So I bought Xplane 10...

[ErichB 3,638]

Thanks all so much for the many comments.  While I didn't intend for this to become an XP v P3D thread, I can say with certainty that I will give XP a good chance.  But I am way over invested in P3D to give it up - and it's doing everything I want it to do.  I think I'm going to make XP my night sim for now and see how that goes.

[jcomm 5,890]

Thanks all so much for the many comments.  While I didn't intend for this to become an XP v P3D thread, I can say with certainty that I will give XP a good chance.  But I am way over invested in P3D to give it up - and it's doing everything I want it to do.  I think I'm going to make XP my night sim for now and see how that goes.

 

They're both excellent sims, each on it's own...

[Thomas Andersen 45]

LaDamson, you will be rolling in your grave a 100 years from now when simmers talk about flying on rails ! lol.....I have hundreds of hours flying Cessna models ! And Xplane just feels more fluid then PD3/FSX.

Couldnt agree more - this is a key point for why I love xp10.

I also enjoy p3d a lot, but I do find xp10 simulates gusty crosswind landings better

[alpha12125 213]

Thanks all so much for the many comments.  While I didn't intend for this to become an XP v P3D thread, I can say with certainty that I will give XP a good chance.  But I am way over invested in P3D to give it up - and it's doing everything I want it to do.  I think I'm going to make XP my night sim for now and see how that goes.

Fortunately you dont have to choose:

 

We are currently at a time where, bar some very few exceptions, you can get the plane you like only for one simulator. You want to fly the 767 ? Go x-plane because there is no good one in p3d. You want the fly T7 go p3d, because the x-plane version pales in comparison. You like a 737 Classic ? Go x-plane.  etcetcetc...

 

The good thing about x-plane is that basically appart from a few mandatory payware/donationware stuff to get the sim running, you only need to buy the planes. scenery while sometimes not perfect, you can get away with the community.  I know alot of people, especially those moving from the FSX/P3D world, don't realize that x-plane is alot cheaper. And alot of people that fly in x-plane do not have that amount of money that the general simmer in FSX has. Thats also one of the reason you have such a thriving community.

 

So do what every smart multi-simmer does. Fly both and use each where it is strongest

[ErichB 3,638]

 

 

So do what every smart multi-simmer does. Fly both and use each where it is strongest

 

Couldn't agree more.

[ryanbatc 12,813]

Couldn't agree more.

P3D v3 and XP10 - that's what I use

[mikealpha 266]

Which yoke do you use?

 

I'm using the Brunner CLS-E Force Feedback Yoke : http://www.beh.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/secure_downloads/CLSP/Brunner_FactSheet_CLS-E-Yoke.pdf

 

Instead of buying tons of Addons and plastic stick or Yokes (as I unfortunately did for many years), I should have bought this earlier. It comes so much closer to a real flying experience.

 

My recommendations :

 

X-Plane :

Carenado Beech F33 with Reality Expansion Pack

IXEG B737 (most immersive Addon I ever came across)

 

P3D :

Majesticsoftware Dash-8 with Airline2Sim Videos (don't know how else to come nearer to commercial flying)

 

Mike

[60North 120]

I'm reading up on the FSX/P3D flightmodels aerodynamics, and I can tell you already that compared to XP it is has serious "issues" and "limitations",

especially ín the areas of Drag, lift, stall/aoa, ground effect etc.  

 

That doesn't mean a skilled designer can't do good aircraft in FSX/P3D, but there is no doubt in my mind that the same skilled designer could do

a (much) better aircraft in XP.  Will document this when I get more time..

[Alpha Floor 237]

 

 

Will document this when I get more time..

 

I would love to hear from you in this regard Morten!

[Don Quixote 76]

So do what every smart multi-simmer does. Fly both and use each where it is strongest

 

 

Fully agreed! There's (currently) no point in choosing only one sim over the other when you can easily use both. I tend to fly one sim for a couple of months at a time, get fed up with its peculiarities, then change to the other one for some time and then repeat the process. It's like discovering a new world of flight simulation each time.

 

As for flight models, honestly I think that X-Plane does some things considerably better - such as the feeling of acceleration on takeoff - but the positive sides are balanced out by the negative ones. What bugs me the most about X-Plane is the Weather modelling which, no matter what plugins you use, just doesn't come close to what FSX/P3D offer with a quality weather engine like ASN or FSGRW.

