737NG tries XP12 :-)

[Franz007 538]

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

Rest assured, it's only a small minority who show insecurity.  There are a few of them in these forums.  

I'm surprised they would even take the time to keep posting anti XP comments in the first place.  If they were secure in their own decisions, they wouldn't even care what else is out there.

Obviously, they care.

Bottom line.  They simply want the competition to evaporate into nothingness.  Some even stoop so low, that they target Austin and his staff.

Yeah, you are basically absolutely right. But I found the amount of negative comments coming even from XP11-users quite alerting, in particular when talking about the PC-Performance with XP12, although we know that Laminar will improve it when XP12 will have reached a stable state.

[GoranM 3,797]

36 minutes ago, markk70 said:

Follow-up video.

 

Without even looking at the video, (so my comment is 100% objective), these kinds of videos must be taken with a very large grain of salt.  

In BOTH cases, the flight model is only as good as what the author does with the tools provided.  

[GoranM 3,797]

32 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

But I found the amount of negative comments coming even from XP11-users quite alerting

Are you absolutely certain they are running X-Plane 11?  I've seen people claim they are X-Plane customers, just to give themselves an excuse to post negative comments (Yes, they go to those extremes.).  When asked specific questions about X-Plane, they either don't really have much to say, or get the response completely wrong.

Edited July 15, 2023 by GoranM

[mSparks 2,094]

17 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

negative comments coming even from XP11-users quite alerting

tbh, XP11 had and has a lot of bugbears.

Performance of many 3rd party aircraft was and is absolutely abysmal.

It took a long time for close to "proper" reporting of which 3rd party plugin was responsible for making xplane explode, and the sim would more often than not take the blame when they did. Still does.

Out of the box scenery especially away from airports was very dated, a lot of 3rd party libraries you would come across even more so.

As we see in this video, what settings to use are not "word not allowed proof" (not an insult, it just means that it takes more than a little effort to know what settings to use) - infinately better than XP10, but it shouldn't be possible to think you are on min settings with 16x AA and max ansiotropic filtering...

stupid bugs sat for years because the org would respond with "LR knows but wont fix it" - use this hack. When in fact LR didnt know. 

They still need to do a better job of tracking issues, feeding back on them and prioritising ones that affect lots of people.

All of these can be overcome, and XP is phenominal once you do. but many people dont.

[Franz007 538]

18 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Are you absolutely certain they are running X-Plane 11?  I've seen people claim they are X-Plane customers, just to give themselves an excuse to post negative comments (Yes, they go to those extremes.).  When asked specific questions about X-Plane, they either don't really have much to say, or get the response completely wrong.

Haha, no i am indeed not sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were making wrng claims. The best I have seen so far was a guy making a comparison-video beetween both sims. And then it turned out that he never had XP installed and made a comparison on what he had heard about 🤣🤣🤣

Btw. the video of 737NG-Driver is very fair and well balanced and doesn’t seem to be biased.

[jcomm 5,997]

I am in the fence regarding buying a 1 month subscription just to be able to watch his flight dynamics analysis of the 172 between XP and MFS...

P.S.: Direct comparison video available right now!

X-Plane12 or MSFS? Let's compare the FLIGHT MODELS directly| Real Airline Pilot - YouTube

737NG feels pretty unbiased / honest about his remarks, and he finds XP12 better in various aspects, but says that the difference is overall not that big. 

I don't know who you guys are referring to above in those comments regarding XP12 naysayers ... I could fit well into that classification, but then I fit for pretty much any flight simulator I try 🙂

Anyway, most of the critics even from users who are really fan / fanatic about other platforms never aim directly at XP's flight dynamics. It's very difficult for anyone with good sense to even try to compare, for instance, MFS flight dynamics with XP12 flight dynamics. Although I am now a 90% MFS user with no time left for other sims (although I did try P3dv6 this week, more as a way of supporting HiFi and Active Sky v6), I am not fool to the point of not being able to recognize that X-Plane offers, overall, a much better feel of flight, and even though I am critic about the type of aircraft I know the better from RL - gliders - it's easy for me to recognize that a recently released glider for XP12 really excels, and actually also makes XP's Flight Dynamics "open system" shine for the possibilities it brings for talented developers to bring their creations to very nice replicas of the real thing.

