2000 0]

Keep you expectations low because you'll find that FSX and X Plane produce similar FPS. If you set up X Plane with similar settings as FSX you'll find similar FPS. If you get 10fps flying over high-density areas with maxed out settings you'll get 10fps in X Plane with the same settings.

[LAdamson 240]

Oscar, for your information, be advised that 99% of LAdamson posts here are exactly the same as the one he just wrote above. Just so you can put it into perspective.

Until the correct changes are made.............they should be. If not, the program remains the same as it has for many years. Flight instructors who run X-Plane based sims, will just still be told to go into plane maker, and modify the wings with different (hidden) airfoils to compensate for roll. And regular users will still be told to just use aileron trim, even if it isn't realistic. Developers will find and post the videos that show constant stick/yoke movement, while Austin makes more videos with feet off the rudder pedals to prove the X-Plane phenomenon of torque roll.

 

 

In the meantime, at the org., since I can't post there (without days of moderation, if ever)...........users will be told that aileron trim is their best friend. Others will say that most small aircraft use a different incidence in each wing to counter roll. This gets piled on to the orginal poster, which asked, because they're time in a Cessna wasn't the X-Plane type of behavior.

 

 

BTW--- for anyone who is wondering where I get my info.................it first, came from my own experience. I built my own high performance kit airplane. I've been around airports and airplanes for many years. When all of this torque issue came up, I started asking a lot of other pilots who fly high powered singles, about their experience. I think I've read about every torque related issue on the internet. I started checking out planes for "engine offset", which there are many. I looked up "rigging" specs for many aircraft. I asked questions on aircraft builder forums, and have seen that Jcomm has asked plenty of questions on pilot forums.

There is not one single shread of evidence, that supports a constant need to trim for roll, from torque produced by the engines. This includes the MU2. The only time you have to do so...........is in the case of high power, and low airspeed (which sometimes can be deadly), or the airplane is just out of rig. As in bent, or old and needs adjustments. We don't need to throw the aileron or stick to the side, to stop a wing from instantly dropping, as a normal occurance in flight. Even if we feel that "torque" pushing the left wheel to the pavement on the takeoff run.......it's mostly gone, or gone, by the time we rotate.

 

 

FWIW---- some of those questions regarding X-Plane based simulators date back three years. It's probably time to "fix", the worlds best desktop simulator....

Will it happen with 10.30? And yes, when Austin produced that video, my senses were re-engergized. I can't help it.

larry no body here said anything about xplane having superior flight dynamics. tonywb only mentioned this

 

• I prefer the flight dynamics in the X-Plane versions of GA planes, such as the Tomahawk, which I have on both FSX and X-Plane.

The Tomahawk is Carenado, or the one the starts with an A, (forgot the name) isn't it? If so, the torque issue is already toned down. I'd like it too. I picked up the Carenado single engine Beech for X-Plane, based on a Beech owners recomendation. I like it too. These have nothing to do, with the ongoing torque/roll issues, and are a pleasant temporary fix, in the meantime.

[skully 1,045]

Oscar, if you're into classic airliners- the FlyJSim 727 is the pinnacle of classic airliner development for ANY FS platform.

The flight dynamics- I don't know how they could could any better replicate flying a 727. The feel in of the aircraft in all flight regimes must me experienced to be beloved. The systems and graphics match the quality of the flight dynamics.

For GA- the Carenado C90 King Air is the way to go. Best money I've spent on a twin GA aircraft.

The Carenado V Tail Bonanza is just exquisite.

The JRollon J32 Jetstream- Just Wow! Tighten you shoulder harnesses and hold on! She's a handful!

I have the Flight Factor 757 but have not yet spent a lot of time in her but as far as 757's go in FSX and XP, it's the best out there.

 

Very exciting news on the updated GPS and sight distance at altitude. I hope they increase the High Altitude VOR range also. Would also like to see a greater range or no limit distance on the moving map.

[Murmur 3,941]

Until the correct changes are made.............they should be. If not, the program remains the same as it has for many years. Flight instructors who run X-Plane based sims, will just still be told to go into plane maker, and modify the wings with different (hidden) airfoils to compensate for roll. And regular users will still be told to just use aileron trim, even if it isn't realistic. Developers will find and post the videos that show constant stick/yoke movement, while Austin makes more videos with feet off the rudder pedals to prove the X-Plane phenomenon of torque roll.

 

LAdamson, I realize you want to get this torque issue resolved and that's great, but it would be nice if you could ponder on the following:

 

premise: it's a fact that also FSX flight model is not perfect and has its limitations. For this reason, just like in X-Plane, the best 3rd party developers heavily "tweak" its flight model (or override it altogether, e.g. Majestic) to overcome its limitations. Ok, we all get your favourite flight models are some FSX 3rd parties.

 

But now please ponder on the following: what would you think of some user participating in the FSX forum, with 99% of his posts repeating again and again the same critiques about the FSX flight model limitations? Would you think it would be a positive contribution to the FSX community? Wouldn't you consider such an attitude bordering on trolling?

 

I don't like the attitudes of x-plane.org moderators at all, but honestly I'm not particularly surprised you've been heavily moderated there...

