Vteckick

I guess for me, more than anything else, XP10 is a breath of fresh air. It's got some issues that I can totally live with and most of FSX issues are gone (unreliable performance, addon compatability issues and so on). Maybe, some day if XP10 doesn't fix the ongoing issues I will get tired of it too. In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy all the NEW features in flight simulation and neat things about XP. Getting the CRJ fixed a lot of issues from me (like tire screeching and all that).

PMDG is designing a plane for XP (how is that for a bottom line?) Carenado has been doing it for a while now REX has done it for XP9 I believe, probably a matter of time before they do something for XP10 There is a strong and developing community designing scenery for Xplane, I don't particularly care if it's any of the names you mentioned. Here's a sample of CYYZ coming, looks way better to me than anything for FSX. Oh and it'll be free. Oh and did I mention it'll have global lighting, good luck with that in FSX.

Welcome to X-plane. I too was a long user of FSX and all that, and it was great at the time. But ever since I started flying in real life, FSX just doesn't cut it with its plastic feel. X-plane fills my need for a fun, yet challenging enough experience with CRJ and some scenery that can be currently found. IMO the default aircraft are very useless and I would discourage from from basing opinion of XP on them. And I miss some of the small FSX features (scroll tuning..) here and there but love the new ones I discovered. (Sloped runways while not 100% accurate are way more fun to land on than the perfect grade in FSX. I used to care about all the ATC stuff (FSX ATC, Vatsim, IVAO) but after RL it's hard to go back to the unrealistic nuances of those networks. If I want the ambiance of ATC I'll just streatm liveatc.net. And still fly my STARs and SIDs. The point is- I can fly a complex plane on a nice IFR route from gate to gate on a scenic airport, just download it first. I find a lot of people from flight simming community (and I used to be one of them) too caught up in all the wrong things that they believe makes flying more real or simulator more authentic. You need a plane that recreates realistic performance and one that Enables the use of its features to simulate it like you would in real life. I believe PMDG creators are one of few who truly understand this. Everything else is mostly eye or ear candy or a bunch of gizmos that you wouldn't know the difference in real life anyway.

Ok, well that's your opinion. I do like XP clouds and how volumetric they feel when you go through them. They could use more clarity from afar and look a bit more picture "perfect", but IMO they do a better job of reproducing the environment as water vapor by feeling Volumetric instead of cartoon cutouts that REX can look like very often. I'de imagine any future XP addons could make them even better, including at night. Anyway, my point was about atmosphere. No matter what you do to FSX- you'll never get this: I was talking more about the atmosphere, when you fly into a city that is under dark overcast you are submerged into their atmosphere of this city and become part of 'it'. It's part of immersing the pilot that you have actually travelled somewhere. That is a huge part of RL flying experience for myself. It's like if you depart from Northern Canada on a cold morning in a snow-storm and land in Sunny New York a few hours later. I find that FSX a lot of the time feels the same everywhere.

I find that XPlane does a decent job on some well modeled planes. I have a couple of hundred hrs in RL, so something to compare it to. But after trying a handful of planes in Xplane and A LOT in FSX, my only conclusion that if the model is done right- it will fly right. FSX never really feels Great but all are more or less consistent. Ixeg demonstrator can fly the 737 very accurately as seen in demo videos. His landing is top notch, yet the plane slips and slides just enough. I especially like the feeling of correcting yaw in some XP planes, although its a bit too sensative. FSX just doens't seem to feel right in any plane. I agree that it is very subjective.

What had me about XPlane was a descent from cruise alt down to the landing in overcast conditions. You go from a beautiful Sunny atmosphere to a groggy overcast sad looking atmosphere below base clouds and into the city. It left a very deep psychological impression on me that made me forget about a lot of XPlane shortfalls. Getting into FSX after to do my usual Vatsim run, the atmosphere felt plastic and shallow. It's a bit tough to describe, but it felt like there Was no atmosphere that I could relate to. Even with PMDG NGX, FTX and REX I felt like that immersion is simply impossible due to limitations of FSX- 24000 feet almost always felt like 3000. The times I catch my self enjoying FSX, I also feel like lying to myself trying to ignore the very unrealistic "overcast" ceiling or lighting, or shadows or many other things. There is so much work to be done for XPlane that sadly I just can't fly IFR point A to point B with the same depth just yet. But for the sheer feeling of "being there" FSX is like some big frozen dinner food with all the right ingredients but nothing compared to a fine Italian restaurant that is XPlane environment. You really don't get a lot but the taste will blow you away. Having said that, I finally ordered XPlane 10. Could someone share their experience with Carenado models? How close do they match to real life flying compared to FSX?

