Stunning..just ordered the World Set with 8.5... thanks for the link..Larry

Lets make a date 1 year from now. We shall see.....In my opinion the FS-X release is as bad as the FS2000 release. The more sophisticated add-on market that exists now makes the problem worse.What is there to do when you finally tweaked FS-X to give you 20 fps in every location on the planet on your top-end hardware? Using sophisticated add-ons will only tank the framrate that took you days to get right.

>>> Seriously though, those "new scenery" screenshots>represent>>> unplayable conditions. >>Well on my machine X-Plane 8.5 with global scenery was very>playable with a smooth framerate and stunning visuals. If FS-X>would have performed like that I wouldn't have returned it to>the shop.>>Come to think of it if FS-X hadn't performed that bad I would>not even have given X-Plane a 2nd look.>>Still its a shame that a 3-4 man development team can't get>your home airport right. With all the money and resources they>have? A bloody shame it is I tell you. (like FS-X doesn't have>autogen in the way every now and then)Boshar a sceenshot of EHAM? just curious here... and what about detailed system aircraft with 3d cockpit?What about developement tools?Andr

X-plane can be incredible fun. In the graphics department there is little to complain about. Ok most of the roads are misaligned (running ove rmountains etc), but now at least they have traffic on them (just like in FSX). And there's nothing like a early morning or sunset take-off.. it really generates some pretty pictures with accurate runway-lights..The planes usually don't look as pretty and don't have all the advanced shinyness and whatnot that FSX has. The included standard planes look pretty boring actually, evebn though they can be a lot of fun to fly with.. but basically it's '90's graphics you're getting here.However, the real fun starts when you start designing your own planes. It's not hard to do at all, yet you have seemingly endless possibilities.. and the beauty is that X-planes models it all pretty well. Design a big and heavy jet, and it will feel like a big and heavy jet. Design a model airplane, and it will behave like one. And you can design pretty much anything you like.. from VTOL to rocket to helo to glider.. no problemo.For me it's not really a matter of either X-plane or MSFS, but in some way they complement eachother. Sometimes i feel like pretty graphics and reasonably accurate landscapes, and that's when i use MSFS. At other times i just like the fun of flying and the particularly smooth feel of X-plane, and then i'll choose that.

X-Plane has its own forum. This is the FSX forum. :) Would it not be better to take it over there.

>If you judged its flight model solely by that test (I can do the >same in MSFS, though), you don't have probably the knowledge to >appreciate it, and your decision to stay away from it is very wise.No, actually you can't do that in MSFS. And if my years as a second officer B727-200, and B737-300/500 F/O for Continental Airlines don't qualify me, would you assume to make that statement since you are MORE qualified to do so?This was not an "attack" it was stating the FACTS Marco. Are you QUALIFIED to state facts or are you simply surmising your opinions? As a life's lesson, criticism is not an attack. Saying X-Plane is "stupid" is an attack. Stating a FACT of X-Plane's deficiency is NOT an attack. Furthermore, I sure X-Plane doesn't need YOUR defense. The X-PLANE page is repleat with innuendos and connotations in regards to its supposed superiority (and Justin's superiority to Microsoft and Windows), when one makes such grandeous claims, one is open to audit. I can say that X-Plane "has been weighed, it has been measured, and it has been found wanting..." -A Knights Tale.

Xplane is a very good sim, but the superior fm's has always been a myth in my mind and has been confused with smoothness-which was in the past due primarily to xplane displaying less out the windscreen.I will never forget spending hours putting in all the specs and dimensions of my Beech debonair into the plane maker-then coming out with something that didn't remotely look or fly like my real bird. I did finally screw around with everything to get something close-but the reality kinda took a dive at that point for me. Still a good sim in a lot of respects-I buy it every couple years but it usually ends up collecting dust.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

>>No, actually you can't do that in MSFS. And if my years as a>second officer B727-200, and B737-300/500 F/O for Continental>Airlines don't qualify me, would you assume to make that>statement since you are MORE qualified to do so?>>This was not an "attack" it was stating the FACTS Marco. Are>you QUALIFIED to state facts or are you simply surmising your>opinions? >Marco seems to be a nice guy, but no, he is not qualified to make real life flight dynamic comparisons. He does not fly real aircraft.L.Adamson

