Flight models: MS-FSX vs X-Plane 9

Loud_Silence · 08-12-09, 05:58 PM

I'm very sorry, but personally, X-Plane didn't pass the test.
Flight dynamics are cool, but they're the only truly thing worthy in this sim.
I've tried an IFR trip from Madrid to Alicante, but there are just not enough tools and info on-the-trip to make a decent flight.
So bad that FSX no longer works with sim-charts 3, but with a bit of GPS-tweaking (any idea of how can i move FSX's north magnetic pole to where it's on FS2004?) it still does it.
And so bad that FS2004 scenery is somewhat outdated now(no Terminal 4 on my loved Madrid-Barajas International), but i'll give it a try again and see how it looks on IFR flights
X-Plane would be good for "flight testing" and that stuff, but i don't know if that deserves 12gigs of hard disk space...
The only thing i'm really gonna miss is that only X-Plane has a decent carrier instrumental landing system. Anyway the F-4 sucks...

Skybird · 08-12-09, 06:50 PM

IFR flying?

Get

- Level-D Boeing 767, or
- PMDG Boeing 747, or
- Flight-1 ATR 72-500.

All have complete FMC systems, and quite some complex ones. All of them have load mamnagers, and fuel planners are available. separate flight planners can be used, but the FMCs can also be manually programmed, WP by WP.

All of them got completely reprogrammed for FSX, but I recommend them on the basis of the FS9 incarnations. Complex, stable, reliable, several hundred pages of documentation. for FS-2004 I can confirm them to be thoroughly stable and bug-free. The latter is a problem with many other commercial packages, unfortunately.

Preferrably used with some special airport scenery like Heathrow, Paris CDG, or any major hub of the German Airport s series.

I also recommend AES, since it adds tremendously to the atmosphere. Nothing better than having animated pushbacks or being welcomed by a follow-me-car when landing in the maze at Heathrow, in thick fog and after sunset.

Don't waste your time doing IFR with default planes!

The IFR flights I do, are a bit unrealistic in that I plan them that way that I have just 05-15 minutes between reaching top-of-climb and beginning-of-descent. That way i have always something to do.

08-12-09, 06:50 PM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,660 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	IFR flying? Get - Level-D Boeing 767, or - PMDG Boeing 747, or - Flight-1 ATR 72-500. All have complete FMC systems, and quite some complex ones. All of them have load mamnagers, and fuel planners are available. separate flight planners can be used, but the FMCs can also be manually programmed, WP by WP. All of them got completely reprogrammed for FSX, but I recommend them on the basis of the FS9 incarnations. Complex, stable, reliable, several hundred pages of documentation. for FS-2004 I can confirm them to be thoroughly stable and bug-free. The latter is a problem with many other commercial packages, unfortunately. Preferrably used with some special airport scenery like Heathrow, Paris CDG, or any major hub of the German Airport s series. I also recommend AES, since it adds tremendously to the atmosphere. Nothing better than having animated pushbacks or being welcomed by a follow-me-car when landing in the maze at Heathrow, in thick fog and after sunset. Don't waste your time doing IFR with default planes! The IFR flights I do, are a bit unrealistic in that I plan them that way that I have just 05-15 minutes between reaching top-of-climb and beginning-of-descent. That way i have always something to do. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

08-12-09, 05:58 PM	#1
Loud_Silence Planesman Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 193 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I'm very sorry, but personally, X-Plane didn't pass the test. Flight dynamics are cool, but they're the only truly thing worthy in this sim. I've tried an IFR trip from Madrid to Alicante, but there are just not enough tools and info on-the-trip to make a decent flight. So bad that FSX no longer works with sim-charts 3, but with a bit of GPS-tweaking (any idea of how can i move FSX's north magnetic pole to where it's on FS2004?) it still does it. And so bad that FS2004 scenery is somewhat outdated now(no Terminal 4 on my loved Madrid-Barajas International), but i'll give it a try again and see how it looks on IFR flights X-Plane would be good for "flight testing" and that stuff, but i don't know if that deserves 12gigs of hard disk space... The only thing i'm really gonna miss is that only X-Plane has a decent carrier instrumental landing system. Anyway the F-4 sucks...