Here you go: x737 Project.

The x737 is a nice freeware project but can't compete with the professional FF/PMDG-Quality. The next real good one will be the B737-300 but is still not a NG...

 

Franz

Gents,

 

There's really, honestly, no need to argue back and forth about an NG making it into XPlane:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/451365-xplane-development-status-thread-updated-12sep14/page-5?p=3105759#entry3105759

It seems like a lot of "classic" fun specially if compared to JS4100's accuracy, realism and functionality .........any updates on the release for FSX ?

Hi folks,

 

inspired by PMDG's announcement to launch the DC-6 for X-Plane 10 I "took the plunge" and left FSX/P3D ground to see "what's next". B)

To make it short: the XP10 platform is simply great! "Real" flight dynamics, professional weather system, up to date and detailed world database, real environment lights+shadows, great performance, excellent replay and training tools... etc.

 

So regarding this thread:

for me the question which A/C will be PMDG's next is for me less important than wondering which platform will actually be best to deliver more than only "eye candy" in the long term. 

 

Those who don't own XP10 yet and are interested in seeing complex A/Cs like B757 or A320 inside XP10 may take a look at the two dropbox links. These pictures I took yesterday night and I found them interesting to share.

(My Laptop: FS resolution 1280x720, XP10 v. 10.3.5.3, 64bit, Add-Ons: SkyMaxx Pro v2 (clouds) and Urban_Maxx_Extreme_V2_3D (cities))

B757 EDDM-LIML (with cloud shadows, 100% real lighting (no "VFX"), windshield wiper in VC, sun/moon environment)

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/z9ziioncnlm4gqi/AABz3MStow0ySAn_NzBLB3Tsa?dl=0

A320 EDLW-EDDF-EDDM (detailed daylight, dusk and night scenery, up to date EDDF(!) and EDDM, OSM, ground vehicles)

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gwt9pob3i1rm21n/AAD0Lcpr8XXVGgbZ3FQV4GMCa?dl=0#/

 

So at least for the time being FSX/P3D lost me for XP10. In order to not get too much out of the 737 business, I am momentarily flying the NGX's grandpa, the 737-200. Very interesting to study historic system backgrounds for NGX-flyers like me.  :rolleyes:

Here are some screenshots of a simple classic airliner inside XP10 (B737-200 EDHL-EDLW): 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wc78qcr1ot8lypw/AADCgyEimEdj3oSEpzHbYUiYa?dl=0

Completely agree with that.

 

With X-plane you have to think 'outside the box' and not only figuratively speaking. You are not finished after installing the default platform. It's just the beginning.

 

Have been a MS flightsimmer since the nineties and never tried anything else.

I always considered X-plane to be a bit of a joke really. A year ago i would have thought the same still.

 

My conclusion now, after giving X-plane 10 a serious effort, is that most if not all disadvantages over FSX are solvable in X-plane as long as you take just a little effort in overcoming the somewhat uneasy GUI and and take some time learning how you can improve the sim's looks. And most of that can be done for free by just exploring what can be done. Learning how to customize X-plane the way you want it to be is better time spent than the time i have spent in FSX.cfg tweaking.

 

PMDG stands for the best there is to get in terms of system depth of aircraft.

"As real as it gets" behind the windows of the cockpit.

 

To get the outside world "as real as it gets" too you need X-plane and undergo a learning curve how to accomplish that. Those efforts pay off almost immediately.

 

And the number of quality aircraft is increasing as well (quite happy with the Flyjet 732 and 757 Pro) This DC6 is a welcome addition of course. 

Really nice to see FSX/P3D pilots giving X-Plane a fair chance, and I've got to thank PMDG for that. We X-Plane pilots all hope there's a nice relationship between freeware devs and payware devs like PMDG, Flight Factor, JARDesign who continue to push limits. We also hope there are more devs who are primarily working with FSX, who also give X-Plane a long, hard look and jump into the platform. It isn't the sim it used to be five years ago. It's even on Steam! (like FSX is.)

