I don't know if there is an option to fly outside of XP10 flight dynamics ... 

 

I don't recall the details, but a while back I remember reading that one of the updates exposed more access to the flight model for 3rd party developers via plugins or other means. It might have been one of the things that encouraged PMDG to start developing for X-Plane? This was shortly before they announced the DC-6 test bed project. Maybe someone else here knows more about it. It might have been mentioned in one of the dev blogs. 

 

One thing to keep in mind about 3rd party plane models and flight dynamics, is that there is a natural tension in this sim concerning stability vs. constant improvement with updates in the core sim engine. Developers for FSX don't have that problem. The base flight model will never change and improve on its own; it's a completely static platform for development. P3D is a little different, but they don't seem to touch the legacy code very much.

 

I've heard that from the developer side, there is a desire for a bit more predictability and stability in X-Plane, so it's less of a moving target. But it's impossible to avoid changes. For example, Laminar recently fixed a longstanding, major bug with prop torque, and now any 3rd party developers who used a plugin or other means to offset it, have to update their versions. Plugins had to be recompiled when we moved from 32-bit to 64-bit. Now we have mouse wheel support coming in v10.50, which will change what users expect for cockpit UI controls.

 

So this constantly "moving target" in the base sim must be tough on these plane developers, even with improved access to the flight model. On the other hand, as end-users we do want to see the sim constantly moving forward like this. It's a forever work-in-progress, and I'd rather have that than a too-static platform that would make it easier on the 3rd party developers. I'll gladly support all the 3rd party developers who can keep up!  :smile:

Good post Parafin.

So this constantly "moving target" in the base sim must be tough on these plane developers

 

Agree, but that's also why it's important to allow 3rd party aircraft devs to operate outside of the provided flight dynamics ... any flight dynamics updates come from the 3rd party vendor and hence not a chased target and not impacted by on-going core developments (although in the MJC Q400 case on-going P3D developments did impact them but in different ways but not specific to the flight model).  With both platforms changing (P3D and XP10) I think it's important that 3rd party devs understand the implications ... especially when it comes to pricing their products to factor in future changes ... reactive or just progressive changes.

 

I personally want more rapid updates, NOT less rapid updates ... still lots missing in XPlane and I'd be happy to pay more in a subscription so that LR can get the resources to make things happen faster ... especially since LR still insist on multi-platform support (I know LR say it has no impact, but that's not really accurate and I know Ben/Austin know that also ... I've done multi-platform projects, it's not so much the code as it is the R&D time to figure out the nuances of each platform).  

 

Anyway, I and others have said this all before ... it's not so much that LR is working on it, that's great, it's the lack of additional resources to speed that work up ... we sadly joke about getting a feature complete product before we die (or Ben and Austin die).  Everyone knows what the target is to increase the demand for XPlane ... but there is an odd "culture" around xPlane that seems to be the primary inhibitor of it's more rapid growth.  I continue to support it in hope ... yes I would pay for a "new version" of Xplane if that encouraged and delivered more rapid development.  Look at IXEG 737 ... 6 years in development ... 5 years to go from XP 10.0 to 10.50 ... 0.10 release every year. Ben's getting old, Austin's getting old, we're all getting old ... I don't want to see another 5 years go by before I see Xplane 11.0 (which is what the current rate suggests).

 

I honestly don't care who's thinks they have the "best" flight dynamics.  I know that very high fidelity can't be achieved on current computational limits of PCs.  For example, real world flight I did a few months back with my instructor ... C172 ... we encountered surface gusts (non-directional) about 1000 feet before runway threshold and I lost the rudder, it was completely ineffective yet the aircraft had lift and no up or down drafts ... I couldn't center line the aircraft and we (instructor took over) did a go around.  I've never experienced a rudder being completely ineffective before, but apparently it can happen even at 60-70 knots ... the instructor believes we hit a small wind eddy that just happened to be moving in our direction and similar speed and very localized.  Point being, this isn't something that is simulated on any platform I'm aware of, yet it's a real issue and caught me out.

