Is X-plane any good? [Archive] - Official Fighter Ops Forums

View Full Version : Is X-plane any good?

Dukey

09-20-2006, 11:51

Is X-plane 8.4 as good as it sounds? I have downloaded the latest demo and to be honest I was not all that impressed with how the aircraft feel. All I am really only interested in creating my own FM using the ‘plane maker’ utility provided; so that I can practice type specific procedures etc.
If anyone that owns the sim could give me the run down on how the full version compares to the demo I would appreciate it.

Thanks
:smile:

Pacman

09-20-2006, 13:20

X-plane is a flightsim that is FAA approved.
The flightmodels for the civie aircraft are second to none.

I have bought it and don't regret it...oh well I regret one thing....I don't have the time to fly it :p

Dirk

Dukey

09-20-2006, 13:43

Yeah I just had a quick flight in the beech king air, it takes a huge slash all over FS2004 or FS-X. The instuments are far better and are very very smooth plus if it has your blessing pacman I guess I should get it :smile:

Cheers

Wheels

09-20-2006, 14:05

I've always wanted to buy that one, but with the world scenery package... that one just looks fantastic .. the planes I think are a bit ... euh old (graphics) but the flying itself is WOOOW

aburge

09-20-2006, 15:38

I just got it (v8.4) and first impressions are:

when 'looking out' ie your own view through the HUD - its fantastic, really fluid, responsive reaction to your inputs. The feel is great.

when looking 'at' your own plane, it seems like a much simpler not very amazing flight sim.

at altitude the cloud/sunset graphics are marvellous.

Lower down things are much more basic.

But overall I find I am being 'drawn in' by its hardcore "its up to you to figure out how to fly this plane " ! approach.

Dukey - I was sent two copies by mistake - I only need one.... PM me if interested.

rgds
Alan

Bosniaguy

09-20-2006, 16:16

well if it for sale I'm in for a bid! ;)

BTW, has anybody managed to setup X52 to work with X-plane. I have 8.1 but loads of problems setting up my X with it.

flyboy22

09-20-2006, 16:26

well if it for sale I'm in for a bid! ;)

BTW, has anybody managed to setup X52 to work with X-plane. I have 8.1 but loads of problems setting up my X with it.

Dude I'll sell you my copy. It's absolutely brand new and includes the new scenery for the USA. My computer is too slow to run it, and frankly I didn't have the patience to figure it out.

It costs 50 new from the website, so I'll sell it for 40 to anyone who wants it.

Bosniaguy

09-20-2006, 16:38

Dude I'll sell you my copy. It's absolutely brand new and includes the new scenery for the USA. My computer is too slow to run it, and frankly I didn't have the patience to figure it out.

It costs 50 new from the website, so I'll sell it for 40 to anyone who wants it.

is it 8.4??
if so, pm me mate so we can talk about i!

Deckerd

09-30-2006, 08:09

well if it for sale I'm in for a bid! ;)

BTW, has anybody managed to setup X52 to work with X-plane. I have 8.1 but loads of problems setting up my X with it.

Yes x-52 had huge probs with the setup in 8.1. It works perfectly with 8.4, though

I have to bear aburge out:
I for myself have always had the feeling that MFS was superior, because of the graphics, atc, the cockpit, the extra content(such as the training stuff)... yadda yadda One word : a bit crude. Not a sim for me to practice procedures and stuff.
The upsides are the flight model(of course) and the vast possibilities of building stuff with the included tools.

I just have updated to 8.4 to give it another try. The flight models itself should be worth it.

Dukey

10-02-2006, 12:13

Thanks to aburge I can now answer my own question; the answer is yes!
X-plane is very good, as others have said its not as good looking as FS, however for practicing procedures and techniques it beats FS hands down. For a start the instruments operate in a far more realistic manor, allowing for better radio nav and general operation of the aircraft. The aircraft systems are also vast. The scenery comes into its own since the roads, rivers, lakes; railways etc are layered on top of the normal map giving pilots half a chance when doing VFR nav. I would like to see improved 3d pits to provide a better flying experience, however perhaps the best thing to do would be to build a pit. I am toying with the idea of building a T6 Texan II and converting that to FO when it comes out… maybe. :wink2:

