X Plane 9

[8thFG]

I got curious and went out and picked this up yesterday. So far, not impressed. It is tedious to get around the program and in general I seemed to spend more time trying to figure the thing out than fly.

[CDNflyer]

I bought it just before Christmas and spent some time trying to figure it out too. Most of us are used to the way Microsoft has set up Flightsim for the last few versions so something new will take a little getting used too. What X Plane does well is physics modelling and giving the user the tools to build and modify the aircraft. They'll even say they don't concentrate on making it a "Game". The 2d panels look just like a professional flight simulator would and in fact, there is a commercial version that's suitable for flight training. However, most of us do like the visuals and game aspects of Flightsim. In X Plane I like the look of the C-172 and the Avanti and the scenery looks pretty good too. It's nice, in map view, to see an option of various charts. I don't like the fact that you can't search an airport by Country, City, etc. Laminar Research only has four full time employees (Although it's four more than Flightsim has now) and it's basically the vision of one person but I think the next major version will be alot more appealing to us MSFS guys.

[flyboy4612]

I bought X-Plane 9, installed it, played it for half an hour, and uninstalled it. I bought it for all the realism it claimed it had and was totally unimpressed. I've flown Cessna 172's in the real world before and I thought Microsoft was way more accurate. Maybe I didn't spend enough time getting around all the tedious setup menus in the game. I'm thinking about selling my copy on ebay soon.

[8thFG]

I bought X-Plane 9, installed it, played it for half an hour, and uninstalled it. I bought it for all the realism it claimed it had and was totally unimpressed. I've flown Cessna 172's in the real world before and I thought Microsoft was way more accurate. Maybe I didn't spend enough time getting around all the tedious setup menus in the game. I'm thinking about selling my copy on ebay soon.

Yep... I have already uninstalled mine. To me it just doesn't hold a candle to the Microsoft programs.

[|ZUTI|]

Well, same here, tried it and sold it. I really would not like to comment too much of the physics but i managed to do few loops in 744, it rolled like crazy, climbed like V1 etc. Compared to PMDG 744 (just flying wise) i didn't see that physics that they are talking about, but then again, i am not a 744 pilot and this could be a result of non-modelled plane electronic systems? And i'm pretty sure i had everything on full-real in the menus (i don't complain about those, my personal feeling is that it's not that bad, just different).

[ROB - A2A]

Zuti, it is possible that a 744 or any other plane can do loops and climb like V1 in Flight Simulator as well. The question is does the X-Plane allow to make correct FM. We know it doesn't forbid to make a bad one. FS neither.

regards
ROB

[CathyH]

I purhcaes i and,while I would like decent AI and a spokemn ATC, the global scnery is not bad and will get better, while the plane models are amazing. The paywre DC-3 includes the float version, and the paywar beench starship is great. I will be flying this a lot, and If Laminar are smart, we will be seeing a lot moore FS like features

[crim3]

I bought X-Plane 9, installed it, played it for half an hour, and uninstalled it. I bought it for all the realism it claimed it had and was totally unimpressed. I've flown Cessna 172's in the real world before and I thought Microsoft was way more accurate. Maybe I didn't spend enough time getting around all the tedious setup menus in the game. I'm thinking about selling my copy on ebay soon.

Yep... I have already uninstalled mine. To me it just doesn't hold a candle to the Microsoft programs.

This is exactly what you can often read at x-plane.org forums but in reverse. Guess why.

I think that it's all about what you are used to. I lost my faith in MSFS in the past 'cos I got used to the way x-plane makes you feel like you are going through the air and the smooth transitions between different flying conditions (I began to feel the 'table' nature of MSFS flight model in comparison. When FSX demo came out the first thing I notice was that the flying was a lot smoother).
Fortunately when I began to fly in virtual reality style (HMD, stereoscopic, headtracking... those things) I was unable to use x-plane and came back to MSFS and then knew about 'wings of power'.

[banjokit]

Yeah I had x-plane V5 about 10 years ago. At the time it gave me the most amazing experience of flying an airbus A320 through a thuderstorm and it bucked about in turbulence much better than FS9 ever could, it was a proper simulation of flight.

However I downloaded the latest version and it seems they have just not moved on. FS has really stolen a march with virtual cockpits and realistic systems. Xplane just hasnt been able to keep up, I removed my demo after a few flights even though I did know how to use the interface!

[Bucic]

I'll try to keep it short:
X-Plane has a lot of potential i.e. everything what can be done in FSX can be done with X-Plane but with better flight modeling. For me if such a great, not to say fanatic , company makes a masterpiece addon for FSX and it still lacks in the FM field, then it means FSX has FM limitations addon makers can't do much about. No X-Plane aircraft I tried comes even close (both - community made and stock XP 9) to what we see in the AccuSim series BUT... New high fidelity addons start to come out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdeNhCjNfhI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlUxRo9OB5U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OpWLcA7DMw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-xl1s7fuqo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoF3-1EZlCI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ73qmufXJE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e29yWkhBwHM

Not only all the systems modeling can be done like for FSX but X-Plane has A LOT of systems modeling built in e.g. single stage and multi stage boost turbines.

