Sign in to follow this  
Murmur

FS2004 or X-Plane? Or both?

Recommended Posts

Is there anybody "out there" with experience of both FS2004 AND the current version of X-Plane who would care to comment on the comparison between these two programmes?I've been flying Microsoft's Sim since it's inception as well as the early versions of X-Plane. Eventually I dropped X-Plane but have now decided to give it another try as there have been vast improvements; most notably in the scenery.Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Thanks for the suggestion Craig but I know X-Plane pretty well. However my last flights were with Version 7 and it's now into Version 8 which I've ordered again.I was hoping for a comparison by someone knowing both Sims even better than me. The discussion could have been an interesting one.Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got the demo of X-Plane 8 and I'm fairly certain the flight realism is generally greater in X-Plane. HOWEVER some aircraft in FS9 are modelled extremely well and fly very similar to their real World counterparts. Two examples are the RealAir Spit and Decathlon.As long as you fly within the envelope in FS9 you can generally be sure of good flight realism from well-modelled aircraft. If you want realistic flight performance beyond the flight envelope (say if you want to practise advanced aerobatics) then x-plane is the way to go. I still don't find the scenery graphics of x-plane anywhere near on par with FS9, and IMO the scenery is a major part of the feeling of immersion you get from a sim.James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have FS2004 and X-Plane 8. I really wanted to like X-Plane, but rarely use it now. Some people say that the flight model is better than FS and some say that the gauges are better. However, with the latest aircraft for FS (e.g. from RealAir) I think that the flight model in FS can be as good as X-Plane, despite the fact that the method of calculation of flight characteristics (a file full of variables) is perhaps less realistic than the method in X-Plane, which tries to calculate how each aircraft will fly. As for gauges, again the latest aircraft for FS now have gauges that are just as fluid as X-Plane (at least on my system), and certainly more varied (and, I believe, more realistic).Otherwise, the environments in which you fly are so much more detailed in FS, and there is so much more choice of add-ons, all of which improve the experience.One of the features of X-Plane that I was particularly interested in was the ability to build or modify aircraft and see how they fly without creating a flight model, simulating building a real aircraft. However, I found X-Plane to be extremely user unfriendly and have never managed to use this feature, although no doubt I could have succeeded , with some perseverance.Having said all of the above, I know there are still many people out the who swear by X-Plane, so if you like it why not use both, if you have enough time available!Happy flying,Boogie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gauge refresh rates and physics of motion (very fluid) are much better in X-Plane. And there are many technical issues which X-Plane clearly exceeds FS9. However for me, none of that makes any difference because of the endless tinkering by the developer.As long as you understand the genius developer is absolutely unencumbered by the impact his revisions have on users. At first look there is a long list of third party aircraft and accessories available. But they are version specific and the add-ons you own now will not work with a new revision. Because of the developers decision to ignore the user base and maintain compatibility (that would require more time and work), there are few developers willing to invest in quality add-ons that have short lives. IMHO it is an excellent platform. And it will never mature for the simulation masses as long as the developer refuses to respect compatibility between revisions. Bob.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> HOWEVER some>aircraft in FS9 are modelled extremely well and fly very>similar to their real World counterparts. Two examples are the>RealAir Spit and Decathlon.>> If you want realistic flight performance beyond the>flight envelope (say if you want to practise advanced>aerobatics) then x-plane is the way to go. Actually, you were more correct the first time around! :D If you want advanced aerobatics, then stick with the RealAir's for FS9. X-Plane doesn't have near the rudder authority for slips, knife edge, hammerheads, tailslides, or hammerheads, that the RealAir aircraft do. X-Plane won't spin with any realism either.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used x-plane for a LOOONG time, but as mentioned above Austin's business sense and ego finally got the best of me. Went over to FLY and was happy with it, but we know where that ended up. Iused FS up until about 1994 then the switch to x-plane. I'm very happy with FS now with regard to the environment and the add-ons are fantastic. I am still not happy with the flight models; x-plane will do that to you :-) I even tinker with many of the payware aircraft I have because I don't like some characteristics. But, all in all, I can't ever see going back to x-plane. I do check out Austin's site every now and then just to keep up on what is happening. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I've got the demo of X-Plane 8 and I'm fairly certain the>flight realism is generally greater in X-Plane. HOWEVER some>aircraft in FS9 are modelled extremely well and fly very>similar to their real World counterparts. Two examples are the>RealAir Spit and Decathlon.>>As long as you fly within the envelope in FS9 you can>generally be sure of good flight realism from well-modelled>aircraft. If you want realistic flight performance beyond the>flight envelope (say if you want to practise advanced>aerobatics) then x-plane is the way to go. I still don't find>the scenery graphics of x-plane anywhere near on par with FS9,>and IMO the scenery is a major part of the feeling of>immersion you get from a sim.