natedogg

10-27-2006, 22:34

Hi,
I just got given a copy of X-plane and patched it up to 8.5 and im stuck in windowed mode? its only using a quater of my screen!
Also my controller assignments are all over the place. I set them all up as normal and the work fine in the test screen, but flying the 172 in just loopy.
Ill slowly apply full power with touch of right rudder and the plane basically does a doughnut to the left :bigeyes:
Giving full right rudder and toe break the thing still moves slightly to the left?
Going back to the control config, the bars seem to move perfectely.
What am i doing wrong?
cheers

man-hi

10-30-2006, 12:18

T I am toying with the idea of building a T6 Texan II and converting that to FO when it comes out… maybe. :wink2:

There is a freeware 7.x T-6A/B and a payware 8.x version available.

COMANCHE7245P

11-16-2006, 21:33

sewillis

11-17-2006, 16:33

Natedogg: I just saw your post and thought I’d reply. I got X-plane 8.5 a few weeks ago and was shocked to encounter the same problems you have. I don’t know if you’ve discovered the solutions yet, so here is what I did. To get out of windows mode go to the Rendering Options menu. Adjust the screen resolution setting to whatever your windows setting is. As for the controller problem go to the Joystick Settings menu. Open the third tab from the left (I’m at work, so I’m doing this from memory). Slide the joystick linearity settings to full right. Also adjust the sliders on the right side (I don’t remember what they are called) to the right. Each time you start x-plane click the “center controller” button on this window. I have to do this because I have a terrible joystick. Some of the planes that come with x-plane are terrible. You are much better off using some of the payware aircraft such as www.3pointaircraft.com (http://www.3pointaircraft.com/) or www.c74.net/xplane (http://www.c74.net/xplane). They are much, much better.

natedogg

11-19-2006, 19:34

thanks for your help, i did sort out the windowed issue but seriously, its a bit weird not to have a full screen mode?
Ill have a look at the payware stuff thanks for the links.
cheers

lqcorsa

11-22-2006, 02:43

Geez, you guy's convinced me to buy this one, maybe for christmas. I have Flight Sim X and its not all that bad. Considering I took the yoke for the first time the day before my 15th birthday witch was about a month ago, I can finally compare FS-X to the real deal. I don't know what you mean by the flying itself is amazing. Could you guys be more specific? The gauges in FSX are alike the ones in real life with the exeption of some of the gauges don't bounce around in GA aircraft, minor, but yet would be cool to see it in a sim :P.

Gimme some examples using specific details showing off some of the things that are added/improved in X-plane. I'm eager to try it out, but I'm hesitating to get it without knowing I'll be satisfied.

Also the graphics sound and look like a disapointment, and theirs no point in GA flying if I can't go about flying over my street and seeing some important details!

Maybe somebody could make a video. I'm just pretty pleased with all the 3rd party developers work, and graphics, and living environment, and multiplayer, and the FSX's sim future.

Thanks...

all-fired-up

11-22-2006, 12:32

X-PLANE has been a real simulator since it's beginning as a virtual wind tunnel for evaluating airfoils. MSFS is a bogus toy. I've run both since the early days and MSFS is a fraudulent piece of crap. I hold instrument and multi-engine ratings and consider x-plane a valuable tool for maintaining proficiency in enroute navigation, instrument approach procedures and failed equipment practice. The realism is incredible right down to the flocks of birds.
If you're considering flying in the real world X-Plane is your simulator.

:nono:

I strongly disagree with this line of reasoning. I learned how to fly because of MFSF and it was was back in FS4 and 5 days. I learned to fly in a short 3 flying days, and graduated a college flying course because I understood procedures that I was practicing at home on my computer whenever I couldn't be in the plane itself. When I'm flying VFR/IFR I'm not trying to gauge how precise the air is moving over the airfoil of my wings, but instead I'm consentrating on flying safely and properly, by scanning, cross-checking, etc... I leave the engineering issues up to the aircraft engineers and consentrate on flying. MSFS has done precisely that, and thanks to MSFS and my instructor, I have earned my wings. The whole issue is almost a "Which is better Mac or PC?" Another stupid argument, because each have their own differences and were created for specific reasons. Stop comparing apples to oranges. I like X-plane for it's complexities and intricasies and I really enjoy MSFS for it's zest in environmental realism and accurate flight handling. And if it isn't accurate enough for some people, well MS has done a great service to make it possible to change said flight parameters (to say the least).

