Everyone at the looks... very few at the "Feels"....

[tonywob 4,768]

 

 

Hard to quantify but the sounds of stress on various parts of the plane when turning, buffet noise, fluidity of flight model in high speed / stress situations, altogether just a very plausible feeling.

 

I must admit, that does sound awesome

[sd_flyer 6,023]

 I just had my friend over yesterday who is airline captain . We tried IXEG 737 in XP11, and he was very impressed. Of course XP is not perfect but don't think it's so bad either. Frankly  I don't recall any ultra realism in IL-2. It  was good at the time, but had its own shortcomings.

 

Back in days when I was working on my multi engine add on to commercial certificate, I tried two FAA approved sims  None of those sim got even close to XP in terms of flight dynamics or graphic. And my flight instructor still had to evaluate me on that crappy sim LOL

 

Really I don't know what is the fuss about. Good things comes in small packages. Enjoy what you have. Want ultra realism go buy/rent an aircraft and fly. 

[Guest-475 81]

Ha ha. It's actually pretty boring in the sim because a) You can't feel it and b ) You're not going to die a tragic death if it goes wrong  :wink:. 

But at least you don't need the bag. :smile: Ok, unless you are using VR equipment...

[Humpty 751]

It's no fuss , its just a few things probably need sorting out.  Even i don't have any real world flight experience, I am not even saying that XP is not good , i prefer it to the other civil sims tbh.  It's now XP11 so wondering what is going to get fixed. I only go buy what i read.

 

I am a GA flyer and VFR mostly, and i have read a lot of good things about IXEG and i will be honest here saying that even the default heavies in XP feel very good because of the response which you may call it as inertia i guess.

 

 Actually the thread title should have been different. Like "what needs fixing".

[alpha12125 213]

99,9% of the people using flight simulators have never ever flown a ga or have experience flying a real aircraft.  therefore they have nothing to relate to. what they can relate to is how the world looks. 

 

I cant tell what a real cessna will do in a stall because me and almost everybody else has never been in one. But i can tell you how weather, clouds, horizion and scenery looks because i see that every day and i can relate to that. And seeing improvements there gives me joy because i can see the progress.

 

I love flying my rep planes and at the end of they i love to pretend that i would know how to fly a real plane because of this but lets be honest. that thing could be completley wrong and i have no idea of knowing it. It seems plausible to me and that is enough. So it is natural for people to focus on what they are good at. We have metrologist here that babble on about vertrical winds, cummolus, etc. and think its the most important issue.  Then we have people that think the moon phase is the most important issue. Then we have a few rw pilots here that think the flight model is the most important issue.

 

at the end of the day it is an aproximation and once that aproximation is plausible enough that most of the people are happy, you move on to the next thing. 

[ErichB 3,637]

Why do I bring this here ? Well, because 99% of the posts and focus of attention on X-Plane is directed towards the looks. Everybody discusses how the skies look, the shadows and the glowing fuselages in XP11, and there's even one guy who is worried about the Moon and it's phases or being able to set a precise date ( including the year )....

 

Are we really seeing just that in a FLIGHT SIMULATOR ?

 

That is because we are not really flying. We are replicating in our mind what we see when we fly - as passengers - and the biggest, most obvious cue we have to replicate that experience is visual cues and sound cues. It is exactly what you see - and the ability of developers to make that cue as realistic as possible that draws the masses. Most have never flown an aircraft themselves, so wouldn't really know what 'the feel' is like - notwithstanding that there is only so much you can do to deliver that feeling on a desktop flightsim. Although DCS does a pretty good job.

 

The illusion of flying takes place in your mind. So unless the flight model is horrendously bad and way off the numbers, the ability to suspend belief is not that difficult and P3D /Xplane don't do a bad job (when left in the hands of skilled aircraft developers) to make that illusion as real as they can.

 

Additionally, the 'feeling' of immersion is also greatly enhanced by a bigger display. There is a massive difference bewteen a 32 inch monitor and a 55' 4K display to deliver the immersion and feel most crave for.

[Guest]

99,9% of the people using flight simulators have never ever flown a ga or have experience flying a real aircraft.  therefore they have nothing to relate to. what they can relate to is how the world looks. 

 

I cant tell what a real cessna will do in a stall because me and almost everybody else has never been in one. But i can tell you how weather, clouds, horizion and scenery looks because i see that every day and i can relate to that. And seeing improvements there gives me joy because i can see the progress.

