Any flight simmers here?

[Feisters]

I have MSFS98 and MSFS2000-Pro. However, I still fly FS98 more than FS2000. Mainly because I think FS98 is better than FS2000 (MS dropped the ball with FS2000). But also because I have a lot more panels and planes for 98. Both however, are lacking in what I feel is realism. Oh, they're touted as being realistic, but I'm sorry; I've been in real airplanes.

I'd been reading a lot of good things about a flight sim called X-Plane by Laminar Research. When I saw the price had gone down to $39.95, I finally picked up a copy. Man, what a surprise! This thing beats any MSFS, hands down. More tools, better graphics, and much better realism. And like the MSFS's, there's a host of folks out there writing add-ons for it.

 

[esung]

I know.. X-plane used to sell at much higher price.. but finally he decided to drop the price and compete.. (and of course, have the product on the shelves instead of website only.) I'm very impressed with X-plane, because there's a few things that x-plane can do that M$ so far can't: supersonic speed! auto-gyros! and a complete modeling kit.

I'm a long time M$ flighsim fans.. they used to dominate this field, until x-plane came along...

At this point, there's no good military combat flightsims out there.. Although Jane's sims are okay, but sometime they lack a good campaign simulation(Microsoft has the worst campaign simulation, all static, nothing dynamic). The best combat flightsim I've ever played is Falcon 4...

 

[Johnpk]

I have to agree with you, Falcon 4 AFTER the patches and enhancments is by far my favorite. I've ben eyeing x-Plane for a while now. Still debating on it...

 

[esung]

x-plane: the flight model is good.. but one thing that's really lacking is the documentation.. but I'd say it's worth it... 2 planes I personally like a lot were included: XB-70 and X-15.. and the game supports a few launch mode: conventional take off, catapult shot, and
drop from B-52..

 

[Feisters]

X-Plane update! While I was originally smittened with X-Plane, I've discovered some caveats. The editing interface is very rudimentary and unwieldy. However, it does produce the desired results. I added my local airport based upon information posted at www.airnav.com. This is time consuming, and not for the faint at heart.

I've also discovered that if you make abrupt changes while flying, things will lockup a bit until "whatever" catches up. This surprised me as I am running a P3-750 w/192 megs ram and a G-Force2 card. X-Plane is all OpenGL though, so maybe I need to update some drivers.

One other thing that I have yet to figure out is, when I make an ILS approach to the airport I added, the plane (A-319) veers severely left when just about to land, and subsequently crashes. I think I've probably screwed something up with the local navigational aids. Yes, if you add your own airport and want navaids, you have to get all that information correct. Latitude, longitude, elevation, radio frequencies, runway lengths and widths, etc.

But for $40, X-Plane is a nice diversion from MSFS. Plus the guy is always updating it with improvements (key word: improvements. Are you listening, Billy G.?).

 

[esung]

that's one thing I like about M$FS.. all the airport and navaid data included.

and yes, OpenGL drivers matters a lot in X-plane.. I had some problems with it since I'm using a Voodoo3 3000.

on your ILS problem is the ILS needle veers to the side, or the plane itself is veering to the side? if it's the needles, it probably means you place the ILS at the wrong place (should be furthur down on runway), but I'm just guessing..