It's really a waste of time to rag on MSFS, they have done a wonderful job to provide a high quality Flight Simulator, both in it's performances and asthetics. It's a joy and pleasure to fly MSFS, and I'm sure it's a joy to fly X-plane. They two are different, used for different things, they should not be compared together nor should they compete together. If you like X-plane, then fly it, if you like MSFS then fly it.

Also, if MSFS is sooo bad than tell that to the Navy. They seem to feel it is good for their base simulation training.

see: http://www.baseops.net/flightsimulators/

and

https://wwwcfs.cnet.navy.mil/microsimptt/downloads/Manual.pdf

p.s. FSX now has flocks of birds, and herds of elephants and other animals.

again, just fly what you enjoy flying! That's what's important.

Dukey

11-22-2006, 12:51

lqcorsa, I would advise you not to buy X-plane, if you want to do what you stated. My uses for X-plane are nearly all pure IF and systems managment (dull stuff).

maggoo

03-03-2007, 21:10

i got x-plane so i could fly the sr-71. big fan of that legendary piece of equipment. Time to install it again.
Im considering purchasing the 60GB's worth of High detail earth images for it. Anyone else got this? like to share thoughts? http://www.global-scenery.org/

sewillis

03-03-2007, 22:42

Spyder

03-04-2007, 08:28

Go with FS. X-plane is geared to fly-nerds who care about whether the ILS needles deflect in an accurate way or how the downwash and propwash affect the horizontal stabilizers when flying at a high angle of attack, etc. For 95 people out of 100 FS is without a doubt the way to go. Most people aren't too concerned about the exact mechanics, but about going up and having a good look around. By the way, I fly x-plane when I have time, but will dump it fast after Fighter Ops comes out!

I don't have any experience with x-plane, but I enjoy MSFS.

@sewillis: I'm sure a lot of people will dump all the sims once Fighter Ops comes out... it puts the best of MSFS and a combat sim all together into 1 nice sim...... actually I take that back... people who fly MSFS may hang on to that cuz as far as I know, there won't be any civilian flyable aircraft in FO... but that will be the ONLY thing keeping FO from completely owning the flight simming market.

Uzi

03-26-2007, 18:43

I've flown both MSFS and X-plane for about 7 years, and I personally like FS much better. It looks better, feels better, and is easier to use. My opinion is that X-plane would appeal mostly to people who are interested in aircraft design and experimental flight, and FS to pilots and non-pilots interested in both VFR and IFR flight.

Believe it or not, Microsoft Flight Sim is one of the main reasons why wanted I became a real pilot. I used it quite a bit over the last few years and it has helped my real-world flying a lot. AOPA Pilot magazine actually wrote about my experience with MSFS and my flight training in their November 2005 issue.

159th_Lonewolf

12-12-2007, 18:16

:nono:

I strongly disagree with this line of reasoning. I learned how to fly because of MFSF and it was was back in FS4 and 5 days. I learned to fly in a short 3 flying days, and graduated a college flying course because I understood procedures that I was practicing at home on my computer whenever I couldn't be in the plane itself. When I'm flying VFR/IFR I'm not trying to gauge how precise the air is moving over the airfoil of my wings, but instead I'm consentrating on flying safely and properly, by scanning, cross-checking, etc... I leave the engineering issues up to the aircraft engineers and consentrate on flying. MSFS has done precisely that, and thanks to MSFS and my instructor, I have earned my wings. The whole issue is almost a "Which is better Mac or PC?" Another stupid argument, because each have their own differences and were created for specific reasons. Stop comparing apples to oranges. I like X-plane for it's complexities and intricasies and I really enjoy MSFS for it's zest in environmental realism and accurate flight handling. And if it isn't accurate enough for some people, well MS has done a great service to make it possible to change said flight parameters (to say the least).

It's really a waste of time to rag on MSFS, they have done a wonderful job to provide a high quality Flight Simulator, both in it's performances and asthetics. It's a joy and pleasure to fly MSFS, and I'm sure it's a joy to fly X-plane. They two are different, used for different things, they should not be compared together nor should they compete together. If you like X-plane, then fly it, if you like MSFS then fly it.