The main problem with an approach like that of XP is that we can't easily fine tune stuff that is done in the core and we can't correctly adapt to RL numbers for a given aircraft. It's also evident that the most talented developers have to use "tricks" to make their aircraft behave closer to reality and the performance of their RL counterparts. These includes dimensions not according to that of the real aircraft, and / or other aerodynamic variables that, if made exactly according to the real aircraft will end up giving performances that aren't acceptable. 

There is yet another great flight simulator I haven't tried in it's last version yet - Aerofly FS 4. I might try it one day... It's approach to modelling of aircraft, both fixed and rotary wing, appears to be really detailed and powerful (in good dev hands 🙂 )

Edited July 15, 2023 by jcomm

[Flyfox 128]

I like 737NG‘s videos, but I don‘t think this comparison is of any significance for these two simulators. It‘s merely a comparison between a C172 model in MSFS and a C172 model in XP-12, nothing more. If you exclusively want to fly in this particular airplane, it might help you to make a decision. But by no means is it a comparison of the flight dynamics abilities of these two simulators.

[GoranM 3,797]

48 minutes ago, Flyfox said:

I like 737NG‘s videos, but I don‘t think this comparison is of any significance for these two simulators. It‘s merely a comparison between a C172 model in MSFS and a C172 model in XP-12, nothing more. If you exclusively want to fly in this particular airplane, it might help you to make a decision. But by no means is it a comparison of the flight dynamics abilities of these two simulators.

What led you to this conclusion?

Edited July 15, 2023 by GoranM

[Gary1124 181]

5 hours ago, GoranM said:

Rest assured, it's only a small minority who show insecurity.  There are a few of them in these forums.  

I'm surprised they would even take the time to keep posting anti XP comments in the first place.  If they were secure in their own decisions, they wouldn't even care what else is out there.

Obviously, they care.

Bottom line.  They simply want the competition to evaporate into nothingness.  Some even stoop so low, that they target Austin and his staff.

I think the hate trolls fit perfectly well with the Internet/Social media generation. 

I myself want 

MSFS

Xplane 12xxxx

Lockheed/Martin P3D

Flightgear

DCS

To all be successful and strive for "Real As It Gets".

Because they are all "sharpening iron" for each other. They all push to equal or best the competitors and we the Flightsim fans enjoy their improvements. I wish all of them success. Makes the hobby better and creates choices.

[Franz007 538]

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

737NG feels pretty unbiased / honest about his remarks, and he finds XP12 better in various aspects, but says that the difference is overall not that big. 

I don't know who you guys are referring to above in those comments regarding XP12 naysayers ... I could fit well into that classification, but then I fit for pretty much any flight simulator I try 🙂

True! The comments to this video were much better, simply because fanatics couldn’t really disaprove what a professional pilot was feeling. A very good video that confirms what we already knew since long.

It could be interesting to see the reactions after having tested the handflying with Fenix and Toliss, knowing that the pilot’s opinion about the Fenix was very bad…

😀

Edited July 15, 2023 by Franz007

[blingthinger 649]

7 hours ago, SAS443 said:

Which variant of C172 did you get checked out on? Are you aware that early C172 models and the latest C172S have different max flap settings, the latter is limited to F30, as opposed to F40 on the early models.

But again, the 172S model does not sink like a brick on a normal approach, it's quite a gentle nose drop, I have more videos (unpublished) if you don't believe it.

I'm not checked out in the 172. I was merely claiming to be the one flying. Sorry for the confusion there.