 

I love flying my rep planes and at the end of they i love to pretend that i would know how to fly a real plane because of this but lets be honest. that thing could be completley wrong and i have no idea of knowing it. It seems plausible to me and that is enough. So it is natural for people to focus on what they are good at. We have metrologist here that babble on about vertrical winds, cummolus, etc. and think its the most important issue.  Then we have people that think the moon phase is the most important issue. Then we have a few rw pilots here that think the flight model is the most important issue.

 

at the end of the day it is an aproximation and once that aproximation is plausible enough that most of the people are happy, you move on to the next thing. 

 

 

To take it even further: I don't even really care if the flight model is accurate. I simply enjoy flying in a sim. Period. The Cessna in XP flies and that's all I want. It goes up and it goes down whenever I want it and it goes left and right and that's all I need. If someone says a certain plane is pretty realistic when it comes to the flight model: nice to know! Really cool! Feels good! I do like my A2A planes in P3D more because of that! But if someone says a specific is totally crap but I like flying it... I don't care at all that it is crap. I like flying it. Period.

 

I also have no real world flying experience and I don't want to get some real life experience either. The flightsim world IS my 'reality' and I am fine with it... apart from the looks! :wink: I want everything to look as realistic as possible and there still is a long way to go in that department. So that's why I mostly post about that. And I think that is why most simmers mostly post about that.

 

So I am, and I think most simmers are, looking at flightsims from a totally different perspective than some of you: some of you want the perfect simulation of an airplane while I, like a lot of other people, if not most, want the perfect simulation of the idea of flying a plane. And looking at sims this way scenery and graphics etc. are far more important than the flight model. I have no clue what a good flight model is anyway so why care about that. I never thought or expected that my flightsim experience would enable me to fly a real plane: I simply like looking out of the window while turning some switches, pushing some knobs and pulling my joystick: my main reason for flightsimming is to relax why I am flying above a simulated world. And I think this goes for most simmers.

[Guest Mik75]

I don't think that there is something like "real" FDM in desktop sims.

Everybody has different hardware (joysticks, pedals, yokes), set up and calibrated differently.

Especially in X-Plane, it makes a huge difference, how your controls are calibrated, how the null zones are set, and all of that. That being said, civilian desktop sims offer not less than the whole world to fly in, they offer (more or less) dynamic and realistic weather, and a few default aircraft, to have something to start with. They are the platform to build on, with plugins, addons, etc.

The look AND feel, and the interaction between the simulated aircraft and the simulated environment has to be a close approximation to the reality, and that's where the experience and expectations vary widely, to give you the feel of immersion.

I've been in full flight simulators a few times (737 classic, A320, 767), and from my limited experience with these things and my understanding of flight, and my expectations of a realistic rendition of that (including the sense of speed, the visuals, THE SOUNDS), the IXEG 737 (XPX) is my all time favourite tubeliner simulation, followed by the FSLabs A320 (FSX, hopefully soon in P3D).

But it really is a highly subjective thing!

I tried DCS, but I am not too crazy about war machinery, so I concentrate on civil aviation.

[wiler 394]

if you want real, your gonna have to go out to your local fbo and rent a cessna for 150+ per hour! come on guys lets be real here, I have flown the real thing , and i guess I didnt realize that im a minority on here because of that . The reason why i cling to this hobby is because realistically the cost of doing the real thing is very expensive and for me its just not financialIy feasable. Now I would say that in terms of reality these sims are not terribly off either. sure, they dont replicate all flight characteristics, but for 59.99 what do you expect ?? Everyhting is what you want to make of it. P3d was great for me till I realized that xp 10/11 offers me something even more enjoyable. 

[jcomm 5,882]

 

 

Everyhting is what you want to make of it. P3d was great for me till I realized that xp 10/11 offers me something even more enjoyable

 

Exactly the same reason I started using DCS and IL.2 Battle of Stalingrad, and I didn't like combat, but I do look for good flight and overall physics modelling...

 

And while I keep my pilot license current, it becomes more and more difficult, specially now with the new EASA rules, so, I am with you in finding in flight simulators an escape from the limits in real world leisure flight.

[CarlosF 1,234]

I second Jeroen's comments, I could care less if the moon/sun is off 2deg, Im not looking at either when I fly.

 

I'm not a RW pilot but been around airplanes quite a few times as my brother is. Even though XP is not perfect, it's the closest one to real life compared to the rest, this is from my own personal perspective, right or wrong, if feels right to me.

 

I love eye-candy and as long as the road/street that leads to my house is there, is good enough for me. 

 

I don't expect for weather to be perfect, trying to emulate mother nature is just NOT possible, period!

 

If Austin gave in to all user demands, we would still have XP being 32 bit, baked houses and roads, season like FSX and blurries. I applaud what Austin, Ben and team have done, thanks to them we have today a quite advanced sim and will only get better...Bravo LR!!!.

