Results 11 to 13 of 13
Thread: xplane as a trainner
-
10-18-2010, 01:30 PM #11
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- NEW ZEALAND
- Posts
- 899
Re: xplane as a trainner
Hi,
The Xplane v Msfs has been discussed many times and for every one Real Pilot that says it better ive read the opposite. That goes for GA and Heavies.
I also think The statement that it is FAA approved needs carefull examination. Cant recall the specifics but " FAA Approved" isnt what it appears.
Besides i think a lot depends on how you percieve things.
The fog Thing gets you smooth Flight but to me its not right.
Both sims have there place, just enjoy.
I keep trying both sims but always return to MS.
Les
-
08-22-2011, 06:09 PM #12
Re: xplane as a trainner
First got into FlightSims by accident buying a FSX plane for my boys then discovering I needed the Sim--then this--then that--ect,ect. Never played games before but became hooked on FSX. Tried X-Plane but could never get a plane to take off let alone stay up in the air so scrapped the Sim as useless until a growing nagging challenge got me trying it again especially after finding FSX unrealistically easy.
Never looked back-- FSX seems like flying a coathanger now. Yes X-Plane feels tempermental. X-Planes Trims are sensitive but responsive (Rudder & aerelon trims are near none existant in FSX) but once they are trimmed right the plane flies very true Weather ,turbulence, side winds cannot be ignored by real pilots nor X-Plane fliers they are a constant challenge & the wind sock is important. (Try turning a 172 on the runway in a wind gusting18-24 mph with the flaps down !! pretty realistic.) I tried everything to get into a stall spin in FSX but couldn't--turn away from the instrument panel in X-Plane for a few minutes with AP off and stall-spin & fall become unoptional extras
I've had great fun with FSX & its a good stepping stone to flying X-Plane properly. Can't wait for v10.
-
01-22-2012, 06:49 AM #13
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Location
- Europe
- Posts
- 1,931
Re: xplane as a trainner
X Plane vs FSX
I would just like to add my view on this debate as I feel that I have some very good and valid comments to share.
Firstly, you have to break down the question and ask the question in a different way. That is 'what's better? and better for who?'.......
Is FSX better than x-plane for a real pilot, or is x-plane better than FSX for a real pilot. A real pilot that flies a GA aircraft for real would probably have pro's and con's for both. Does that pilot believe that better scenery means a better a sim, or does that pilot believe that the responsiveness to flight and flight characteristics mean a better sim. Or does that same pilot believe that one is more important that the other, and does another pilot believe vice versa? We will never have a true answer, its all down to personal perspectives and expectations. Everyone is different and shares DIFFERENT views which means there will always be multiple answers.
Now you have the majority of sim users that have never flown for real before. How can they tell you what's more realistic if they have never flown before. Just because they have used FSX and XPlane and one flies better for 'them' than the other, does that mean the other is less real? How can someone say what's better because the actual fact is they will never know until they jump into a real plane and fly it, then tell us what's real.
So for example, this simmer has a real flight in the aircraft that they fly in flight sim. It turns out that neither flight sim matches the experience of flight, but, xplane appears to match the responsiveness of the controls, however fsx appears to replicate the scenery better. Now the sim users has something to compare to!
FSX has a flight planner, but x-plane makes you do the planning on real maps and charts, whats more realistic? I cant see a flight planner magically appearing on your windscreen in a real cessna! This is just an example of 'whats real to you....as a pilot or someone who has never flown before'.....
Someone could start a debate saying that xplane is better than fsx.....the reason...because this flight simmers computer has better graphics when running xplane and fsx is really jumpy, so xplane is more realistic to the user, however his mate has this fab quad core pc with a fab gfx card and it turns out that surprise surprise fsx runs better for the user, and this user is persistant that fsx is better than xplane for him, but this is based on hardware and not on 'flight'....
Realism of xplane vs fsx should be based on opinions from real pilots that have flown the aircraft both for real and on flight sim...and the opinions should be based on JAR pilots and FAA to get a fair conclusion...
There isnt 1 right answer for the debate because its all down to personal views and experience and everyone's is different!GA or the Highway!
Similar Threads
-
How in the world did Xplane get FAA approval???????????
By 737NUT in forum General X-Plane (Laminar Research)Replies: 12Last Post: 11-13-2011, 04:52 PM -
Xplane Cross platform phidget
By mrmaster in forum Phidgets Interface & Alan Dyers' FS2PhidgetReplies: 6Last Post: 03-16-2011, 01:43 PM -
xplane
By gokhotit in forum FS2Phidget UsersReplies: 3Last Post: 01-10-2011, 08:34 AM -
pc lay out for trainner
By spiro in forum General Builder Questions All Aircraft TypesReplies: 2Last Post: 06-25-2009, 10:01 PM
6yo FACECAST LINK 14year GIRLS FORUM : ( )...
YWM RAR JAILBAIT ZOOM