Grotius

I'm pretty interested in Pilot Edge. I do have a couple questions about it: 1. I usually fly a Beech Bonanza F33A, but I'm a newb. I can handle the Bonanza fine without the workload of ATC. But when I practice the Pilot Edge training exercises offline, and make myself simulate frequency changes, radio calls, airspace considerations, etc., I find that things happen fast in the Bonanza! Would I be better off swallowing my pride and using a slower aircraft, like a Cessna 172? 2. It seems everyone uses real names on Pilot Edge. I've long been wary of doing this on the internet! A couple weeks ago I watched a video of a guy being "swatted" while he was playing an online game, and it made me think, man, I'll never play anything online with a real name! Is everyone expected to use real names on Pilot Edge? What if I were to make a realistic psuedonym, or perhaps a name vaguely related to my real name?

Yes, agreed, sometimes it's too lively. Occasionally I'll eliminate some unwanted liveliness too. I'm glad FSX is worry-free for you; it's never been worry-free for me. I didn't used to care so much about the crashes and freezes, but now that I play FS Economy, I have to restart a flight if/when FSX freezes or crashes. There are things I can do to minimize the chance of a freeze/crash in FSX: most notably, refraining from using replay or FSRecorder. But even in just plain old vanilla flight, it will occasionally freeze for no reason. By contrast, X-Plane never crashes on me, even when I'm alt-tabbing in and out like crazy, no matter how many times I do playback, from no matter how many different angles. There are some things I prefer about FSX: the massive amount of scenery and aircraft addons, in particular. But that stuff is accumulating for X-Plane now, too. My new Leading Edge Simulations DC-3 is just a joy. I have some nice photoscenery for Oahu and elsewhere, and I'm about to install some more airport scenery. X-Plane gets better every day.

Fair enough. :)

I have the opposite perspective. FSX is not a replacement for X-Plane. FSX is buggy, and it freezes or crashes with depressing regularity. X-Plane has crashed only once on me, ever. I had no trouble configuring my hardware for X-Plane (CH Eclipse, CH pedals, TrackIR), and I love that it gives me complete freedom to set any button to anything. The flight model is livelier and more challenging than that of FSX, which feels like driving a car. There are great aircraft and good scenery available for X-Plane. Just my two cents. :)

Back on the original topic: I hope PDMG realizes that there are users like me who will not pay one penny more for payware on FSX, but will insta-buy PDMG work for X-Plane. I hope ORBX reads this thread and realizes that, too. Why? It's not just that X-Plane has a more lively flight model, that it looks better at night, that 64-bit is coming, and that it has its own growing library of addons, although that's all true. No, it's because X-Plane 10 is stable, and FSX is not. At least on my machine. FSX crashes/freezes regularly, especially if I try to make a recording, whether or not I use FSRecorder. X-Plane has crashed on me once -- just ONCE -- in weeks of use, in which I fly it multiple hours a day. I didn't used to care as much, but now I play FSEconomy, and if the flight sim crashes mid-flight, I've just wasted an hour or more of my life. I was reminded of this forcibly yesterday, when I took a break from X-Plane to revisit ORBX's pretty scenery for Oz in FSX. It looked nice (not great, but nice), and it ran at an okay framerate. But FSX crashed twice within the space of an hour, both times while I was trying to do a FSEconomy run. I quit FSX and returned to X-Plane. For me, X-Plane's stability, smoother performance, and more lively flight model makes it the clear choice. And yeah, there are now great aircraft available for X-Plane: I'm loving my new LES DC-3, and I plan to buy some of the Carenado stuff. Some good scenery is available too, and more is on the way. I'm done with FSX. PDMG, please make stuff for X-Plane.

I'm glad to hear you're enjoying it, Luis. I just went back to fsx for a few hours to try it out, and it crashed twice, both times while I was trying to do a flight in flight sim economy (a game that involves hauling goods and passengers around in one's flight sim). By contrast, X-Plane has crashed only once for me -- ever -- in the weeks that I've been flying it. That alone keeps me sticking with X-Plane.