>No, actually you can't do that in MSFS. And if my years as a>second officer B727-200, and B737-300/500 F/O for Continental>Airlines don't qualify me, would you assume to make that>statement since you are MORE qualified to do so?Again, Mike, you're confusing between flight models and flight dynamics. Both simulator are capable of realistic flight dynamics. If the X-Plane designer put too little parasite and/or induced drag in its 767 model, that's why it can reach 400kts with full flaps. If he'd have designed it in MSFS using the same values, the results would have been the same. >As a life's lesson, criticism is not an attack. Saying>X-Plane is "stupid" is an attack. Stating a FACT of X-Plane's>deficiency is NOT an attack. Furthermore, I sure X-Plane>doesn't need YOUR defense. The X-PLANE page is repleat with>innuendos and connotations in regards to its supposed>superiority (and Justin's superiority to Microsoft and>Windows), when one makes such grandeous claims, one is open to>audit. You're right, I've should have used "criticism" instead of "attack", pardon.Yes, there is a lot of marketing hype in X-Plane page (as in about every other videogame ads I've seen).And yes, X-Plane has many deficiencies (as MSFS). My point is that you can't judge a flight simulator flight model just verifying that an aircraft model can reach 400kts with full flaps. You can only judge a poor designed aircraft with that test.And one last point: can you be 100% sure that a 767 could not IN THEORY (read: with "damages" disabled in the simulator) reach 400kts with full flaps? As you certainly know, 400kts is way beyond Vfe and Vle, so nobody could try it and end up with flaps still on the wings. Do you have engineering data from which I can extrapolate that the induced and parasite drag on a 767 with full flaps and gear down would prevent it from reaching 400kts?Marco

>Marco seems to be a nice guy, but no, he is not qualified to>make real life flight dynamic comparisons. He does not fly>real aircraft.Hi Larry, even if it may be not evident, I set great value on your opinions as a pilot, and always read your posts as you may have noticed. And, surprise surprise, I share in some way most of your points and conclusion on MSFS and X-Plane.Yes, I'm not a pilot myself. Even if I can't make RL comparisons, I have a different kind of qualifying as you maybe know, so I speak facts supported by my knowledge of the matter, as you speak yours supported by your knowledge of the matter (and piloting experience).Moreover, consider there are some RL pilots who prefer MSFS, and some who prefer X-Plane, so RL experience seems not to be, after all, a decisive factor.Marco

>Yes, I'm not a pilot myself. Even if I can't make RL>comparisons, I have a different kind of qualifying as you>maybe know, so I speak facts supported by my knowledge of the>matter, as you speak yours supported by your knowledge of the>matter (and piloting experience).>>Moreover, consider there are some RL pilots who prefer MSFS,>and some who prefer X-Plane, so RL experience seems not to be,>after all, a decisive factor.>Yes, I only mentioned it, because you've stated it here, on these forums.And yes, some RL pilots prefer X-Plane for various reasons. However, simmers need to realize that X-Plane is not the holy grail of flight dynamics, and that it's just basically 15 year old hype.I'm often ammused when I see an MSFS flight simmer jump to an X-Plane forum proclaiming they want more; are abandoning MSFS, and are ready to step up to the much higher flight dynamics level of X-Plane. When in fact, I know, that what they're looking for, isn't really there.As most know, I use X-Plane too, and have bought the latest version along with global scenery. But overall flight dynamics is certainly not the reason. I still prefer MSFS, especially with 3rd party addon's for the overall sensation & control of flight.L.Adamson

>What is there to do when you finally tweaked FS-X to give you>20 fps in every location on the planet on your top-end>hardware? Using sophisticated add-ons will only tank the>framrate that took you days to get right.I have a totally other experience Boshar with 120 AI aircraft on Heathrow with a high-end system 30 fps or more ;-)FPS between 27 and 60 FPS in FSX with great visuals :-)http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...d=245443&page=4Was with 72 AI on the ground at EHAM my hometown aiirport...FSX is on high-end system far smoother as FS9 ever will be lolBut have Fs9/FSX on my HD and fly in both lolLooked into the XPlane stuff was just curious but I'm graphical system guy...The aircraft looks like stuff wayback from FS98 and I don't like the visuals to... Still a great Job for 4 person team...Only liked the EDDM 2.1 beta version...But at this point I will skip it hard and fast :-lolHave fun guysAndr

