Recommendations.Anything and everything from X-Aviation.

+1 I would also add the Yak-55M from ND Art & Technology and the awesome Yak-40 from the Felis Planes team. If you like classic Russian planes, you'll love this one where you'll find every system including their navigation system, the weather radar and all the circuit breakers. If you like great flight models and don't need photoreal textures or 3D graphics where you see every nut and rivet, don't forget to visit Jason Chandler's website.Happy flying !

I've just come into some new information. It appears there IS another big developer coming to x plane. And this one is big. So far it is unannounced as final details are being resolved, but it's going to shake things up a lot.Exciting times around the corner. Good competition.

You said too much or not enough !!! I can't wait knowing more about this now...

I've just come into some new information. It appears there IS another big developer coming to x plane. And this one is big. So far it is unannounced as final details are being resolved, but it's going to shake things up a lot.Exciting times around the corner. Good competition.

I heard the same today again and from a different source this one quite reliable. And it seems to fit with my first information, especially when AeroSoft was mentioned everyone would simply say oh yeah, but that's not anything we already didn't know.

When will HiFi Technologies start building add-ons for X-Plane ?

If they do, it's a safe bet Jim won't be joining them.I doubt we'll have a need for a 3rd party weather add on anyway. The weather and clouds are getting heavy modifications and improvements for XP10. Just a stab in the dark, but I think that's why Jim hates X Plane so much.

Well, yes, we'll get a lot of new weather features in X-Plane 10. But even now, for X-Plane 9, it would be nice to have a tool with winds and temperatures aloft forecasts on your route. There's a market to take for companies like HiFi Technologies.In the future, I may buy a tool like PFPX because it "can be used with any flight simulator" and because I heard it will even work with Wine.

And like you said, there was something missing in FSX that I found in X Plane. And that something was enough to totally change my mind about my preferred sim. I think what it boils down to is FSX "looks" better with the color saturation, water effects, ATC and AI, but, for me, x plane provides a far richer flying experience overall. And as a certified pilot, that is far more important to me.

Now remember.......................there are also lot's of certified pilots, who also prefer MSFS.............at least if they're into desktop simming. Personally, I haven't found something in X-Plane, that's missing from FSX. It's just different. I guess what I'm saying, is that since I'm a pilot and plane owner myself (a speedy & manuverable little plane BTW)..................is that I really do like some of the top notch flight models for MSFS, and they too, provide as good of experience, as desktop simming allows. I'm not even going to argue MSFS versus X-Plane in the flight department. I do have some X-Planes that I really like. I just want it to be known, by the unknowing........................that X-Plane really doesn't have an edge in the flight dynamics department. X-Plane uses one method, and MSFS uses another. They both work, when programmers have a clue of what they're doing... L.Adamson

Now remember.......................there are also lot's of certified pilots, who also prefer MSFS.............at least if they're into desktop simming. Personally, I haven't found something in X-Plane, that's missing from FSX. It's just different. I guess what I'm saying, is that since I'm a pilot and plane owner myself (a speedy & manuverable little plane BTW)..................is that I really do like some of the top notch flight models for MSFS, and they too, provide as good of experience, as desktop simming allows. I'm not even going to argue MSFS versus X-Plane in the flight department. I do have some X-Planes that I really like. I just want it to be known, by the unknowing........................that X-Plane really doesn't have an edge in the flight dynamics department. X-Plane uses one method, and MSFS uses another. They both work, when programmers have a clue of what they're doing... L.Adamson

Like I said, purely subjective. You're completely and unequivocally entitled to your opinion. For YOU, X Plane doesn't have an edge. For me, and obviously for Ark (and no doubt for thousands of others who are registered in the various x plane forums around the simming community) X Plane DOES have an edge in flight dynamics.I'm sure you can respect OUR decision as much as we respect YOURS.

Like I said, purely subjective. You're completely and unequivocally entitled to your opinion. For YOU, X Plane doesn't have an edge. For me, and obviously for Ark (and no doubt for thousands of others who are registered in the various x plane forums around the simming community) X Plane DOES have an edge in flight dynamics.I'm sure you can respect OUR decision as much as we respect YOURS.

I guess I can always wonder what the edge is..... :) L.Adamson

I guess I can always wonder what the edge is..... :) L.Adamson

Obviously, it is something you don't agree with. To avoid a debate, let's just leave it at that.Back on-topic...

Obviously, it is something you don't agree with. To avoid a debate, let's just leave it at that.Back on-topic...