@ctredvirus: I fly both sims, and I think you're understating the strengths of X-Plane. For me, it runs smoother than FSX. X-Plane has crashed only once for me, ever, in weeks of use; FSX crashes a couple times a day, more if I try to do recording from different views. Flight "feels" more real to me, or at least more enjoyable to me, in X-Plane. There are some complete airports in X-Plane, and many more available for free download. Likewise with scenery and aircraft, both freeware and payware. I've bought the Oahu and DC-3 addons for X-Plane; they're both great. You complain about gate starts, but X-Plane makes it much easier to pick a place to start, in general; easier to switch weather and time on the fly; easier to change most settings; easier to install addons. Yes, there are weaknesses too: ATC is a work in progress, and there aren't as many addons as with FSX, but I think your prediction about another 10 years of FSX may be unduly pessimistic.

Welcome to the party! I came to X-Plane from FSX too, and I still enjoy both sims. I really like the "feel" of flight in X-Plane; it's lively, with lots of bouncing around in environments with gusty or shifting winds. I also like the default weather and recording systems. I especially like that I've crashed only once in weeks of using X-Plane, and that crash came when I tried to setup a seaplane on an asphalt runway, so it was partly user error. The default cities need work, but there are already lots of great scenery packages, many free. Ditto for aircraft. There's lots of good stuff to explore in the X-Plane universe.

I have it, but I haven't played it much. The graphics are nice, but yes, it lacks many features of the PC version. I don't recall any missions or procedural content, but I haven't really been looking for it -- I just climbed in a jet and wandered around over the skies of Innsbruck, Austria. I do like the controls: you hold the iPad like a yoke, and tilt it as need be. I bought it just before I bought the PC version, and once I had the PC version, I lost interest in the iPad version, so I'm not the best person to ask. I don't necessarily regret the purchase, as I plan to return to it, but not sure I recommend it either.

I think he wants to know what RVR stands for: Runway Visual Range. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runway_visual_range .

I'd be interested in hearing about options for more aircraft, too. But even so, I'm enjoying X-Plane more than I thought I would. I like the "feel" of flight in this sim. It seems a bit more challenging than other sims. X-Plane at night looks fantastic, and by day it still looks decent, even accounting for the unfinished airports. I like the ease of recording videos. The ATC is incomplete, but it's already quite interesting, and it promises to improve. And one other thing that I really like: X-Plane has not crashed once for me so far.

Everyone keeps saying that the main danger in GA is "pilot error." Well, that's why I don't trust myself to do it! I make mistakes, especially when I'm under time or other pressure. Everyone makes mistakes. I read somewhere that most people can't drive for more than a mile without making some sort of driving error. Well, I probably can't fly for a mile in FSX without making some sort of flying error, either. We all make errors. That's what makes me nervous when I hear people dismiss GA accidents as pilot error.

Did my first night flight last night in X-Plane, and it blew me away. The airport lighting, the big jets with their flashing lights, the scenery from altitude -- it all looked great. Best of all, as gizmosellsbunnys says, it's really disorienting flying at night. I felt like my instruments were the only thing between me and disaster! I like the challenge.

Thanks for the info, everyone. Very helpful!

Yeah, it's just a heading. Heh, my Jeppesen SIMChart (printed out directly from FSX itself) says 295/115, and in the checkride I think it was 296/116. Presumably these discrepancies reflect changes in magnetic north over time? Anyway, in the checkride and in Rod's lesson, they suggest using the RITTS intersection as the focal point for turning left onto that 294 heading. (What is an "intersection", anyway? Is there any actual ground landmark to look at, or is it just a creation of aviation charts? It apparently has no radio signal -- neither VOR nor NDB -- right?) Since RITTS is not a VOR or NDB, I didn't know how to 'draw a line in the sky" heading 294 from RITTS, and I probably should've started my turn before RITTS so that I was heading outbound from it at 294 when I rolled out of the turn. Is there a way to fly an "outbound heading" from an intersection, using GPS? I'm glad to hear the autopilot can fly an outbound radial from a VOR. I'll try it again. When should one disengage the autopilot to pass the checkride? I used it to follow the glideslope down pretty close the runway. When do real-world airline pilots disable autopilot?