Yes, flaps would make a bit of difference, but you are also avoiding the speed question. +5 knots (which would still be considered a 'normal approach') will make the difference in floating vs not floating, regardless of the flap setting.

It's also not a question of nose drop, per se. It's a matter of a loss of power yielding a loss of lift force. Pitching moment is cancelled by the yoke pull. Note in his new side-by-side video there is little change in pitch when he pulls the power. Far more 'gentle' this time around. He also repeatedly reiterates the fact that in his opinion, XP models power-lift coupling more realistically. I'll have to dig up what model I was in, but this all corroborates my own experience and what I've visually observed in both sims.

 

 

1 hour ago, Flyfox said:

But by no means is it a comparison of the flight dynamics abilities of these two simulators.

That's not entirely true. In fact, it's known that the default XP 172 has some wrong numbers in the geometry definition. Wrong enough that there's an addon that can be purchased over on the org that supposedly improves upon the model even further, simply by correcting a few of the values in the default definition files. That XP can miss a few geometry-definition values and still be overall more accurate in both the steady and dynamic motions, is saying something.

There's very clearly issues with e.g. rudder influence in 2020. There's deficiencies near the ground and elsewhere and most importantly, other prop aircraft exhibit the same problems in 2020. Even those with CFD turned on. That points to general modeling differences. Not simply a matter of one aircraft type in either sim.

[Gary1124 181]

6 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

I'm not checked out in the 172. I was merely claiming to be the one flying. Sorry for the confusion there.

Yes, flaps would make a bit of difference, but you are also avoiding the speed question. +5 knots (which would still be considered a 'normal approach') will make the difference in floating vs not floating, regardless of the flap setting.

It's also not a question of nose drop, per se. It's a matter of a loss of power yielding a loss of lift force. Pitching moment is cancelled by the yoke pull. Note in his new side-by-side video there is little change in pitch when he pulls the power. Far more 'gentle' this time around. He also repeatedly reiterates the fact that in his opinion, XP models power-lift coupling more realistically. I'll have to dig up what model I was in, but this all corroborates my own experience and what I've visually observed in both sims.

 

 

That's not entirely true. In fact, it's known that the default XP 172 has some wrong numbers in the geometry definition. Wrong enough that there's an addon that can be purchased over on the org that supposedly improves upon the model even further, simply by correcting a few of the values in the default definition files. That XP can miss a few geometry-definition values and still be overall more accurate in both the steady and dynamic motions, is saying something.

There's very clearly issues with e.g. rudder influence in 2020. There's deficiencies near the ground and elsewhere and most importantly, other prop aircraft exhibit the same problems in 2020. Even those with CFD turned on. That points to general modeling differences. Not simply a matter of one aircraft type in either sim.

I know flying through a pre-thunderstorm cloud formation causes fits for altitude hold on the Baron AP. Constantly adjust with Control Steeering button or the up/down rocker which I have assigned a switch.

[blingthinger 649]

6 minutes ago, Gary1124 said:

I know flying through a pre-thunderstorm cloud formation causes fits for altitude hold on the Baron AP. Constantly adjust with Control Steeering button or the up/down rocker which I have assigned a switch.

:) autopilots are a totally different layer of the onion!

[jcomm 5,997]

2 hours ago, Franz007 said:

True! The comments to this video were much better, simply because fanatics couldn’t really disaprove what a professional pilot was feeling. A very good video that confirms what we already knew since long.

It could be interesting to see the reactions after having tested the handflying with Fenix and Toliss, knowing that the pilot’s opinion about the Fenix was very bad…

😀

I think 737NG had mentioned trying the Zibo too, but I'm not sure if he already decided to do that?

[Franz007 538]

46 minutes ago, jcomm said:

I think 737NG had mentioned trying the Zibo too, but I'm not sure if he already decided to do that?

Yes he confirmed that he will. But I am not sure if it won’t be too biased, knowing he is test-pilot for PMDG…my guess is he will find both around the same. But I may be wrong 😃