>>JamesI agree with James.When out of the envelope, X-Plane superior modeling comes out.For example, FS9 fails to appropriate model asymmetric thrust conditions, in particular near or below VMC. Also, windmilling props modeling is very poor in FS9.Modeling of prop slipstream on tail surfaces is highly superior in X-Plane.X-Plane flight model works at a higher frequency, so it is not subject to instabilities during high dynamic maneuvers (in FS9, I've experienced them e.g. with RealAirSF260 and helicopters).Regarding spins, the author of X-Plane has been tinkering with spin dynamics in the latest versions, now they're better (although probbaly default a/c's need to be re-tuned). I've been able to do hammerheads and tailslides with X-Plane.Helicopter modeling is simple not comparable between the two (also due to the non-existent props/rotor modeling of FS9). X-Plane copters really feel like they're "soaring". Trying autorotations in X-Plane is a dream.Weather effects (turbulence, downbursts, ice) are more challenging and dangerous in X-Plane. Extreme variations of friction with runway conditions (dry, wet, ice) is modeled. Aquaplaning on wet runways is modeled, as well.For all the rest (scenery, AI, complex add-ons availability) FS9 obviously wins hands down. However, there are several developers who produce nice GA a/c's for X-Plane.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the comparison in fluidity? Like are there the same stutter problems reported, plateau airports, or any other problems that fill the pages here at the forum?George Tyrrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>What about the comparison in fluidity? Like are there the>same stutter problems reported, plateau airports, or any other>problems that fill the pages here at the forum?>George TyrrellApart from problems with specific users, X-Plane is much more stutter-free. Gauges are smoother as well. On the other hand though, probably FS9 has better average FPS than X-Plane, when scenery complexity is similar. However you can try the demo and see by yourself.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Marco...and all the others that put in their pennyworth...for the interesting comments.Marco I was intrigued by your comment that "Trying autorotations in X-Plane is a dream"It will be a few weeks before my new set of X-Plane DVDs arrive but as I cannot recall an autorotation facility in my older versions please tell me where to access it. Till now I've found copters too finicky and difficult to control in FS9. Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>X-Plane flight model works at a higher frequency, so it is not>subject to instabilities during high dynamic maneuvers (in>FS9, I've experienced them e.g. with RealAirSF260 and>helicopters).Please explain....I get more sim time with the RealAir SF260 than anything else. I've also flown the real Marchetti SF260. I just happen to like sliding canopy's and good simulated aerobatic flight dynamics. I don't have a clue of what you're trying to explain.And if you do happen to fly the RealAir SF260 or Spitfire, it would put an end to claims, that X-Plane always has more fluid gauges. :( L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks Marco...and all the others that put in their>pennyworth...for the interesting comments.>>Marco I was intrigued by your comment that "Trying>autorotations in X-Plane is a dream">>It will be a few weeks before my new set of X-Plane DVDs>arrive but as I cannot recall an autorotation facility in my>older versions please tell me where to access it. >>Till now I've found copters too finicky and difficult to>control in FS9. >>CliffWell, that's a problem since in X-Plane IMHO copters are more difficult to control at first :). Maybe, to begin, you should try to select "Auto coordinate anti-torque in helos if no rudder axis selected" (in joystick-equipment menu), especially if you don't have rudder pedals. It's a big helper.Also, make sure you have smooth and steady FPS (I'd say >40 FPS), since copters want smooth control.There is no autorotation facility, just shut your engine while you're flying. :)Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Please explain....>>I get more sim time with the RealAir SF260 than anything else.>I've also flown the real Marchetti SF260. I just happen to>like sliding canopy's and good simulated aerobatic flight>dynamics. I don't have a clue of what you're trying to>explain.In some occasions, trying fancy maneuvers (but heavily out of normal flight envelope), the a/c's behaved strangely, for example doing sudden swerves and zigzags, or doing steady climbs with no engine. IMO, it's solely due to the fact that FS9 flight model works at a (quite) low frequency. I hope they double FM frequency for FSX. :DRegarding spins, I noticed there are still a lot of X-Plane a/c's that don't spin properly (where they should, e.g. Extra300, etc.). Maybe they simply need re-tuning, or maybe X-Plane FM still has lacks in the area. Spin dynamics changed very often in the latest versions.As a side note, I tried a spectacular maneuver with that Extra300: a vertical roll, turning with no solution of continuity into a "backward" roll (with the plane descending and rolling in the same direction) after ailerons have been reverted. I don't remember the name of the maneuver. Neat to see though! :D>And if you do happen to fly the RealAir SF260 or Spitfire, it>would put an end to claims, that X-Plane always has more fluid>gauges. :( Eheh, agree. In a recent post I said the only FS9 gauges in par with X-Plane are RealAir ones. I hope in FSX they'll improve gauge smoothness as well. :)Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree. Try a knife edge spin in FS and occasionally the things just go haywire with the a/c being launched sideways and sometime up (with an idling engine) in the most inexplicable of ways. However, I agree with Larry to, certainly in 8.15 trying extreme crossed control manouevre highlights how bad the rudder authority seems to be in X-plane, as can also be seen in trying to take-off in a taildragger with a 10kt crosswind. X-plane looks promising, but there are still quite a few funnies in there, not specific to the FM either.Generally, I find both sim have big drawbacks for different reasons :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Marco. I appreciate that advice.Incidentally when seeking an answer to the pros and cons of FS9 compared to X-Plane I never thought I'd find a summary as telling as "I play with Microsoft Flight Simulator, I fly with X-Plane"It says it all.............Regards,Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks Marco. I appreciate that advice.>>Incidentally when seeking an answer to the pros and cons of>FS9 compared to X-Plane I never thought I'd find a summary as>telling as "I play with Microsoft Flight Simulator, I fly with>X-Plane">>It says it all.............LOL, no please, don't wanna start a flame here on a MSFS forum. :) Mine is just a little provocative signature.Don't forget that a lot of RL pilots prefer MSFS to X-Plane. And the overall flying experience MSFS+ADDONS can give (scenery, ATC, etc.) is currently not attainable on any other home simulator.X-Plane has just some advantages on smoothness, weather effects modeling, and specific aspects of flight model (copters is an example). If you can appreciate those aspects (most people do not) then you'll enjoy it.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this