[LAdamson 240]

But now please ponder on the following: what would you think of some user participating in the FSX forum, with 99% of his posts repeating again and again the same critiques about the FSX flight model limitations? Would you think it would be a positive contribution to the FSX community? Wouldn't you consider such an attitude bordering on trolling?

I don't like the attitudes of x-plane.org moderators at all, but honestly I'm not particularly surprised you've been heavily moderated there...

I do not consider my attitude bordering on trolling..........whatsover.

 

 

I'm sure you do. I'm as much into this, as anyone else. I owned X-Plane versions 8 & 9. I purposely purchased a new CPU, for both FSX and X-Plane. But, unlike many users, I saw a need for some flight dynamic revisions. Especially when X-Plane was being promoted as the most realistic flight simulation available for desktop simulators. Austin even had advertisements to lure FSX users over, when Microsoft pulled out of FSX. He said that "real pilots, will just know". Okay, I'm a real pilot, and no it's not right.

 

 

When I see someone move from FSX to X-Plane, and make comments about X-Plane being more challenging, then I have to wonder. It's mostly about the flight dynamics, and more of a need to stay on top of it, which usually requires more trim. And then I hear............you're in X-Plane now. Forget what you learned with FSX.

 

 

Okay...........Just like Geoff A..........I'm done. I will deleat my account. Have a good one, and hope for the best.

[Murmur 3,941]

But, unlike many users, I saw a need for some flight dynamic revisions. Especially when X-Plane was being promoted as the most realistic flight simulation available for desktop simulators

 

"As real as it gets", it was MSFS slogan right? And yet, I wouldn't think someone _constantly_ complaining on his every post that MSFS is not 100% real would be regarded as a positive contributor.

 

Okay...........Just like Geoff A..........I'm done. I will deleat my account. Have a good one, and hope for the best.

 

I honestly wouldn't want you to do that. Even if it may seem contradictory, I always regarded your observations as interesting. Nor would I like a forum where it's only praises and no space for criticism (a bit like X-Plane.org).

 

It's just that I think 99% of posts dealing with the same issue, everytime someone mentions he prefers X-Plane over FSX (in a X-Plane forum), is... tiring?

[jcomm 5,929]

Any FSX user should approach X-Plane 10 carefuly and not as a "jump to" / exclusive alternative.

 

Presently I think users of both platforms will be able to profit from what is good in each one, and or inexistent in the other.

 

I am sure the new GPS will help GA flyers feeling more at home in X-Plane 10, and this is surely a great innovation.

 

Never bought the Reality XP products for either MS FS or X-plane, and many of you didn't either. Those users can now have a plausible GNS430 /530 in X-plane 10 for $0,00 - not bad!

 

Larry, I, just as Murmur, hope to be able to continue reading your posts :-)

[uwespeed 497]

As I already wrote some time in the past: I suspect LAdamson is a bot which activates on some keywords  :lol:.

 

Just one test, which I made with the default Beech Baron (King Air as well, as far as I remember) in both sims - longer time ago: switching off the left engine and observing how the flight continued. I encourage everyone, who has both sims to try it themselves - and report back.

[flyaway 11]

Thank you all. Well I downloaded the demo and cranked all up. 10fps wow. AlthoughI didnt have enough time to play with it.

 

I activated HDR and put the reg anti aliasing to the max and later I read that they conflict each other impacting the frame rate. Like I said I havent had enough time to test it but when I get home I will work with it.

 

I will follow this article http://www.x-plane.com/?article=setting-the-rendering-options-for-best-performance to try to achieve around 30fps in my test.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spam3d 54]

I get great performance and fluid graphics compared to FSX, it does take time to get used to the difference in the two, I personally dont believe that both sims are of the same performance hits,

[Baylorguy 39]

Thank you all. Well I downloaded the demo and cranked all up. 10fps wow. AlthoughI didnt have enough time to play with it.

 

I activated HDR and put the reg anti aliasing to the max and later I read that they conflict each other impacting the frame rate. Like I said I havent had enough time to test it but when I get home I will work with it.

 

I will follow this article http://www.x-plane.com/?article=setting-the-rendering-options-for-best-performance to try to achieve around 30fps in my test.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hi Oscar, something doesn't sound right.  I also came from FSX and X plane 10 runs MUCH better than FSX ever did for me.  Do you have the latest drivers, etc for your video card?

[ryanbatc 12,847]

Mines like Oscar.... FSX runs better. Especially in big cities perf drops way off....

 

Probably my VRAM 1.2GB - in FSX you needed a fast GPU but in XP you need lots of VRAM.

[flyaway 11]

Ladies and gents!!! After tuning it up I gotta say that.........It looks and feels amazing!!! I got blown away by how this thing looks especially at night with the HDR effect. WOW!

All the sliders set at around 80% with the shadow detail at 3d on aircraft, HDR on with 2xSSAA + FXAA anti-aliasing (higher has a high performance impact, while FXAA only has too many flickers for my taste), clouds 85% and I get around 30-40 fps, I gotta add that my resolution is 1440p.

 

3D Cockpit shadows have some jaggies and I dont know how to minimize this. 

And I love the sloped runways very nice.

 

I'm definitely pulling the trigger..