 

soooo, no jcomm, for me its not only about looks but the feel too....and honestly, XP feels right to me. 

[sd_flyer 6,023]

Exactly the same reason I started using DCS and IL.2 Battle of Stalingrad, and I didn't like combat, but I do look for good flight and overall physics modelling...

 

And while I keep my pilot license current, it becomes more and more difficult, specially now with the new EASA rules, so, I am with you in finding in flight simulators an escape from the limits in real world leisure flight.

 

 

What kind of aircraft do you usually fly in real life? 

[Humpty 751]

lol jcomm 

What kind of aircraft do you usually fly in real life? 

 

I think he flies gliders 30 yrs i think

[jcomm 5,882]

What kind of aircraft do you usually fly in real life? 

 

AS-K21, Grob 103 twin acro, Grob 102 Astir, Phoebus B1 and PW-6u mostly :-), but along the years I have flown some other models / types of gliders.

 

Got my GPL in 1980, so, more or less 36 yrs of glider flying, ad many opportunities to fly other GA aircraft, including our tugs, from the Auster Husky to a Piper Super Cub, including a few Rallyes and also Robin DR-400...

 

Also tried to add ULM to my license, but after my second flight was cancelled due to a new techinical problem, the aircraft crashed killing one of the pilots a few days latter, and I knew for sure ULM was something I was no longer interested in...

 

As I work at the Portuguese Metoffice @ LPPT, and some of my fellow glider pilots are also captains flying Airlines for living, I also had a great chance to use the A3219/20/21 full flightims for 1 hr which was a great oportunity to feel so close to one of my preferered airliners of the modern times.

 

At the Portuguese Air Force I had also the chance to fly with fellow pilots on T-37, Epsilon TB-30 and C337, with good hands-on experience :-)

 

For simulation I have used pretty much everything, but one of my preferred is still ELITE PC for IFR traning ( just as a game ), and I keep my eyes on AEFS2. DCS and IL.2 Battle of Stalingrad and Moscow are those sims I spend more time at, I have to admit, but it all started because they provided me, for the very firsttime in my simmer experience a trully remarkable sensation of "being there"...

[Jimmy RFR 406]

Hard to quantify but the sounds of stress on various parts of the plane when turning, buffet noise, fluidity of flight model in high speed / stress situations, altogether just a very plausible feeling.

 

I tend to prefer small GA aircraft in any sim platform I use. To this day, I still only have one reference aircraft when it comes to the immersion you describe - the DA20 4X done by Marcel Felde (for FSX). I'm not sure exactly what it is about that release, but the combination of a superb sound set and finely tuned FDE makes that aircraft an absolute joy to fly.

 

It still stands up graphically to even the latest releases, and the depth in terms of an 'ownership' simulation is quite enjoyable. But it's truly the sense of flight in every aspect that makes that release so enjoyable - the flight model is just so 'real' feeling and fluid.

 

It's my number one reference when I look at the immersion level in any release. A lot of GA doesn't even come close. Sadly, the AFL 172 is far, far down that list, and I never fly it anymore.

 

 

AS-K21, Grob 103 twin acro, Grob 102 Astir, Phoebus B1 and PW-6u mostly :-), but along the years I have flown some other models / types of gliders.

 

 

 

Got my GPL in 1980, so, more or less 36 yrs of líder flying, ad many opportunities to fly other GA aircraft, including our tugs, from the Auster Husky to a Piper Super Cub, including a few Rallyes and also Robin DR-400...

 

 

 

Also tried to add ULM to my license, but after my second flight was cancelled due to a new techinical problem, the aircraft crashed killing one of the pilots a few days latter, and I knew for sure ULM was something I was no longer interested in...

 

 

 

As I work at the Portuguese Metoffice @ LPPT, and some of my fellow glider pilots are also captains flying Airlines for living, I also had a great chance to use the A3219/20/21 flull flightim for 1 hr which was a great oportunity to feel so close to one of my preferered airliners of the modern times.

 

 

 

At the Portuguese Air Force I had also the chance to fly with fellow pilots on T-37, Epsilon TB-30 and C337, with good hands-on experience :-)

 

Aaaaaand now we know what your main issue is.   Seriously, no simulator is *ever* going to do a good enough job of simulating real life, and the more experience on various types you have, the less you're going to be able to suspend disbelief long enough to create a sense of immersion. You're always going to be looking for those things that you know are just not right.

 

In some regards, I those of us with no piloting experience are better off when it comes to simulators because we're less likely to notice the details!