Hey Paul,I completely agree with you here. I've been a pilot from the age of 16, then went into the military and flew F4 Phantoms - FSX promised to be the ultimate - I thought FS9 was good, so I just paid for FSX Deluxe and installed it yesterday - to be perfectly honest, it sux! To get it going, I have to build myself a brand new system!! I only put this one together a year ago. The other alternative is to go nuts with tweaks - I've had a total gut full of trying to get it to give me reasonable FPS but have to reduce resolution, move the sliders down, etc. - all to what avail? I'll answer that and say TO MY DISGUST! It looks horrid - blurry planes, lock ups, comp crashes - I GIVE UP and am uninstalling it now. What a waste of time and money. Does anyone honestly think we are going to sit in front of our (up to date) systems and edit coonfigurations in notepad ad infinitum? Give me a break! Thumbs down to MSFS on this flop.X-plane is definitely the way to go.Later guys.

Dead links? Look in the new download manager: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?&autocom=dlmanagerDefault crafts are worthless (thats right Austin) in X-Plane, no detailed airports, no forest trees yet... BUT.....Yes I fly both.............Here are some good aircrafts and stuff for X-Plane 8+:Hughes H500D---my favhttp://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?autoco...ewfile&fid=5271Eurocopter EC120B Colibri with animated cockpithttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7372.shtmlSame as above, dif skin:Eurocopter EC-120B Colibri Spanish Air Forcehttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7473.shtmlBell 47G P9L1NGhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7286.shtmlYou can find the Chinook in the other download section @ x-plane.org, didnt know if you had to be a member(free to join) to access the "other" download area.1952 Bonanza---favhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7386.shtmlPiper Comanche PA-24 180http://www.x-plane.org/registry/6563.shtmlTwo Beechcraft's(read well):http://x-plane.org/home/twinpropflyer/index.htmlA300-600ST Beluga Beta 1.1 v.8.20-----favhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7393.shtmlA380-800 V2.5-----favhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/6891.shtmlAvro RJ100 flybe----favhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7201.shtmlP51 Miss Americahttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/6751.shtmlMartin P5M2 Marlinhttp://www.x-plane.org/registry/7347.shtmlHeavies and fighters:http://www.xplanefreeware.net/forums/index.php?showforum=14Scenery:http://www.x-plane.org/home/tdavis/scenery8/xp8scenery.htmlhttp://www.x-plane.it/staticpages/index.php/ItaOverlayNewIf X-Plane had default crafts as good as and better than FSX's VC (some addon planes VC are pretty close, but I think FSX takes the cake in virtual cockpits), trees, and 50 detailed airports by default, I would not touch FSX as much as XP, soon it will be there.If your are a TRUE flight sim lover, you will own both, and scream and complain back and forth as releases come...LOLHeck I even fly Orbiter alot, try that, then complain about FSX or X-Plane graphics or crafts.PeaceNOTE: some links might be dead, download manager at the ORG has changed, look in new download area for whatever you want that has dead link

>Hey Paul,>>I completely agree with you here. I've been a pilot from the>age of 16, then went into the military and flew F4 Phantoms ->FSX promised to be the ultimate - I thought FS9 was good, so I>just paid for FSX Deluxe and installed it yesterday - to be>perfectly honest, it sux! To get it going, I have to build>myself a brand new system!! I only put this one together a>year ago. The other alternative is to go nuts with tweaks ->I've had a total gut full of trying to get it to give me>reasonable FPS but have to reduce resolution, move the sliders>down, etc. - all to what avail? I'll answer that and say TO MY>DISGUST! It looks horrid - blurry planes, lock ups, comp>crashes - I GIVE UP and am uninstalling it now. What a waste>of time and money. Does anyone honestly think we are going to>sit in front of our (up to date) systems and edit>coonfigurations in notepad ad infinitum? Give me a break!>Thumbs down to MSFS on this flop.>X-plane is definitely the way to go.>You're correct, you might have to improve your CPU. FSX would not run on my other setup either. But now my FSX aircraft have perfect smooth skins with no jaggies & a high gloss finish, on such aircraft as the Lear. And no crashes or lockups. But the old unit sure did! I have not performed any tweaks and run FSX in 1600*1200*32 with AA on. BTW, a new system will even run X-Plane better. X-Plane with global scenery will suck up the frame rates too, or it just brings in the fog.L.Adamson --- FSX, FS9, X-Plane 8 with global scenery