the Falcon takes off

[Skybird]

Released:

http://www.aerosoft.de/_php_projekte/_php_screenshots2/screenshots.php?sp=fsx&p=f16

http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/re/iboshop.cgi?showd,,10285

Sorry, no FS9 - FSX exclusively.

[FIREWALL]

I might have to pick this up. Looks good.

I have the F-18 Expansion that came with my FSX Gold Edition. Carrier landings. This makes any other FS kids stuff in comparison.

This is the only other software I've ever bought from M$ besides my OS.

I think I'm hooked. You are about the only other member that posts about FSX.

Are we the onlyones that like real REALISM ?

[Schroeder]

Have you ever tried Il2?

I had the Dmeo-version of FSX and, sorry, there wasn't much realism in it.

[Task Force]

Full games alot better Schroeder. that looks like a great add on, I might get that after my computers Christmas upgrade (to 64bit vista and a new processor)

[FIREWALL]

Originally Posted by Task Force

Full games alot better Schroeder. that looks like a great add on, I might get that after my computers Christmas upgrade (to 64bit vista and a new processor)

Hi T F YOUR SO RIGHT !!! FSX is a different ball game. I wouldn't have even bought it except Gamestop left the orignal FXS @ $49.99 marked down to $29.99 like the base XFS then didn't have it.

BUT.... He had the $49.99 XFS Gold Edition with Xpan and sold it to me for $29.99 because I'm such a good pc sim buyer and he wasn't gonna let me leave there without getting some of my loot. :p

I'm very happy with my purchase.

ps

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

You are about the only other member that posts about FSX.

Are we the onlyones that like real REALISM ?

Actually, I am on FS2004 standard, and do not own FSX. I tried it, saw that my system would habe no ressources left for addons, and sold it again. Ms FS9 is heavily beefed up with major airport sceneries and airliner packages. I do not wish to ait for all that another couple of years again, after having done the transition of all these for several versions of FS. Possible that FS9 will remain my last version of Fs for a very long time to come, even on my next system, where then all the stuff should run maxed out and smooth as silk.

Compared to dedicated FS addons, the flight models of IL2, regarding a free BF109 and a payware Spitfire I use, are kids stuff, as you put it. Much of it too arcade, imo. I never understood all the hype about it's alleged flight model realism. It is a nice MP environment for dogfighting, and offers diversity in FMs indeed, but that'S it. Handling leaves to be desired. Not bad it is, but also: not spectacular. I have left IL2 behind, although I have all three addons. Flying it simply does not satisfy me for longer than just ten minutes.

And if people want to see what a dynamic medium the air really is through which they fly, they should try "Condor" anyway ( http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=129997 ). The pure FM leaves FS and IL2 behind in all regards.

Edit:
German Amazon lists Condor for 30 euros now. For that price it is almost a steal.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Have you ever tried Il2?

I had the Dmeo-version of FSX and, sorry, there wasn't much realism in it.

the beauty of FS is that it is modular. It leaves the factory as a game, but it could be turned into a reasonable procedure trainer by using good addons. However, these are demanding and FSX has more problems with such addons than FS9.

If you want VFR, go FSX, if you want comp0lex cockpits and fly at FL300 anyway, stay with FS9. However, the simulation of the medium air, althouzgh becoming better, always lacks in FS. Again, use Condor for that.

[Schroeder]

@SKybird
I assume you are the same Skybird that wrote the review then on AMAZONE.
Well, I have Condor. But it causes some problems on my pc. It is the CD-Version you mentioned before and it doesn't run properly.
Whenever I'm in the cockpit the mouse doesn't work until I hop out of the game with the windows key and back in it . Then it works fine until I end the flight...CTD ALWAYS.
Therfore Condor isn't much fun for me. BTW I was a bit disapointed by the realism of the winchstarts. Usually the winch tows you in one direction and you can do some minor changes (like flying deflective... is that the Englisch term when you are flying towards the wind to avoid the rope falling off the airfield area after releasing) or pulling into a steeper climb, but in Condor you can almost perform aerobatics while being towed. (I remember a real take off in our ASK 13 and I used full rudder and some ailerons but couldn't get the plane to actually move more into the wind....).
But you are right about the flying experience. The air is not a static place in Condor.

And now, after totally derailing this thread:
what's wrong with Il2's FM except for the static air?

[Skybird]

Sorry for your mouse and ctd problems. I am not into the condor community and background and tzhus cannot help. For me it ran smooth out of the box.

The wind thing I cannot judge by reality, sinc i do not fly the real thing, but I have often observed it this and last year when they used not the plane but the wind at EDDG to launch the sailplanes. To me the profile does not look much different, seen from the outside.

The FM in IL2 cover the basics like loosing speed when climbing or turning, etc, but generally feel too light, and over-sensitive, imo, even when fine-tuning the axis-response. It feels like a toy to me, lacking a feel of material mass.