Also, if MSFS is sooo bad than tell that to the Navy. They seem to feel it is good for their base simulation training.

see: http://www.baseops.net/flightsimulators/

and

https://wwwcfs.cnet.navy.mil/microsimptt/downloads/Manual.pdf

p.s. FSX now has flocks of birds, and herds of elephants and other animals.

again, just fly what you enjoy flying! That's what's important.

:thumb: I completely agree, I recently got FSX, and although it may not be quite so realistic as X-Plane...it does what it was built for. I was learning about gliders and how to find thermals etc, sounds easy but it was quite challenging and I loved it. :plane

Deckerd

01-12-2008, 11:12

Bucser

01-12-2008, 19:20

:thumb: I completely agree, I recently got FSX, and although it may not be quite so realistic as X-Plane...it does what it was built for. I was learning about gliders and how to find thermals etc, sounds easy but it was quite challenging and I loved it. :plane

If you are in for Gliders try Condor Soaring Simulator.

http://www.condorsoaring.com

It is currently the best for this purpose and has some quite good features. For example you can make a flightplan with the given utility you would use to make a realflight then import it into Condor. Dynamic weather and dynamic thermal and cloud forming and disintegrating.

It is really awesome. and there some really nice scenery for it.

edit: Ohh and forgot about the best: the online race mode which allows you to fly with others during the same conditions on the same path.

TX-EcoDragon

01-15-2008, 21:47

Condor is an awesome sim!!!

The gliding aspects are well done and it's actually one of the best for aerobatics too. . .I just wish they had an Edge, Su31, and Pitts in it!! The other sims out there should look at the physics of condor before they decide if they can use the term "realistic" on their procduct packaging.

X-Plane is cool for some things, particularly if you are into the digital windtunnel concept that X-Plane allows. But overall, I'd agree that most people would be better off with MSFS. FS2004 and some of the better addons that came out for it is still one of the best GA sims out. FSX has some catching up to do with respect to the IFR GPS performance, fps, and the addon on market is so new that the best of MSFS still comes from FS2004.

ActionMan

03-10-2008, 15:05

Little revival. I was browsing the photo gallery on navy.mil (in order to avoid learning for my upcoming college exams) and stumbled across this nice picture:
http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/webphoto/web_070216-N-6247M-009.jpg
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=43305

Does anybody recognise the sim Lt. Cmdr. McAllister is flying?
Note it's only used for reduced oxygen tests here...

I've done the ROBD a few times now, and let me tell you it is excellent for hypoxia training. It used to be that they would sit us in the pressure chamber and reduce the pressure to 25k feet and let us get hypoxic. With the ROBD, however, you don't know when it's coming and you are actually flying an airplane, so it does a good job of simulating the procedures you would go through if you got hypoxic in the jet. I think I was flying the YF-23 last time I did it.

irregular

03-13-2008, 17:08

so from what i am hearing, Xplane is much better than MSFS?

Deckerd

03-13-2008, 21:53

I've done the ROBD a few times now, and let me tell you it is excellent for hypoxia training. It used to be that they would sit us in the pressure chamber and reduce the pressure to 25k feet and let us get hypoxic. With the ROBD, however, you don't know when it's coming and you are actually flying an airplane, so it does a good job of simulating the procedures you would go through if you got hypoxic in the jet. I think I was flying the YF-23 last time I did it.

Sound like a lot of fun. I wonder how a flight vid would look when guy goes hypoxic...

RichardG

03-14-2008, 15:06

Is fighter ops flight model based on x-plane code? Read somewhere (Dev Diary?) that it was.

A.S

03-16-2008, 07:41

http://www.simpilotnet.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=9

Nice read at least

Pacman

03-16-2008, 08:01

Is fighter ops flight model based on x-plane code? Read somewhere (Dev Diary?) that it was.

That was our first intention. Regretfully it became apparent that the codebase wasn't suitable for our project, small parts are being used but then mainly in regards to databases.

We have recoded everything ourselves from scratch.

Best regards,

Dirk

Buckshot

03-16-2008, 09:02

I guess the most complete way to explain it is that although we are still based on the X-Plane code, most of the modules have been gutted to be either drastically reworked or in most cases completely rebuilt from the ground up to make them suitable for a military sim of this type and/or to bring them up to our standards.