It's an interesting question.I remember answering it before I started flight training, and now (finishing it):Before any RW flying, I thought that yes- I could land it and I thought that FS experience would get me safely on the ground, especially if I had AP. But I was very illusional as to the extent of my abilities.Now I can say that an FS only pilot, on a perfect VFR day, with little to no wind conditions, WITH ATC assistance is likely able to do it safely.However RW flying is rarely that good, and each layer of 'obstacles' can quickly change the outcome. You throw in things like Busy airspace, Poor weather, strong winds, poor landing surface, increasingly Limited fuel amount, location of the plane (over Atlantic or NY), low visibility, unfamiliar aircraft, systems, ICING, TC and so on..And most importantly managing the plane to be healthy all the way to landing. Should anything go wrong with the plane though, I think a FS pilot will be completely in over his head very quickly even in a Cessna 172, nevermind a Boeing.I'm sure my answer will continue to evolve as I get some actual experience flying commercially.

I wanted to be a pilot once... then I took an arrow in the knee! :) (skyrim anyone?)I'm working on my CPL and I am optimistic about the future.-There is going to be a lot of retirees in the near future-Regional positions in Canada appear to be better than in US. Avoiding the Hub and Spoke system helps (being placed anywhere and everywhere at the same time)-There are charter/private options for building good time other than regionalsFor contrast, my wife is just finishing her masters in Urban Planning and volunteering is the name of the game in the beginning. That's right- not making instant $, but working for free!There are no easy good jobs, you put your time in and you put up with different BS one way or another. At the end of the day, I want to do something I enjoy doing at the very root of it. When you do something you love from the onset, work is still work, but it's much easier to get by the negatives.Big houses and sports car are nice, but there are bigger problems in the world than me not living an American dream, and those people still manage to be happy. I strongly believe that if you aren't happy today, no houses or cars in the world will fix it in the future. That's just my philosophy. So might as well do what you love.

Comparing X-plane 10 to RW flying is very subjective. The controls that most people are using are a far cry from the real aircraft, for obvious reasons. On most bottom-level yokes the tension simulated is highly unrealistic, if it's there at all. There is no feedback from the controls. That's a challenge that a sim pilot has to get used to, since it's impossible to feel the plane, or "feel the wing" as my instructor used to say. So that makes the whole realistic 'flight dynamic feel' thing a moot point.Anyway, I thought that default X-plane settings and plane are downright unflyable. Apparently as a RW pilot I could barely land a Cessna, which put a smile on my face. I don't want to spend money on XP Carenado product, considering that I would need to upgrade my system anyway to enjoy the sim, and that's not in the plans. So, if I want to fly on my current set up, I'll have to stick with FSX and NGX. I think Xplane has a fairly long way to go in that department. Having tried NGX, and the myriad of addons for FSX it makes it all the harder to make a move to XP.

What would it take for PMDG to start making addons for X-Plane? I mean it's fun to play around and all, but it's just not the same without PMDG quality products...Default planes make me cringe

They should just have a separate Rant Forum, where people who aren't as patient as the majority can vent on and on and on and... Nick M

sorry, USB RAM stick? Am I missing something? never heard of such thing I meant, if you have any addon scenery and you're trying to fly within it- it would decrease your FPS. Otherwise, I don't think that just getting rid of scenery will do you any good. By the sound of it, if you can somehow upgrade to a 64bit system, you will likely find the best gains.

Make a list of cheapest to most expensive solutions, and go through- see what gives you any improvements before you spend $$$ on hardware.

as opposed to an "unprofessional" business? :)Nick Matveev

ah, yes.. that's what I was thinking- thank you! :)