rototom

None of that even closely resembles what it would look like in real life.

I got 64 bit as a free update with my sim.

I'll be getting this upgrade for sure. And I might just leave the headset on the hook when I fly.

What's the latest word from LR?

Not picky at all. I think the visibility slider in X-plane will use statute miles. And we know that a METAR reports visibility in statute miles so that makes sense. You've positioned your plane 10 nautical miles from the runway? with 8.7 nautical miles of visibility. I think you should not see the runway until you're at 8.7 nautical miles from it. You definitely have to be using the same units in your tests, otherwise you have a sizable gap.

I don't see the problem either. It's about time we started seeing smog in flight simulators. Try reducing the number of cars and see if that helps.

This software is worthless; not much that works in there; and there is no support. Don't buy it, and if you already did, cut your losses and walk away. There are free tools that are 1000 times better.

I think the OP is looking for something that works.

I like the water

I'm sure they will tweak it. X-plane isn't perfect, but it gets better all the time. Base on all the added features I've seen in version 11, I think they are listening. It took 10 years of addons to get FSX to look good. They made just about everything you could think of. I think someone made an addon at one point to replace aircraft contrails. Heck, some people on here probably don't even remember what FSX actually looks like (unless they installed P3D).

Great idea to assess X-plane. I think some of the comments (at least mine) may have been driven by the impression that you're comparing FSX's best addons to an X-plane demo. The conclusion can be made without any testing. FSX is pretty strong when you paint it with addons. I'm pretty sure that anyone that dives in to the X-plane library of payware (and even freeware) will find some nice goodies. If you can run both, that's the best scenario. If not, then go with what is working for you. I would still keep and eye on X-plane progress, because right now, it's moving faster then any other platform.

I'll have some screenshots of my new simulator soon too. I was looking for a volunteer to be in it. All you have to do is look angry.

There is a more recent post where he states that the 744 will not be ported in the foreseeable future. Nothing is carved in stone, so best to just wait for something to hit the table. No need to pull your hair out.

X-Aviation does that all the time.

All makes sense to me; the only preference I would have is if all military simulations were done in one place; then it could really meet the needs of everyone interested in those types of aircraft and there would be many more to choose from. I will often fly in DCS and not use weapons. The aircraft systems simulation seem to be very good. For helicopters, I don't think there is a comparison, the ones in DCS are miles ahead.

I use DCS for this type of simulation. I wouldn't even entertain the idea of using any other simulator platform.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. For me, what sim I use depends on what I feel like doing at the moment. I love having so many options.

Some people on here are so defensive, like P3D is their own creation and nobody can speak of anything else; you sound like children. Most of us will use more then one simulator and we'll get the most out of this hobby while supporting all companies that support our hobby, and you'll sit in your grumpy old man chair and fuss about petting issues.

The Dreamfoil R22 is on sale at the org; if you have XP10.

I haven't noticed yet, but does XP11 allow you to adjust the stability augmentation like you could in version 10? This was also supposed to help compensate for various types of hardware that are not ideal. I typically used around 12-15% on all axis. I'll give the S76 a go and see how it compares to the other helos I have in version 10.

I couldn't care less if they read it. 3 days is terrible. PMDG would need time to investigate technical issues etc, but first reply should not take 3 days. This case is not a hard question. PMDG also replies to posts on these forums and well within 3 days, so I think your point is mute. That's why you have multi-tier support. Not surprised this is coming from a "Commercial Member".

3 days is ridiculous. Every time I've emailed the org store, I got a reply within a few hours. 3 days is a low standard and they can't meet that? Personally, I appreciate the feedback from other people as it protects me from headaches. Don't agree? then ignore it.

Disagree on consensus is one thing, disagreeing on an overwhelming consensus based on the experience of one default helo is not going to hold any weight in any corner of the world. There are lots of RW helo pilots flying sims. I definitely think that you can get great aircraft in any sim and that may be true for helicopters too. I have 5 simulators installed (XPX, XP11, FSX, DCS. Aerofly) so I'm no fan'boy. However, I would bet that a developer is faced with a lot more work to make a helicopter fly right in FSX vs the same in X-plane. You can also tell that Laminar puts focus on it since the simulator has an axis for collective. So as a result, you'll end up with more good helicopters in X-plane because it's supported and provides a good base to work from. And we've all heard many developers talk about how they bypassed the FSX FDE because it just limited them. So any type of aircraft that flies good in FSX/P3D, probably has nothing to do with FSX/P3D. Curious, have you tried any helicopters in DCS? There are some in there that are highly regarded more so than X-plane.

Yeah, and Cameron was the guy that gave me the big spiel about not criticizing their customer support. There's a thread every week about them not doing something right. We can all learn from this...

Safe bet that a lot of those simmers have rotocraft ratings. But more importantly, none of these claims can be verified, so I'll go with majority. It aligns with most internet topics.