 

I know it can be difficult to support multiple FS platforms and people tend to focus on one or the other, but I'll always encourage anyone to take a peek at what's to offer on the other side and see if it fits their goals ... supporting on-going active development, be it XP, DTG, P3D.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Anyway, I and others have said this all before ... it's not so much that LR is working on it, that's great, it's the lack of additional resources to speed that work up ... we sadly joke about getting a feature complete product before we die (or Ben and Austin die).  Everyone knows what the target is to increase the demand for XPlane ... but there is an odd "culture" around xPlane that seems to be the primary inhibitor of it's more rapid growth.  I continue to support it in hope ... yes I would pay for a "new version" of Xplane if that encouraged and delivered more rapid development.  Look at IXEG 737 ... 6 years in development ... 5 years to go from XP 10.0 to 10.50 ... 0.10 release every year. Ben's getting old, Austin's getting old, we're all getting old ... I don't want to see another 5 years go by before I see Xplane 11.0 (which is what the current rate suggests).

 

 

You wont have to. Sure xplane is updated slower but thats because its a much smaller community. FSX was supported by Microsoft and Prepa3D by lockheed. Recently x-plane has picked up alot of steam and Im sure with the added revenue LR gets they can hire more developers.

Also, historically X-Plane updates stop at around .60 or .70, not .99.

 

Hints are X-Plane 11 is already in the pipes, I think it is between 6 and 18 months away.

 Everyone knows what the target is to increase the demand for XPlane ... but there is an odd "culture" around xPlane that seems to be the primary inhibitor of it's more rapid growth.  

 

I honestly don't care who's thinks they have the "best" flight dynamics.  I know that very high fidelity can't be achieved on current computational limits of PCs.  

 

I know it can be difficult to support multiple FS platforms and people tend to focus on one or the other, but I'll always encouraged anyone to take a peek at what's to offer on the other side and see if it fits their goals ... supporting on-going active development, be it XP, DTG, P3D.

 

Cheers, Rob

 

Good post Rob and I would agree with you on many counts.

 

The culture around X-Plane (and I've said it before) is a bit more hobbyist than that which surrounds the legacy FSX/P3D - let's call them ESP - sims. I suspect that this is because the ESP sims have matured to the point where there are a handful of benchmarks for aircraft, scenery, weather and utilities that just work and few see any point in experimenting with freeware stuff any longer. If you want the ultimate ESP install then there are the go-to products to install and go fly.

 

The X-Plane world is less defined currently with less mature benchmarks and there is a ton of freeware content of varying quality. Some of it is really good - like payware quality - and some it not so much. However much of it is spread around the web and requires installers, packs, plugins and a bit of know how. AI traffic isn't easily achieved.

 

ESP switchers will not find X-Plane an easy swop. The first dev to get a grip on this and start making the benchmark X-Plane install an easier prospect will do jolly well, I suspect.   

Good post Rob and I would agree with you on many counts.

 

The culture around X-Plane (and I've said it before) is a bit more hobbyist than that which surrounds the legacy FSX/P3D - let's call them ESP - sims. I suspect that this is because the ESP sims have matured to the point where there are a handful of benchmarks for aircraft, scenery, weather and utilities that just work and few see any point in experimenting with freeware stuff any longer. If you want the ultimate ESP install then there are the go-to products to install and go fly.

 

The X-Plane world is less defined currently with less mature benchmarks and there is a ton of freeware content of varying quality. Some of it is really good - like payware quality - and some it not so much. However much of it is spread around the web and requires installers, packs, plugins and a bit of know how. AI traffic isn't easily achieved.

 

ESP switchers will not find X-Plane an easy swop. The first dev to get a grip on this and start making the benchmark X-Plane install an easier prospect will do jolly well, I suspect.   

 

I agree Ben, it has a lot of potential, almost an untapped market, ripe for the picking.

I'm with Rob - I'm getting older quickly (feels that way) and the XP progress is just....

 

....sooo..

 

....slow...

 

I know some don't seem to feel that way, but I often wonder how long that type of person has been around.

