X-Plane C172 sim

[Cessna172sim]

Hi,

I thought that I could finally post somekind of update. It took almost one year for us to update our sim from well served FS9 to a brand new X-Plane 10.

Some major updates:
- All interface cards changed
- new software (X-Plane 10)
- New altimeter (SimMeter)
- New avionics panel (DIY)
- New DIY scenery (all buildings are now in their real-life locations instead of generic and randomize FS9 buildings)
- True 180-degree view, 3 x new PC
- Specially modified propeller and animated wing view flight model

New sim space with some original B717 and Finnair DC-9 seats and catering trolley.


Video: (filmed during the first test flights):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNOEvjS8McQ

Feel free to join our Cessna-simulator Facebook page also:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/319420204832/

[roxiedog13]

Hi,

I thought that I could finally post somekind of update. It took almost one year for us to update our sim from well served FS9 to a brand new X-Plane 10.

Some major updates:
- All interface cards changed
- new software (X-Plane 10)
- New altimeter (SimMeter)
- New avionics panel (DIY)
- New DIY scenery (all buildings are now in their real-life locations instead of generic and randomize FS9 buildings)
- True 180-degree view, 3 x new PC
- Specially modified propeller and animated wing view flight model

New sim space with some original B717 and Finnair DC-9 seats and catering trolley.


Video: (filmed during the first test flights):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNOEvjS8McQ

Feel free to join our Cessna-simulator Facebook page also:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/319420204832/

How do you like the X-plane program compared to FS4 ? I intend to build the exact same type of simulator for home usage mainly for realistic IFR training . I currently have a three monitor desktop running FSX but it is not giving me the realism I ultimately want to
have. Then again, for realism I just go fly my real 172 that one is on floats. My 172 does have all the IFR equipment with steam gauges but does not have the Gamin GNS series systems that I see in your simulator. I do have a Garmin 796, the GNS is on my radar .....so to speak.

[Cessna172sim]

How do you like the X-plane program compared to FS4 ? I intend to build the exact same type of simulator for home usage mainly for realistic IFR training . I currently have a three monitor desktop running FSX but it is not giving me the realism I ultimately want to
have. Then again, for realism I just go fly my real 172 that one is on floats. My 172 does have all the IFR equipment with steam gauges but does not have the Gamin GNS series systems that I see in your simulator. I do have a Garmin 796, the GNS is on my radar .....so to speak.

Hi,

If you want to have more realistic flight dynamics and flight model you should go for X-Plane 10. There's a very notable difference, at least after FS9. There's one thing that you cannot model in home cockpits and that is the G-forces. Otherwise it's very close to a real thing nowadays.

You already have your multi-monitor setup running (FSX). You could easily install X-Plane 10 also and test fly it in your current 'home cockpit'.

Best regards,
OP

[fsx-cockpit]

Hi All,

I like X-Plane because realistic Flight-model...but I don´t like the not real enough scenery...
Since I know FSX need very Powerful CPU above 4000Mhz it runs very great
I think FSX will be longtime nr. 1
Or is there anybody who works on new Flightsim??????????????

CU,
Chris

[Cessna172sim]

It's not exactly the case anymore with X-Plane 10. For example, we've just finished Finland scenery package that is based on just recently released Finnish landscape institute database /ultra sharp satellite images. The quality and details are superior compared to FSX. The best part is that the scenery package contains ALL real building with true X & Y -coordinates and floor levels (instead of randomly generated buildings, like in FS9 and in FSX). In my opinion FSX is history.

All green dots in the image below presents a real life building. In Finland scenery there are almost 5 million real buildings:
1780701_10152025877367569_1748287456_n.jpg

Trees:
1979852_10152034760662569_823797966_n.jpg

Night and roads:
1901186_10152032760067569_23013624_n.jpg

Landing:
1908254_10151811386520834_845562194_n.jpg

Check also these amazing customly designed airports from Finnish TruScenery team:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...6907528&type=3

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...6907528&type=1

Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAVDV568XgA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shiH7bDFEVo

[fsx-cockpit]

Ohhh, good news
I hope in future it will be better and greater as FSX
With cheap download scenerys and other toys for simmer...

Thanks for that information!!!

Cheers,
Chris

[roxiedog13]

Thanks for the reply, I may very well try Xplane , I understand it is very good and even better for realistic flight simulation.

Not sure how much scenery is available for X-Plane Canada , there is a lot of geographic area to deal with .

[iwik]

Hi OP,
Very nicely done and hats off to the scenery guys. You have really done yourself proud with the C172.How is the force feedback yoke going?. My one is still functioning flawlessly.
Thanks again
les

[Cessna172sim]

Hi Les,
Thanks for the compliments. The force feedback yoke works like a charm with X-Plane 10.

/OP

[xplanematt]

Love your 172 sim, I have seen your project in the past and always admire the quality of execution on converting the plane to a sim. I'm glad to see X-Plane 10 on it now. It looks amazing on that big curved screen with powerful computers pushing out some good frame rates!

Quick question, what are you doing for your screen warping software? I'm just about decided on going for the commercial X-Plane keys to get the native spherical projection modeling. I'm going to be doing a spherical shape with a back-projection screen from a level-D commercial sim, and I just don't see how any post-rendered warping software can properly bend X-Plane's planar output into a really good spherical image.

I will say whatever you're doing for that cylindrical section looks VERY good!