Another issue with XP is ground modelling / friction. I mean, FSX/P3D are well known to have poor ground modelling, but compared to Xplane they seem like perfection. This doesn't affect large aircraft as much as it does small ones, but try to take off in a taildragger in XP with even the slightest crosswind and chances are that the aircraft points its nose directly into the wind long before it becomes airborne, even with full rudder deflection. XPlane seems to completely ignore any friction between the wheels and the ground as long as you don't apply the brakes... Some addon developers (like Soulmade Sims) use custom plugins to overcome this problem, but even then it's far from perfect.

 

The best comparison (concerning GA at least) we currently have is probably the A2A C172 and the Airfoillabs C172, both of which are among the best you can buy for the respective sims. I've found that both behave exactly the same, which speaks volumes about which flight model is "better" - it all depends on how the developers manage to tweak it.

[bonchie 2,305]

I think a lot of flight simmers (including me) have varying levels of OCD when it comes to installations.

We subconsciously think that having two sims installed will somehow hurt the other (probably conditioned from years of having FSX do random crap for no real reason).

 

I installed XP10 along side P3D a few months back and haven't had one hiccup in either sim. There's just no reason not to use both these days. The days of having to spend 10 hours following some pedantic guide of setting up windows just to get a sim to run well are over. XP10 and P3D both run well out of the box and aren't near as finicky as an FSX install. They play just fine together.

 

Enjoy both.

[Guest]

P3D has improved it's flight dynamics (as I understand it as a result of their real world data from the aircraft they've built/produced), it's not "exactly" the same as FSX ... for example you will lose altitude faster in P3D during a turn given same level of control input.  I've flown real world 172 and A2A's 172 -- so far A2A's 172 feels the most accurate out of any simulator I've flown.

 

If you look at devs like Majestic with their Q400, they actually go outside the standard flight model and operate the aircraft at a 125hz sample rate ... now I've never flown a Q400 real world so I couldn't even guess at it's accuracy.  But when I'm in the mood for a challenge, I'll load up some nasty weather and fly the Q400 in a loop around my airport of choice ... one has to hit the numbers just right with the Q400 or it's going to be a problem.

 

I don't know if there is an option to fly outside of XP10 flight dynamics ... I know Ben/Austin are very proud of their "blade element theory", but if you look at the history of the "real" Blade element theory it was intended to break down forces into smaller parts of a propeller blade only and used in combination with momentum theory ... it was not meant to be extrapolated over an entire aircraft structure.

 

Given current CPU processing power and all the dynamics involved it would be impossible to accurately calculate in real time with any degree of accuracy in a simulated 3D space on a 2D display.  So it's probably best to just say "they use different approaches to solving a flight dynamics problem under given processing restrictions" rather than to attempt to say one is better than the other ... just fly what they offer and work within it.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Jimmy RFR 406]

 

 

If you look at devs like Majestic with their Q400, they actually go outside the standard flight model

 

There's a few aircraft like this that I'm aware of in FSX/P3D. The Q400 obviously, but also the VRS Superbug, as well as the Milviz T-38 Advanced. Supposedly P3D makes things easier to implement external flight modeling, but I don't know of any developers that have taken advantage of that outside of what they can already do with FSX.

[FS++ 707]

 

 

Given current CPU processing power and all the dynamics involved it would be impossible to accurately calculate in real time with any degree of accuracy in a simulated 3D space on a 2D display.  So it's probably best to just say "they use different approaches to solving a flight dynamics problem under given processing restrictions" rather than to attempt to say one is better than the other ... just fly what they offer and work within it.
 

 

Totally agree.

 

Unless one has many hardware modules (each doing one thing in a loop) running real time operating systems with no thread interleaving taking place, there is no way you can guarantee the best aerodynamics algorithm in the world will behave as you intended it. 

[sizziano 172]

I'm reading up on the FSX/P3D flightmodels aerodynamics, and I can tell you already that compared to XP it is has serious "issues" and "limitations",

especially ín the areas of Drag, lift, stall/aoa, ground effect etc.  

 

That doesn't mean a skilled designer can't do good aircraft in FSX/P3D, but there is no doubt in my mind that the same skilled designer could do

a (much) better aircraft in XP.  Will document this when I get more time..

 

 

Fantastic, always a treat to read your perspective Morten.