When comparing to payware Spitfire models and one freeware BF109 for FS9, I must say the feel of flying something of that size and mass, is much more convincing with these addons. for me it was unconvincing enough after some time with IL2 to now turn me away from IL2 completely. And my interest ihn combat flightsims, including my beloved Falcon, has decreased to almost zero anyway in the past two years. I'm now more in SBP (best hide and seek there is), ATRs, 767 and 747s (more buttons to push).

But maybe I am just getting older and need my rest... The hectic things are not attractive for me anymore, except SBP.

[FIREWALL]

Glad to see some discussion here. I didn't mean any ILL will towards IL2. I have all the IL2 series includeing IL2 1946 and fly it also.

I recently built a new rig and it is just great for FSX.

Also bought a Yoke and 2 throttle quadrants and panel to us with my rudder pedals. I still use my X52 for puddle jumpers and Soaring. Oh and the FANTASTIC F-18 Carrier xpan.

I've just scratched the surface in what this sim has to offer. The add-ons are kinda pricey IMHO so I will in future get only the ones I'm SURE I want.

I plan on getting this just for Flight sims.

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/cto.do

I will do somemore reasearch tho.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

I've just scratched the surface in what this sim has to offer. The add-ons are kinda pricey IMHO so I will in future get only the ones I'm SURE I want.

If you tell me what you are interested in, I may be able to offer some assistance to separate the "just good" addons from the "superior" ones, judging by FS9 experience, of course. They get slowly but constantly transported to FSX, but due to the complexity of FSX technology they sometimes have more issues than there FS9 versions. The variety of good small aircraft is greater, than good airliner packages. If you think FS shows you complex cockpit environment by default, you think wrong. there is some pretty cool stuff out there that makes reading some hundred pages of manual a must.

[FIREWALL]

@ SKYBIRD

You have iirc done more posting on FS9 and FSX than anyone else so your knowledge base will be most helpful.

As a movie tag line said " We have much to discuss " .

I couldn't find FS9 anywhere and I thought I did a pretty good job looking. If it's available I'll buy it.

I am also going to look over your thread on " CONDOR "

Take a look at this and give me your opinion : http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/cto.do

I want it only for Flight sims with two more monitors.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

Take a look at this and give me your opinion : http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/cto.do

Hm.

"
We're sorry!
We no longer have available the desktop or notebook PC you're trying to customize, or some of its components.
Please choose another PC to customize, or consider one of our ready-to-ship PCs. You can also call our sales center at 1 (800) 351-9687.
Thank you for your understanding.
"

I don't know much on tech anyway. I recommend Simped pedals for their good production quality and precision, and the wide foot space. I use CH Fighterstick and Pro Throttle, plus TrackIR4. Since I got TrackIR, I almost exclusively use the virtual cockpits, some of them coming with external addons are spectacular. FS9 has a limit of RAM it can use, Everything beyond 2 GB I think, you need tricks to unlock that if you want more RAM being used, and it may negatively effect some sceneries to do so (Heathrow for example does not run AEP correctly then).

Ironically FS9 teczhnically does not allow to run FS9 with hardware and as much memory as needed to have fluid frames when maximising all sliders. Now they are wondering if it is the same with FSX. Could be that super-wonder systems in three years still do not allow to run the sim with maximised slider settings. In FS9, maximum sliders could lead to memory overflow (depending on scenery complexity), even when you have 4 GB. The simple answer is to keep the sliders at more moderate settings. I personally never had memory overflows, not with 1 GB and not with now 2 GB. Sliders are in medium settings, and I have frames on a P4 3 GHz of 22-15, which is okay. just taxiing with airport scenery could drop to 10-12, which is okay for taxiing. The framerate in FS is not decided by your graphics-board, but your CPU. The CPU makes the frames, the graphics-board makes the looks.

But I can help you with software for FS9. Some of it already is transported to FSX as well. I would differ between
- general environment
- special (local) sceneries
- airport sceneries
- small, busiiness and sporting aircraft
- medium commuters and big airliners
- tools

As a rule of thumb, FSX for VFR flying, FS9 for IFR flying. Naturally, my scenery focus is on Germany, and central Europe.


Get FS9 here f.e.:

US 30$:http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-2004-Century-Pc/dp/B000096L71/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/191-0211082-6392833?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1226491989&sr=8-1


Germany 15€: http://www.amazon.de/NBG-EDV-Handels-Verlags-GmbH/dp/3933397871/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1226491581&sr=8-2



I also see it in warehouse occasionally, for cheap price. Also you could try ebay

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The wind thing I cannot judge by reality, sinc i do not fly the real thing, but I have often observed it this and last year when they used not the plane but the wind at EDDG to launch the sailplanes. To me the profile does not look much different, seen from the outside.

Well I do. If you get the chance take a seat in glider and do a winch start. You will never forget your first one when you are accelerated from 0 to 80km/h in about 2,5 sec. and climb almost vertically into the sky.
Therfore I think I can judge that the take offs aren't that realistic.
(But I have just started flying recently so my experience is limited to 7 starts with me as the pilot and an instructor on the rear seat).