By most normal metrics, it's been a really really slowly developing program, for lots of reasons it sounds like.

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..

At the end of the day, I do believe that FSX/P3D developers who've been at it for many, many years, have worked around those limitations. I say that, because at the present time, GA wise...............I haven't found any X-Plane with better flight dynamics, than what's available for FSX. 

In so many words, I have yet to say "wow, that's sensational, and I'll have to now dump FSX"!

I suspect that this is because the ESP sims have matured to the point where there are a handful of benchmarks for aircraft, scenery, weather and utilities that just work and few see any point in experimenting with freeware stuff any longer.

 

Oh my.. respectfully, I would have to disagree with you there. I would venture to say the these forums (as in Avsim in general) may not give freeware the focus that it once did, but the rich library here shows just what importance freeware still plays in the ESP side of things.  And in other places, it's given as much or even more importance than payware.  An example is a 62 page thread with over 400,000 views regarding a (freeware) redo of a virtual cockpit for a (freeware) DC-3.  A thread that keeps popping to the top of it's forum, while payware comes, gets pinned for a week, and quietly disappears....  Not on this site, mind you.  :wink:

 

If you fly small GA in ESP, and you want to fly in places not covered by FTX, you very, very quickly will find yourself immersed into the freeware world once again.

 

I've made note of this before, but I would disagree that XP culture is any more or less 'hobbyist' than ESP. It's just that in FSX/P3D the 'hobbyist' focus is turned elsewhere... occasionally.

 

 

Hints are X-Plane 11 is already in the pipes, I think it is between 6 and 18 months away.

 

Indeed, see here:

 

 

I don't remember the exact point, but somewhere along that video they mentioned XP-11 "hinting" that it was in the way as you say!

 

 

The first dev to get a grip on this and start making the benchmark X-Plane install an easier prospect will do jolly well

 

If there's a hole, the first one to acknowlegde and fill it, will do good!

Thx for the video Alpha

 

It reminded me that supporting X-Plane 10, apart from being an excellent sim, is also supporting the Geniuses Austin ,and Ben, are, what they're always trying to bring to the user community even if not at the pace I sometimes liked, and, supporting that brave fight against Patent Trolls!

 

 

supporting that brave fight against Patent Trolls!

 

Indeed. I didn't know anything about this ridiculous patent system in the US. I guess over here in Europe it's no different...

Indeed. I didn't know anything about this ridiculous patent system in the US. I guess over here in Europe it's no different...

 

No Jaime, here in Europe it is, thanksfully, not even comparable, but since we, in Europe, like to copy the worst examples from most places around the World, and add to it the bureaucracy that is the main container of our actions... I wouldn't find it difficult to see this happening around in a few years too...

Heres my 2cents and im part of the old crowd flying since 86.  Both have their strengths and weaknesses and you will never please everyone all the time....Ever.

Im fairly recent user to XPX and am blown away by some of the scenery, but it takes alot of work to download the huge files and organize everything into the scenery.ini. As someone mentioned, there are aircraft that are better in one than the other and vice versa. One of the reasons I went to try xplane was the FF767/757 whereas the 767/57 for P3D are not very good. The night lighting is bar none, the greatest and far above P3D and if you want to fly night time flights go with XP. The weather sucks in XP and no where near like P3D although this is also being worked on. The AI system is also useless in XP although there is some nice addons in the works. Speaking of which 10.50 idea of filling the airports with static AI is a lousy idea. Much rather have a dynamic airport with real world aircraft flying real world routes in their real world times. Hope this can be turned off instead of editing each and every airport to remove the statics. I have world traffic right now but its quite tedious to get right in that the airports have to be correct or else nothing works well. The new version being worked on should be alot better.

 

Can go on and on here, but the point is you wont get the best of everything in one sim. Enjoy both to the best that you wish to invest in. There is alot of free and in one way its good for XP but on the other hand quality devs will stay away if they are not getting paid for their work. After all our hobby is supporting flight simulation as a whole. We shouldnt be against one another with a bunch of A vs B vs C but rather be supportive. Its what drives the whole hobby forward.