Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tull

Just phenomenal......

Recommended Posts

I have actually spent days just revisiting towns I worked in 50 years ago just to see what they look like now. Even found a few houses we lived in as a kid and the old family farm we sold back in the 70's .

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I little late here, but I knew it was going to be the TBM the OP was flying. It is crazy, but I haven’t flown any other plane in this sim. Flipped back to the other platform for the last week or so in my favourite bush plane!



Lawrence “Laurie” Doering

Latest video at The Flight Level F-18 Hornet | Supersonic Medical Transport | Dubai to Abu Dhabi | First Mission in DCS World | 4K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gary1124 said:

Currently using FSX-SE. I have UT North America, GEX North America, and Active Sky Next. Was out of simming since 2006 prior to June. Century of Flight last version I used. I liked FSX when I first started with it. Better but still familiar. I am impressed with the screen shots from MSFS 2020. I currently have only 8 gig of DDR4 3000 on my Ryzin 5 with RX580 8 gig. I would like to buy me 16 more gig of ram for Christmas and then I will decide between Xplane 11 and MSFS. I DO enjoy visuals but I'm also a tech nut and bolt counter. I like GNS, GTN, FMCs, a 45 minute preflight checklist, and procedures. Tough call.

When you make this decision, keep this in mind: XPlane-11, along with FSX and every other flightsim program prior to MSFS, uses almost entirely fictional buildings, cities, towns, and villages that only roughly approximate what is actually there. Except for a handful of large cities, when you fly over a city or town in those earlier sims, you rarely see anything resembling the real place. Not only is your house (and everybody else's) missing, your street and neighborhood are too, along with familiar downtown buildings. Same with rural areas. This means that while the fictional scenery may be visually appealing, real VFR flight based on actual landmarks is simply not possible.

But in MSFS, it is!. The entire world comes to life, to a degree I never thought I would live to see (I go back to FS2, and for many years enjoyed FSX augmented with Ultimate Terrain). This is not just a difference in degree of realism or a mere "upgrade" -- it is a fundamental advance that changes everything. You can fly over the countryside and see barns and even mountain huts where they actually exist, believe it or not. This, with similar advances in flight modelling and weather, gives a level of realism that is mind-blowing. Some try to denigrate this by calling it "eye candy", but to me this is almost willful ignorance; to paraphrase an earlier poster said, it is like failing to see the difference between a 6-year-old's artwork and a masterpiece. But, your choice!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leprechaunlive said:

Gives you hope that someday your kid is gonna make masterpieces 🙂

Naah, they'll probably end up like me. At 40 I never evolved beyond drawing tadpole figures.. 🤪


Richard

7950x3d   |   32Gb 6000mHz RAM   |   8Tb NVme   |   RTX 4090    |    MSFS    |    P3D    |      XP12  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gary1124 said:

Currently using FSX-SE. I have UT North America, GEX North America, and Active Sky Next. Was out of simming since 2006 prior to June. Century of Flight last version I used. I liked FSX when I first started with it. Better but still familiar. I am impressed with the screen shots from MSFS 2020. I currently have only 8 gig of DDR4 3000 on my Ryzin 5 with RX580 8 gig. I would like to buy me 16 more gig of ram for Christmas and then I will decide between Xplane 11 and MSFS. I DO enjoy visuals but I'm also a tech nut and bolt counter. I like GNS, GTN, FMCs, a 45 minute preflight checklist, and procedures. Tough call.

Just to add to what cobalt wrote, many have reported - me included - that what can be called just "eye candy" (scenery, weather depiction, lighting, etc) actually changed what we thought to be "our liking" in flight simming.

Many discovered that the instrumental, planning and system knowledge where our enjoyment sources simply because that was what previous sims tech was good at. This new generation product showed that the "flight experience" itself can be as much entertaining. Many tubeliners/"button pressers" found themselves spending hours just "flying".

Maybe you can at least have a try with a one month game pass subscription to see if it also apply to yourself...

  • Like 5

Marco Manieri

Perugia - Italy

 

169055.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cobalt said:

When you make this decision, keep this in mind: XPlane-11...

Dont want to escalate this thread as some gentle hearted might escalate that.

But there is a little fictional in x-plane 11 world which uses real data with mixed sources.

I navigate in vfr in x-plane, even without orthos, recreating real flights in a region that never gets much love out of the box (middle east); all the streets and network are there, including obstacles, water bodies, mountatins forests etc... Also checked shapes of cities and villages, x-plane does that in a good manner, even building heights data. This is what i care for in vfr and it's mostly not "this is my house and it should have a red roof not black"

Is it perfect? Hell no, data can be inconsistent, the fact the x-plane art assests are very old doea not help, but i can give you many areas where msfs so called 100% real scenery fall apart completely (starting with my home region). As for orthos im not gonna comment as my views might be already known.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only agree 100% on the eye candy.

As for functionality, we still have a few months (years? I do hope not) to go. First off - I do not fly large airliners (or even small ones). I am dedicated to GA, Bush, fast and low, ignoring civil aviation rules (I fly under anything if I find it - I am still looking for barns open at both ends to take a Piper Cub through 😇) There are still many things that don't feel right - flight dynamics leave a lot to be desired. I am a glider pilot and I have 3-400+ hours "you have" stick time in military fixed wing (piston engined) and light helicopters as an engineer.

msfs is getting close but none of the predecessor sims were this buggy out of the box. I am even beginning to like glass cockpits - mainly because there are so few "steam" planes around. Certainly the sim has me lusting for a 3090 RTX graphics card, but I do get great smooth video around most places.

