I think if members of the "Orbx Appreciation Society" were told by JV that the world is flat, they would believe it. LM is the big cheese here, not Orbx.

I think if members of the "Orbx Appreciation Society" were told by JV that the world is flat, they would believe it. LM is the big cheese here, not Orbx.

Now wait a minute. Are you trying to say that the world is not flat!? When did that change??

The only thing missing from X-Plane is a realistic flight model. I wouldn't train my students on it.

 

For now it's a great graphics simulator especially in 64bit form.

Interesting - I am learning to fly at the moment. Last weekend was my first crosswind landing in the Tomahawk. I set up the weather as per the METAR and practised a few circuits in X Plane. When it came to the real thing I absolutley planted it perfectly on the centreline and bang opposite the PAPIs, absolute greaser. On the way down the instructor said ' now this is your first crosswind landing so I will probably give you more instruction than usual and may need to take control' - he said and did nothing until we touched down - when he said "that was sublime...and.. you are not going to take long in the circuits".

 

The whole experience was pretty much bang on in the sim.

 

When I got back I replayed in P3D just to compare (same aircraft and same developer) - sorry but no way was it anywhere near as close to the real thing as X Plane.

 

There is for me a fluidity and feeling of flight in X Plane that you just cannot get in P3D - and that is because the 'aircraft' is actually 'responding' to the airflow around it which is not the case in the ESP based sims, although I agree it gets better when the flight model is, as I understand it, built outside the sim (e.g. A2A).

 

Now that is not to say there are not other advantages to P3D and I do use it quite often - but not for practising VFR flying skills.

 

So that's my view through the lens of student.

 

But don't take my word for it - The National Test Pilots School in California use X Plane, Cessna use it and Dave Rose (Reno Racer) practised his course in X Plane having put his Bi-Plane "Rags" into planemake and predicted a 50sec lap time - he qualified in 49.9 secs on the day.

 

Apologies I know this is off topic but I felt the need to respond to that particular post as it did not fit with my personal experience.

 

cheers

Peter

For ATC on X-plane I recommend to use "Pilot2ATC", also you can install it on a second PC. For my is good to learn the fly speech concept. Check out.

 

OOhhhh I forgot, it work with FSX and P3D too.

Without reading all of these posts yet just my 2 cents I also find it hard to believe John would make a post such as this without some hard facts - doesn't make sense that he would - not his style - one way or the other P3D is still going to be my sim of choice

 

Also if 32 bit serves LM purposes then 64 bit may not be very high on the to do list especially with limited resources and not a a big return on Their investment hence 32 bit is good enough if They can get P3D to run as if it was 64 bit - if thats even possible

Interesting - I am learning to fly at the moment. Last weekend was my first crosswind landing in the Tomahawk. I set up the weather as per the METAR and practised a few circuits in X Plane. When it came to the real thing I absolutley planted it perfectly on the centreline and bang opposite the PAPIs, absolute greaser. On the way down the instructor said ' now this is your first crosswind landing so I will probably give you more instruction than usual and may need to take control' - he said and did nothing until we touched down - when he said "that was sublime...and.. you are not going to take long in the circuits".

 

The whole experience was pretty much bang on in the sim.

 

When I got back I replayed in P3D just to compare (same aircraft and same developer) - sorry but no way was it anywhere near as close to the real thing as X Plane.

 

There is for me a fluidity and feeling of flight in X Plane that you just cannot get in P3D - and that is because the 'aircraft' is actually 'responding' to the airflow around it which is not the case in the ESP based sims, although I agree it gets better when the flight model is, as I understand it, built outside the sim (e.g. A2A).

 

Now that is not to say there are not other advantages to P3D and I do use it quite often - but not for practising VFR flying skills.

 

So that's my view through the lens of student.

 

But don't take my word for it - The National Test Pilots School in California use X Plane, Cessna use it and Dave Rose (Reno Racer) practised his course in X Plane having put his Bi-Plane "Rags" into planemake and predicted a 50sec lap time - he qualified in 49.9 secs on the day.

