I would suspect that this topic has been aired before, but I would like to know what you fellow-simmers think about the most commonly available sims.
I have used X-plane 9, FS9, and FS10 (aka FSX).
First of all, I have found FS10 a complete disappointment, and a complete waste of money. I have a reasonable system which runs FS9 and X-plane 9 perfectly. But FS10 does not run well; it would crash if it hit 10 digital bluebottles. I uninstalled it when it refused to do anything. It was a shame as I have Saitek’s excellent switch panel and radio panel, both of which are designed for FS10. The scenery was dull and uninspiring. Planes would also hit things on taxiways that were not there.
FS9 has a huge range of planes which I handle with varying degrees of incompetence. Some are outstanding, e.g. Rick Piper’s Viscount and Argossy. Some of the commercial packages are brilliant as well. I have had much pleasure in using FS9. However I have moved it onto my laptop with Windows 7, and it is a bit disappointing. I think it’s the limitations of my laptop as much as anything. £500 is a vast sum of money on the joke that is my salary. It’s a good laptop for my work, but not so good as a gaming machine. I am putting everything back to my big computer (Windows XP).
FS9 has its limitations. Although I have a plug-in for Saitek’s switch panel, it can crash the program to desktop, often on short final…
X-plane 9 has its up points. There is a huge range of add-ons available for free. Some are as good as anything you would get commercially; others are abysmal, but they can be deleted easily. I like the fact that it can sit in a folder outside the programs folder, and I have a back-up copy on my external hard drive, just in case my computer goes on the fritz. I have also copied to my laptop, but I think it’s limited by the graphics card.
I am willing to believe that its models are the most accurate, although I know little about blade element theory (X-plane) and stability derivatives (FS9). I would like to know what others think. The weather engine in X-plane is meant to be good – I have REX to improve the cloud textures.
However I do prefer the scenic experience of FS9, although the abrupt changes in weather when using real world weather are disconcerting (X-plane 9 does that as well). Also the FS9 ATC is much better; I do not like the robotic tones of Microsoft Sam in X-plane. Is there an add on for natural-sounding ATC in X-plane?
I find X-plane 9 too American based; most downloadable add-ons are in the USA. X-plane France produce a good range of scenery and aerodromes. So I do most of my flying around France. Another problem with X-plane is that there is only the most rudimentary flight-planning system, although in commercial planes, there is the FMC. FS9 is far superior and you can also use the GPS as a moving map. GPS displays in X-plane are rather crude, although the local map is excellent. For flight planning for an X-plane flight, I use Navbox 5, a real world flight planner which did not cost very much.
As for the size on disc, FS9 is 20 GB with all my add-ons; X-plane 9 is 90 GB.
And what about the new MS Flight (which, I gather, is NOT FS11)? Will it be any good?
I look forward to your thoughts.:)
By: Arabella-Cox - 19th August 2011 at 21:10
Yup, I have lost 500 hours because of the logbook problem
By: hampden98 - 19th August 2011 at 21:07
I run FSX on a Win7 32 or 64 bit system without issues.
You need a minimum of a quad core and a 500meg grafix card.
The logbook bug has a tool which fixes the problem available from www.flightsim.com files section
Runs fine on my system with VFR scenery and quality sliders about half way.
By: Flying_Porker - 18th August 2011 at 23:23
Another reason why FX10 is no good
My copy (Deluxe with Acceleration) does not work in Windows 7. It is not compatible.
FS9 does!
By: Arabella-Cox - 28th July 2011 at 13:59
FSX crashes if you delete something from the logbook or when the logbook becomes corrupt, it appears. To fix that, you have to delete the logbook.bin file which is in my documents/fsx files folder. This will erase the logbook information however. I notice mine also freezes and then crashes when I use the menu, not sure exactly what action causes that.
By: Flying_Porker - 27th July 2011 at 20:38
Military aviation
Thanks for your reply.
I am not very good at military planes; I am far too slow-witted. I have 3 speeds, slow, dead slow, and stop.
I have tried powerful tail-draggers. I usually end up with a massive groundloop. The really big tail-dragger bombers are a lot more tame. But put me in a Spitfire, and I will put it on its back in no time. I do wonder how the lads who did this for real actually survived.
As for the modern military machines, the Tucano is quite nice. It is tame on the approach. The Herc is handful in the approach, tending to crab, or stall spectacularly.
I do low, slow, and in a straight line. I have an imaginary freight airline called Pork Air, based on my web-name (which in turn comes from my wife’s contention that I am a pig). Such an event will happen when pigs fly…:)
By: RobAnt - 14th July 2011 at 00:51
If you like military sims as well, you might find a lot of satisfaction with DCS: A-10C & DCS: Ka-50. Particularly if you’re an advanced pilot.
Personally, I can barely keep them in the air long enough to complete a mission, but that’s because I’m a newbie dork who needs a tutor.
There’s a great job out there for anyone who wants to fly as lead or wingman, teaching newbies – for altruism or monetary compensation/barter. I know I need a tutor and I’ve got an awful lot of free time.
Read and weep, picked up a Saitek X52 Pro, brand new, on eBay for £34 delivered! Normally about £120. It works perfectly, but I think I’ll change the PS2 lead connecting the stick and throttle. So many buttons and profiles to choose from I barely know which way to look.
Sign In
June 13, 2011 at 11:39 pm