Yep. at 67 I do get cranky about sim performance, but I am falling in love with this one, despite the numbers of reports and suggestions I keep writing to Asob/Zendesk about.


Chris Brisland - the repainter known as EagleSkinner is back from the dead. Perhaps. Or maybe not.

System: Intel I9 32 GB RAM, nVidia RTX 3090 graphics 24 GB VRAM, three 32" Samsung monitors, Logitech yoke, pedals, switch panel, multi panel

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am enjoying the sim as well.  Long time Flight Sim enthusiast.  If you enjoy the TBM, try Rob Young's turbo normalized Bonanza mod.  Rob Young made some adjustments to the flight model and I find it fly's a lot more like a real aircraft.  Not as twitchy and with better response to control inputs. 

The product does have bugs and requires further development, but it is still early days.  I am hopeful that we will get those accusim models and impressive system simulations from the heavy developers. 

 


KBJC 

AMD 3900 / RTX 2060 Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loving the sim for what it is.  It's got plenty of bugs and issues, and I'm confident they'll all (or almost all) be fixed in time.

Said it before and I'll say it again: I think a year out from launch, we'll be laughing at a lot of the problems we had now, and I think even more people will have quietly migrated to MSFS as their primary sim.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, buzzbee said:

I am enjoying the sim as well.  Long time Flight Sim enthusiast.  If you enjoy the TBM, try Rob Young's turbo normalized Bonanza mod.  Rob Young made some adjustments to the flight model and I find it fly's a lot more like a real aircraft.  Not as twitchy and with better response to control inputs. 

The product does have bugs and requires further development, but it is still early days.  I am hopeful that we will get those accusim models and impressive system simulations from the heavy developers. 

 

The C152 mod discussed elsewhere in this forum is reasonably close as well.  You can actually fly the FAA recommended circuit for a 152 by the numbers and end up pretty much touching down gently with slight power on just past the 1000' markers.  The only change I had to make was 1700/1800 rpm on base instead of 1500 but  a lot of people do that in a real 152 anyway.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

The C152 mod discussed elsewhere in this forum is reasonably close as well.  You can actually fly the FAA recommended circuit for a 152 by the numbers and end up pretty much touching down gently with slight power on just past the 1000' markers.  The only change I had to make was 1700/1800 rpm on base instead of 1500 but  a lot of people do that in a real 152 anyway.

Yes, I think the modified C152 is underrated and skipped over by quite a few.  It is what I jump into by default to have a quick look around somewhere.   

It doesn't have an autopilot, but it trims nicely so it is easy to hand fly, it has a good view out, and due to simple systems it gives you a high frame rate. 


Call me Bob or Rob, I don't mind, but I prefer Rob.

I like to trick airline passengers into thinking I have my own swimming pool in my back yard by painting a large blue rectangle on my patio.

Intel 14900K in a Z790 motherboard with water cooling, RTX 4080, 32 GB 6000 CL30 DDR5 RAM, W11 and MSFS on Samsung 980 Pro NVME SSD's.  Core Isolation Off, Game Mode Off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gary1124 said:

... I will decide between Xplane 11 and MSFS. ... Tough call.

Gary, the majority of users have X-plane11 and now have FS2020 as well. Be a man and buy both! 😄

P.S. As a virtual pilot since 1988 I tell you that all your previous flight simulation experience is irrelevant when it comes to FS2020.

Edited by OSM
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is looking great when it works. Unfortunately fly in Central Europe and you'll get phenomenal pauses and stutters show.

But yes flying in other areas can be quite nice.


Roi Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, cobalt said:

When you make this decision, keep this in mind: XPlane-11, along with FSX and every other flightsim program prior to MSFS, uses almost entirely fictional buildings, cities, towns, and villages that only roughly approximate what is actually there. Except for a handful of large cities, when you fly over a city or town in those earlier sims, you rarely see anything resembling the real place. Not only is your house (and everybody else's) missing, your street and neighborhood are too, along with familiar downtown buildings. Same with rural areas. This means that while the fictional scenery may be visually appealing, real VFR flight based on actual landmarks is simply not possible.

But in MSFS, it is!. The entire world comes to life, to a degree I never thought I would live to see (I go back to FS2, and for many years enjoyed FSX augmented with Ultimate Terrain). This is not just a difference in degree of realism or a mere "upgrade" -- it is a fundamental advance that changes everything. You can fly over the countryside and see barns and even mountain huts where they actually exist, believe it or not. This, with similar advances in flight modelling and weather, gives a level of realism that is mind-blowing. Some try to denigrate this by calling it "eye candy", but to me this is almost willful ignorance; to paraphrase an earlier poster said, it is like failing to see the difference between a 6-year-old's artwork and a masterpiece. But, your choice!

That I understand. And in FSX my own town is depicted with a rail line that hasn't existed for over 30 years. I see what you mean. UT-NA has my central PA ridge and valley landforms fairly accurate and most of the roads are close but the buildings are lacking indeed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, buzzbee said:

I am enjoying the sim as well.  Long time Flight Sim enthusiast.  If you enjoy the TBM, try Rob Young's turbo normalized Bonanza mod.  Rob Young made some adjustments to the flight model and I find it fly's a lot more like a real aircraft.  Not as twitchy and with better response to control inputs. 

The product does have bugs and requires further development, but it is still early days.  I am hopeful that we will get those accusim models and impressive system simulations from the heavy developers. 

 

Is Rob Youngs turbo normalized Bonanza available in FSX? I have Carenados F33.

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...