If you eventually hope to go the multi-monitor / multi PC route, it seems XPlane is worlds easier to network and to set those synchronized views out the cockpit windows.  You can compare both worlds on my YouTube channel.

 

Ultimately, the 64-bit XPlane 10 advantage trumps all IMHO.  Take advantage of ALL your system ram, and ALL the VRAM you paid for on your graphics cards. 

 

Not to say that if LM would convert P3D to 64-bits and bring easy networking support for mutli-monitors there could be a real clash of the titans.

 

Less tweaking more flying?  That seems to be XPlane.  For a long time I thought the 'blank airports' and lack of 4 seasons in XPlane were severe negatives.  Then I flew P3D and encountered the world of Lego airports.  Not so thrilling.  Too similar.

 

XPlane 10.3x is adding airports by the moment and a wealth of freeware and payware as well on Xplane,org (which is NOT owned by Laminar Research AFAIK)

 

All sims offer some value, it's up to each pilot to fly what they enjoy.  And if you are not into a lot of real-world cockpit hardware/electronics. the PMDG aircraft in any platform is the 'go to' for max enjoyment and complex modeling.  There IS a frame rate impact as the aircraft complexity increases.  

I hope it goes into beta soon (or better yet, it's released ) so we can get some more screenshots. 

Now for a question about PMDG's next aircraft (don't worry, I'm not asking what it is). I know nothing about programming, so please excuse me if this is a simple question, but here it goes. How much code could be shared between aircraft developed for both FSX/P3D and XP? Is, for example the FMC an "external" simulation that could be shared between all the simulators or would it have to be developed individually for each one?

A320 EDLW-EDDF-EDDM (detailed daylight, dusk and night scenery, up to date EDDF(!) and EDDM, OSM, ground vehicles)

 

Claus, do you have the Aerosoft Airbus for FSX/P3D?  If so, how does the JarDesign compare?  I've been seriously thinking about giving X-Plane a try w/ the JarDesign 320 being the main plane I'd fly.  I've been reading reviews and watching YouTube videos but some are rather old and I know there have been updates.  Is the JarDesign at least as good as the Aerosoft Bus?

 

I maybe have to apologize too...I posted this without realizing what forum I'm in.  Sorry for not really being in the right place with this question but would still love a reply?  

 

 

Sorry for not really being in the right place with this question but would still love a reply?

 

Kevin,

           You might get a better reply in the X-Plane forum here at Avsim.

I maybe have to apologize too...I posted this without realizing what forum I'm in. Sorry for not really being in the right place with this question but would still love a reply?

 

Yes, this is not the right place to discuss this.

Generally speaking I would say: if you are very happy with your sim hobby and if you don't have the feeling to miss something while flying your favorite A/C inside FSX/P3D, than it would be a bit misleading of me to say that you nevertheless would have to migrate to XP10...

 

Here just some things I can definitely state about XP10 in relation to FSX/P3D IMO:

- the lighting system - although called "HDR" inside XP10  - is not "HDR only". It is the consequent realization of a world that is only visible if sun, moon and/or any artificial light illuminates the scene. E.g. when entering an A/C parked on the ramp during night time, the cold&dark (virtual) cockpit is lit by the light of the moon and the light of the ramp's lampposts. XP10 offers an aviation flashlight (red or white) that you can operate with the mouse to search the overhead panel switch for the dome lights which than will illuminate the scene from the bulb's direction... That is a totally different thing than just changing textures. Also the sunlight's shadows inside the VC and on the plane or cloud shadows affecting all objects are amazing... (see link below)

- the flight dynamics in XP10 are more close to real. Myself having been a private pilot for 12 years (C172 (also as floating plane), C210, gliders, PA-42 Cheyenne) and having flown a B737-300 level D sim for 6 hours know a bit about how A/Cs behave in the air. I would not say that FSX/P3D feels wrong or unrealistic to an unbearable degree, but XP10 teaches you a more realistic lesson when having reached or crossed the limits of flight physics.

