The flight model in P3D vs XP

[rototom 198]

4 hours ago, WebMaximus said:

I've been thinking about getting the demo but haven't invested any time into it so far since I figured it wouldn't be a fair test unless I also bought a good payware aircraft. Thinking about the default aircraft in P3D (which I never fly) I figured probably the same thing is true in XP or at least to a certain extent.

I think the default aircraft in X-plane 11 are very usable. I think there are only about 7 or 8 new default models in XP11 and the detail is much higher than the typical level we have seen. I was also surprised that they added some good functions to the default FMC implementing the route and dep/arr pages.

[ryanbatc 12,833]

For airliners I'd personally stick with P3D.  There's not that many very high quality ones.  HQ meaning pmdg-like.  If you do decide on XP look no further than the IXEG B737.  Its older but is the best.  Otherwise the B757 v2 gets high marks.  And if you enjoy steam gauges the FTS B727 v2 is very very good.

[jcomm 5,912]

Depends...

IMO X-Plane's wind variability and gust factor simulation is unrealistic in various aspects, but I'm not sure if it pertains to the flight dynamics or the weather modelling.

Looking at the bellow video, to the end, where an A320is approaching Madeira ( LPMA 05  ) on a day I actually studied at my office ( I'm in the branch :-) ) the bouncing and wobbling is totally unrealistic, but typical of X-Plane's airplane reactions, GA or heavy, under such circumstances.

OTOH, I do prefer the way wind variability affects X-Plane aircraft in roll compared to FSX / P3D even with the best weather injector. It just needs to be fine tuned IMO...

https://youtu.be/kgxBe_Jxnl4?t=16763

 

[WebMaximus 372]

Tonight I tried out the XP11 demo and performed a short circuit in the default B738.

I was pleasantly surprised by the detail of the virtual cockpit but the overall feeling after I was back down on the runway wasn't positive enough to make me feel I'm willing to invest any more time into it. At least not for the time being.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

That wasn't  my point. For training purposes, static simulators provide 99% of what's needed at a far lower cost. But a static simulator  doesn't fully mimic real world aerodynamics. Maybe some day someone will figure out how to do so but by that point all aircraft  will probably  be drones and the training need will have disappeared.

[Pluto7777 10]

FSLabs should bring out their A320 for Xplane 11, this kind of performance with the stability of Xplane11 64b, man, that would become simmers paradise !!  i regret i payed 172 euros for FSL320 (taxes) but i would buy it again, immediatly, even for 200 euros if this product should become available in this version

[virtualstuff 757]

On 4/3/2017 at 0:58 PM, Bobsk8 said:

Something to keep in mind, while airlines use Flight Sims for all their training today, and usually the pilot has one ride with a check pilot after the sim training and then is on his own, the sims they use for the majority of training are not full motion sims, but something more like the sims we use. When I was at the Delta Training center, the only full motion sims were for the 767. Smaller  aircraft like the 737 used a cockpit mockup sitting on a floor with no motion at all. Yet these pilots would come out of the 737 sim in a sweat, after practicing emergencies. 

Not at the major airline over here lol, they use full motion sims (and even those behave a bit differently as the real world counterparts)..
But they are better skilled too not every pilot is a good one or capable to achieve certain standards even with a type rating;-)

As for airliners and Simulators and their flight model compared to real life it's a non discussion because both are off.

Systems simulation is a different story...

As for XP I would just try it I enjoy both since XP10 but missing realistic WX and ATC despite the plugins available.

I use XP where it shines for me and that is night stuff....

[bean_sprout 1,201]

On ‎4‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 10:07 PM, ryanbatcund said:

sIn simplistic terms, most aircraft are too twitchy in XP, but too stable in P3D.  I have now put many hours into both sims so I feel I can comment on both.  In xp the way even larger jets handle in turbulence doesn't look quite right.  But outside of turbulent air I prefer their handling vs P3D.  Smaller props feel better in xp but I still love my P3D addons - there's much more of them and they look a LOT better!

im still enjoying both sims!

just try the demo!

EZDOK 2 does a great job on the P3D 3.4 stability comment.  Really make the sim come alive.

 

Regards

jja