Best addon jet for FSX?

[Guest davidvoogd]

Just curious what people's thoughts are on whats the best addon jet available currently for FSX, either Private jet or Commercial Airliner. I'm mainly looking for realism, but with reasonable framerates.

[phoenixphire 50]

I think I speak for the commercial side of it. For FSX the Level-D 767 is an amazing airplane. PMDG will be releasing their FSX version of the 747-400 and F version. This plane is by far my favorite airplane to fly. I flew it in FS9 and can hardly wait to fly it again in FSX. I am a shameless PMDG promoter, but for good reason.

[Guest stevehow]

yep mike has it spot on LD767 And PMDG 747.really any aircraft from thse two companies will be top class.heres a few others i like as well.Flight1/superMD80Skysimulations MD11 cheers steve

[Guest davidvoogd]

I really enjoyed the LDS 767 in FS9, but my worry was if my computer can handle the LDS767 + FSX while keeping decent framerates. How does it perform on your systems.Also I'm considering the Eaglesoft CJ1 or the Feelthere Citation X, any commments on those?

[ccaughie 0]

I run the LDS767 on a fairly mediocre system (P4 3GHz, 1MB RAM, 6800GS), and it runs smoothly enough IF I turn off autogen and all AI aircraft, cars etc.It's a shame not to have the other aircraft around (I kind of enjoyed watching them pile up behind me as I was fumbling my way through the take-off checklist for the first time) but I find that the plane gives me enough to think about that I don't really notice their absence much.So far it's my only payware plane so I can't comment on the others.Colin

[byork 2,259]

Level-D is probably the only real choice right now for the hard-core FSX user in the heavy jet class.Of course if you're an Airbus fan, there's the Wilco/FeelThere A320. It's a more controversial product than the LDS 767, but I've run it for a long time and I don't have any real problems with it.Next big 'revolutionary' thing on the horizon is the Airliner XP Airbus, which, if it lives up to its hype, may bowl everything on the market over. We'll just have to wait and see.Cheers,Bryan

[Wilbert 0]

I think another thing to consider when selecting an addon scenery or whatever, is what operating system you are using. I purchased the feelthere/Citation X about two months agao and have not been able to fly it yet. I'm using Vista 64 and after contacting Feelthere about the problems I was experiencing they informed me that the A/C is not supported for Vista 64.Wilbert

[FlyingsCool 3]

I've got an E6600 overclocked to 3.3 GHz w/ EVGA 8800 GTS 640 OC and I see minimal framerate hit (2 - 4 fps?) with the LDS 767 with air traffic at 80% (as recommended by Phil Taylor) and auto traffic at 35% and Ultimate Terrain X installed. I have the system locked at 30 fps (it can do better but I like it here). At KBOS, it starts at 10 to 15 fps on the ground, stays at 15 fps after takeoff, and climbs to 20 fps by the time I'm at 10,000 ft (still over Boston). Over rural areas I get 25 - 30 fps. These numbers were measured at dusk with light cloud cover. I tried stormy weather, too and didn't see any difference.I don't know if this is faster than your system, but at least it shows good performance is just around the corner.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[phoenixphire 50]

I have had no problem running the Level-D on my computer and my computer was pretty good a year ago but now I have to run without autogen (no problem because I fly high and I never really liked it) and without any traffic what so ever. I will wait a year and half and let everything catch up and then I will try and build something that can really show me what FSX can do. Until then I am happy with what I have. Also I had the Wilco/Feelthere a320, which is not a bad little airplane. I can run it with pretty good and with good frame rates but eventually I get a texture corruption. I haven't followed up on a fix because the Level-D has kept me busy.

[Mace 1,910]

>767 with air traffic at 80% (as recommended by Phil Taylor)Keep in mind that Phil's recommendation is good for the stock/default traffic file.If you disable the stock traffic file (as many do), and you use aftermarket traffic bgl's then 80% may not be the optimal point in terms of trading off amount of traffic vs. fps.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Guest danny68]

Level D 767 for me.Dan

[FlyingsCool 3]

Man, there is so much to do in FSX, I just don't have time to immerse myself in getting addon traffic to work. That's a career in and of itself! :-)Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[PhilTaylor 45]

And that was just a max number to use, to avoid funky traffic patterns. For perf, the number is going to depend on your rig.

[slashed2 53]

I have the Wilco/feelthere citation X and 737 PIC(300/400/500) and am enjoying them both. Wanted to start out small and build my way up to the Level D and PMDG offerings.The X is good on frames and the 737 isn't too bad but it's all subject to individual settings, both cause FSX/Vista to CTD after exiting a flight or changing planes, and the 737 has a AP HDG/LNAV turning issue with less than smooth banks which they are looking into, otherwise fun to fly and a good start.The PMDG and LevelD are the big ones and more complex aircraft but seem to be the best of the genre.Ian.

[Guest PPSFA]

I fly the CJ all the time, its a great plane with no adverse problems