- the weather engine is more based on atmospheric correlations. E.g. freezing rain or ice brings the A/C down if you don't act accordingly. Clouds, visibility and light situations look convincing because they really interact. It is not only VFX (visual effects) based...

- the global scenery is very detailed, up to date and e.g. coastlines, rivers and streets are VFR suitable. E.g. the sloped/bended runways are quite a challange in combination with cross winds and ice/water contaminations. Cars with halogen and (meanwhile) xenon lights illuminate the streets...

etc.

 

There are some (commercial) software offerings missing yet, but can be realized with internal tools (to a certain level), with share/freeware or are under development like: scheduled AI traffic, season handling, expanded ATC (MCE+RCv4 is just under development), lots of airports very detailed out of the box (v10.3.5.3) but a few just concrete panel areas (but realistic in shape, like LFBO and LIRF I noticed so far).

 

Summerized I would say that IMO FSX/P3D is a well done/nice looking replication of the world in terms of a "stage scenery" you look at, while XP10 is more a world you act in...

 

Here is a dropbox link showing a complex A/C flying from Toulouse to Nice (LFBO-LFMN) showing the beautiful interaction of scenery, clouds and light and the resulting visibilities. Especially the volumetric fog/haze in the mountainous area of southern France is quite remarkable. (Sorry for the low res of 1280x720 pixels, but that is the max for my almost 5 years old laptop to run between 20 and 35 FPS, but 64bit-solid as a rock...):

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/92vyhivcx8o2lup/AACq5apcs63QS6AhUglDqq4Qa#/

Probably the first time I read a reasonable comparison between FSX/P3D and XP. Well done Mr. Kuepper! :thumbs_up:

Indeed very interesing read from Claus Kuepper, especially on the wheather engine.

But does this mean it actually makes a difference when i forget to enable anti-ice (when needed) in x-plane or are they just 'for pretence only' buttons like in FSX?

Do not turn on anti-icing systems in xplane when required and you will fall from the skies like a stone. I experienced this myself twice.

 

-Cruising on the B732 at freezing temps over a cloudy area, forgotten to turn on the anti-icing systems, suddenly IAS indicator started to drop quickly to lows 130 kts, the plane started to descend like a stone, spin, frame over-g and crashed.

 

-Departing from patagonia argentina area winter time (freezing temps) on the les saab 340, while climbing around 9000, the plane started to have very hard times to keep climbing, speed dropping, altitude started to decrease nose up attitude, i realized the anti ice systems were off, turned all them on (pops, boots, etc.) and the plane re-gained energy after a minute or two

 

I do not know how well it is simulated, but it is there. As long as i understand xplane simulates:

 

pitot icing 

prop icing 

engine inlet icing 

window icing 

frame/wing icing

 

Hope someone with deep knowledge on the platform can share us more info

Well, I bought X-Plane when it was released in Steam and I was very disapointed at the time. X-Plane is a certified simulator, and this was it's goal until some time, when FSX was discontinued they advanced in the portion of enthusiast in flight simulating.

 

Configuring X-Plane is harder than FSX, and the FSX has advantages in systems simulation as far as X-Plane doesn't have yet so many 3rd parties developers than FSX.

 

But in simulation itself X-Plane is better in all ways, maybe not so fun because of it. the CFP is much more advanced and the efects of the weather in the aircraft is much more realistic. Fly with crosswinds with an external camera and you will see the plane "skating" diagonally with the efect of the Yaw Damper. Ice in the wings mean stall, landing gears down at high speed and they will fly away, the same for flaps and slats, with all of this impacting the aircraft performance. And lot of things that you need to pay to have in FSX you get for free in X-Plane, especially the night enviroment.