Sign in to follow this  
GamerNurd

Flight model?

Recommended Posts

Is the flight model realistic in prepar3d?

Compared to xplane 10, which one has the most realistic flight model?

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Same reply I gave you in the Prepar3D forums.

 

All simulators have their strengths and weaknesses and if anyone ever tells you that one sim is the most realistic... they're probably lying.

 

So... find the one that you feel is the most realistic... because in the end, that's what it really boils down to.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I generally agree with what WarpD said.

 

In my opinion, with the Cessna plane I personally have flown extensively in real life (210) - the example I've used from Carenado in X-Plane is the most representative of how the actual plane flies. I particularly notice how the airplane responds with the application or removal of power at various phases of flight.

 

Obviously no offense if someone disagrees...just what I've experienced with that particular aircraft that they make for both platforms.

Share this post


Link to post

It depends on the aircraft, where the 3rd party addons are generally better than the default aircraft.

 

For me, I find that A2A's C172 Cessna has a more realistic GA flight model than any default aircraft in P3D2 or in X-Plane 10.  I also only fly with Active Sky Next, which add turbulence and ridge lifts/drops. 

Share this post


Link to post

It depends on the aircraft, where the 3rd party addons are generally better than the default aircraft.

 

For me, I find that A2A's C172 Cessna has a more realistic GA flight model than any default aircraft in P3D2 or in X-Plane 10.  I also only fly with Active Sky Next, which add turbulence and ridge lifts/drops.

 

+1 (I have several hundred hours in the C172 RL version)

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting question. I have over 900 hours in various GA aircraft and feel both can't replicate the real experience. You need the crucial inputs that real flying afford; from the subtle pull on the yoke of various external forces to the push/pull on your torso from the negative/positive "Gs".

 

I find these simulators useful in navigation, approaches, systems familiarization, and quite frankly, for entertainment. I find it detrimental to "trash" one platform over the other. Find what you are comfortable with and exploit it. It's about aviation and the education of the public of this beautiful endeavor so our "enlightened" political class will not make the real thing disapeared for the average person.

Share this post


Link to post

Agree with gpf3m, i also have hundred of hours on a cherookee, c172, katana and grob and neither Prepar3d or x plane exactly replicate the experience. But both offer hours of fun (oupss except Prepar3d of course). I never worry too much about how the model replicate the real experience because each real life flight offers different performance; number of people on board, fuel load, lift /temperature relationship, power setting selected, updraft from thermal. All this change on each flight and you need to be comfortable with a wide range of performance variation. So in simulation, i just take the performance as they are and just pretend they are the results of the various factors that affect real flight.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

TurbineSeaplane, I am confused.

 

You state you generally agree with my statement, and then mark my post with a dislike. Really?

 

That makes no sense. LOL

Share this post


Link to post

@Warp

 

Didn't even realize I did. Sorry.

Can that be undone?

I'm on some "mobile version" of the site I can't seem to get out of. :-(

Share this post


Link to post

TurbineSeaplane, I am confused.

 

You state you generally agree with my statement, and then mark my post with a dislike. Really?

 

That makes no sense. LOL

 

 

Oh we are a sensitive bunch really. :P  :rolleyes:  

Share this post


Link to post

 FSX, Prepar3D, and X-plane all are based on simplified flight models and approximations. Also  none of them have motion cues or realistic visual cues.  At the end of the day it's down to the one you like.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh we are a sensitive bunch really. :P  :rolleyes:

No, not really... but it is amusing. :)

 

@Warp

 

Didn't even realize I did. Sorry.

Can that be undone?

I'm on some "mobile version" of the site I can't seem to get out of. :-(

It's ok... just confusing and amusing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

@Warp

 

Didn't even realize I did. Sorry.

Can that be undone?

I'm on some "mobile version" of the site I can't seem to get out of. :-(

Look at the post you marked. There should be an option on the far right to "Undo Rating" of your selection and allow you to choose another one if you wish.

Share this post


Link to post

Look at the post you marked. There should be an option on the far right to "Undo Rating" of your selection and allow you to choose another one if you wish.

Found it, thank you,.

Share this post


Link to post

I fly a 182 and have more than 1,000hrs.

Used to be in favor of XPlane 10 but after the A2A 172 in Prepar 3D.

Im thinking thats the best most realistic.

 

Still This planes are far for realistic, and always too easy to land.

But fun and good practice for IFR

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this