 

Apologies I know this is off topic but I felt the need to respond to that particular post as it did not fit with my personal experience.

 

 

When it comes to flight models, and X-Plane versus...........

 

Actually, I don't have P3D.  But I flew for decades, and owned/built high performance airplanes as well.  I do have plenty of experience with FSX, as well as X-Plane 8.9.10.  As far as I'm concerned, it has been my RealAirs for FSX, that have the best sense of cross controlling in a slip. They're perfection. I'd never trade the single engine RealAirs, such as the simulated Lancair Legacy, or Marchetti SF260 for any X-Plane model.  In so many words, the flight models for FSX (and I'll presume 3PD) can be exceptional.  The presumption that X-Plane is always superior because of "blade element theory"................is a myth, as far as I'm concerned. I've said that for many years, and haven't changed my mind.  In the meantime, I'm enjoying both X-Plane & FSX with a new high performance system.  Naturally, I use flight models for both sims, that do a good job of replicating real flight.  

Lockheed doesn't make decisions like picking up a flight simulator for the short haul.   They know what they are doing years and even decades into the future.   They have to because they pull off complicated events that can't just planted and harvested in one season, and requires extraordinary coordination that small nations can not pull of, maybe some big ones.  If you think that the Prepar3d team is not a part of that culture, you don't know what you are talking about in regards to Lockheed Martin.  http://www.technologyreview.com/news/531836/does-lockheed-martin-really-have-a-breakthrough-fusion-machine/

 

Think positively and make things happen.   There will be a 64bit version of Prepar3d.  

If you're in Software Development and you're still developing 32 Bit software, the move to 64 Bit is not a case of 'if' but 'when'

 

P3D is likely Lockheed Martin's last piece of 32 Bit software

And just to expand on this thought a bit further  -  if you're in the Software Development business ( as Orbx is ), and haven't figured out how to turn an opportunity ( such as this is ) into profit, then ... ???

Now wait a minute. Are you trying to say that the world is not flat!? When did that change??

 

About 2006, fourth quarter. Microsoft went from flat earth v9 to round earth v10.

 

 

And with a thread/comment a couple of weeks ago about how great someone's visit was to the Dovetail offices and the talk about FSX:SE, seeing the focus turn away from P3D isn't really that surprising to me.

 

There does not appear to be any interest from the comments, other than self-interest and self-promotion?

The hard part is turning a profit into an opportunity.  I think LM has ORBX beat on that.

Indeed, the best of both worlds would be great. Can I name her X3D? PreparPlane sounds terrible.

 

I whole-heartedly accept X3D.    Get on it you two sims!  Make sim babies!

Now wait a minute. Are you trying to say that the world is not flat!? When did that change??

 

Hmmm....I want to say it was around FS2000 when MS added elevation mesh.

 

Edit: And Pease_W is right, great circle navigation was first possible in FSX I believe so it was even MORE less flat 

It's clearly not in Orbx's short-term interest to raise expectations of a 64-bit platform, especially if that would require users to upgrade their sceneries etc. If LM were to announce 64-bit for the near future that was incompatible with current scenery, that would clearly dent Orbx's cashflow, unless they promise no-cost upgrades. Just saying...

Now wait a minute. Are you trying to say that the world is not flat!? When did that change??

Changed when FSX was released. FS9 was flat, FSX is round.

 

Sorry, couldn't resist -)

And, OOMs are an unhandled error. 

 

 

OOMs are "HANDLED"  (when they occur,  they are handled with that crude "out of memory error" message-- but the exception is handled in an  extremely "Crude" and unintelligent manner. Basically, FSX just gives up and terminates.

 

This is unfortunate, as while there may be  plenty of "Free memory",  none of that fragmented memory can satisfy the failing request for memory.

 

A lot more mileage (excuse the pun)  could be got out of FSX  (and P3D),  with improved memory management.

 

I would assume that both P3D & FSX_SE developers are aware of this, and are working towards addressing this area of the sim.