Why many planes fly like kites currently - this topic may shed some light on the subject http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?sho ... 46060&st=0
I believe it's not going to be left out. What's worth highlighting is that the fault is mostly on the addon makers part, not X-Plane itself which provide necessary options even right in its Plane Maker.

What are the FM limitations of FSX I talk about? I don't want to get into details. For one FSX FM does not give the sensation of flight (floating in the never-stable mass of air) as good as X-Plane, ROF or even A2A's old BoB 2 WoV do. Not to mention that when one makes an addon to X-Plane it predicts the aircraft's handling very good automatically and requires only fine tuning. So in FSX you can spit your guts out and your plane may still behave erratically sometimes while with X-Plane it's the opposite - you have to try to mess up the final effect Or be ignorant to some aerodynamics phenomenas which require tuning in every flight model.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-xl1s7fuqo#t=2m37s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdeNhCjNfhI#t=2m0s - fugoid/oscillations

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-xl1s7fuqo#t=2m52s - ground handling/undercarriage dynamics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkWSOP0VEwU - no comments

One serious X-Plane limitation is graphics of course. It looks like there was no sun in the world of X-Plane. Ever.

So IMO X-Plane's potential will eventually overcome the FSX dominance. It happens slowly because of X-Planes demo is crap i.e. there is not a single stock aircraft which would scream "look at what X-Plane is capable of!" and community made aircrafts are not better. Apparently someone does not really want to actually make money. Note that I haven't tried any of the payware addons.

I'll be definitely looking into X-Plane now and then. The only thing it needs is his potential utilized and some damn rethought marketing.

Oh, for those who does not like X-Planes interface

TH: X-Plane 10, of course, is already on everyone’s mind. Amongst the most requested features are a better GUI, less numerous but far more accurate airplanes with more system depth, a real ATC system that’s at least as good as the one in FSX, and more accurate landclass. Which ones of these features are on your list? Do you have an ETA for X-Plane 10?
AM: All of them are on my list except the new GUI. I think the gui that we have now is perfect. I love it, and cannot imagine anything easier. Of course some will say I am wrong, so my statement to them is exceedingly simple: put up or shut up! Show me the beef! Show me a better UI than what I have now, and, if it is still as powerful, allowing the flexibility of what I have now, then I will sure give extremely serious consideration to using it!

Complete interview with Austin Meyer here http://techhaze.com/2010/03/interview-w ... tin-meyer/

Edit:
As for graphics and enviroment the solution is simple and effects awesome:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HleXqrXqHng

[Burning_Daylight]

I have X-Plane 9 and fly it occasionally. I tend to use the single-engine Pipers and Cessna 172 made by a fella name of Jason Chandler. He makes some pretty good planes. In fact, if you fly X-plane, you should check them out here: http://www.c74.net/xplane/

I like that all of the airports aren't flat in X-Plane and I like the stock airport lighting. In fact, I can't really complain about the entire sim. If the A2A Accu-Sim aircraft were available for it, I'd probably fly it a lot more.

Lately though, if I'm not flying an A2A plane, then I'm busting around the sky in Black Shark, and waiting impatiently for the DCS: A-10 (I love them Thunderbolts.)

BD

[snave]

Remember, too, X-Plane still has an active developer. MS only want to sell `BoyBoxes` and `Windoze`.

FSX is stagnant, an obsolescent product, albeit with some life left yet. If you want to, you can still converse with the developer of X-Plane and ask what comes next...

...`nuff said...

[JJB17463rdBombGroup]

The only thing that I don't like about FSX is it's DRM activation scheme (too oppressive).
Just about a week ago I screwed up with upgrading a CPU on one system that I had ( I've worked on hundreds of systems and have only screwed up on 2 systems so far).I apparently used too much force in removing a aftermarket heatsink and basically must have inadvertantly caused damage to the motherboard.
I thought that I just had made a $2,000 mistake (software loss as well as hardware loss) but I was lucky in finding a similar chipset motherboard.I did have to reactivate Windows as well as FSX so instead it was a $105 loss.
I had a much older single core budget system that would run FSX and I did purchase FSX for it.
After 4 years this older system died.Not worth the cost to get a replacement motherboard for it.
Basically that version of FSX (I didn't use it that much only a few months) that I purchased is absolutely useless now.
I do have X-Plane 9 but I don't enjoy it as much as FSX.
I don't think that FSX is that obsolete as a software application.After all it does support up to 32 CPU cores.
However FSX is more optimized (runs with better framerates) for nVidia graphics cards even though ATI has graphics cards on par right now with nVidia.
Joe Worsley told me earlier that he wanted A2ASimulations to come out with add ons for X-Plane 9.I think that it would be nice if A2ASimulations made just one payware add on for it (or perhaps for a future X-Plane 10) just to test it's market.It could be a flop or it could succeed.

[Scott - A2A]

We have no plans to do any development for X-plane. We have nothing against it, but it's a long investment to learn another platform, and for now and the foreseeable future, we see no reason to.

Scott.