I much prefer debate. You should know that by now! By flatly saying that X-Plane DOES have an edge in flight dynamics.............................you're simply throwing a "blanket" cover over the whole heap of flight regime. In reality, a particular model completed by a particular programmer, for a particular SIM, may be more realistic than the competion........................or far worse. But because it's X-Plane................there is NO upfront advantage. It's marketing 101 that ticks me off with X-Plane. Austin makes millions from it. I applaud Austin for donations to animal shelters, and I even like the fact he's building a new Lancair turbine powered aircraft. What I find a farce, is comments that "real pilots" will immediately appreciate the differences between the two sims if they switch to X-Plane. That is simply marketing. When you use the same approach, as you did earlier in the thread.................I'll again say balony. Give me hard facts across a real spectrum of flight regime. Fact is, the methods used for flight dynamics within MSFS can be very realistic in both terms of numbers and flight fidelity. If that was not so..................thousands of real pilots (who actually use flight sims) would have jumped ship years ago. You know, and I know...........that simply running specs through X-Planes "Plane maker", usually doesn't cut it. That fact is well supported by writings from various X-Plane developers who are serious about programming FD to be as real as possible. My position is to still use both sims. I just don't find an overwhelming edge in X-Planes flight dynamics. And across the board, it's not an edge all. I use a third party FSX aircraft, that's always a comfortable and natural transistion from flying my real plane, which I do often. That has to also say something for FSX. L.Adamson --- Van's Aircraft, RV6A. 180HP Lycoming, Hartzell constant speed prop. (note: the default X-Plane RV's are horrible)

If you compare FSX and x-plane 9 it's still fact that a plane can be more precisely tuned to replicate real world planes in FSX than in x-plane.E.g. in FSX you can tune e.g. the stall behaviour, wing rock at high AoA, spin entry, -rate, -attitude, -recovery etc....I haven't seen any of these design capabilities in x-plane 9.

It's marketing 101 that ticks me off with X-Plane. Austin makes millions from it.

I'll just say one thing. "As real as it gets". I'm sure you know where that came from. Not to mention getting John and Martha King to promote just about every version of MSFS. Are all the MSFS versions as real as it gets? Come on Larry. It's marketing. It's promotion. I have never seen Austin lie about anything in X Plane. It's his product. He can promote it however he wants. He is legally, morally and ethically entitled to. As a matter of fact, it's in your constitution. Freedom of speech.

I applaud Austin for donations to animal shelters, and I even like the fact he's building a new Lancair turbine powered aircraft. What I find a farce, is comments that "real pilots" will immediately appreciate the differences between the two sims if they switch to X-Plane. That is simply marketing. When you use the same approach, as you did earlier in the thread.................I'll again say balony. Give me hard facts across a real spectrum of flight regime.

I have seen this happen many times. Once SOME real world pilots, who have been flying FS9 or FSX give x plane a try, they are immediately surprised as to how smooth it is and how much better it feels. I've seen them in the x-plane.org forums, AVSIM forums and x-pilot forums. I have 2 testers for the Saab 340 I'm making. One was always into X Plane but the other was a very hardcore FS9 simmer. He is type rated on various aircraft as he was a flight instructor and he now flies a Saab 340 just about every day. He tried X Plane here at my place when I asked him to test the Duchess for me and he was instantly shocked and hooked onto X Plane. Since that day, he has never touched FS9 or FSX. The one thing I have seen with X Plane that I have not seen in FSX is the number of aircraft manufacturers who use X Plane to design and test their products. Garrow Aircraft. Carter Copter. And several others I am not allowed to mention. They design and test their aircraft on x plane because x plane DOES have that edge of realism. They will never design an aircraft in FSX because they can't.

Fact is, the methods used for flight dynamics within MSFS can be very realistic in both terms of numbers and flight fidelity. If that was not so..................thousands of real pilots (who actually use flight sims) would have jumped ship years ago. You know, and I know...........that simply running specs through X-Planes "Plane maker", usually doesn't cut it. That fact is well supported by writings from various X-Plane developers who are serious about programming FD to be as real as possible.

Absolutely and whole heartedly agree with you. Garbage in-Garbage out. But even PMDG have said they cannot (or choose not to) program a realistic flight model when it comes to stalls for their NGX. FSX limitations. Could they do it? I don't know. Possibly, if FSX allows it. Although seeing as look up tables are linear and X Planes flight model is not, it would be very difficult to hit those characteristics, if not impossible.Planemaker is seriously misinterpreted by many. It is a very powerful tool, but far too many people don't know how to use it properly. That is why many FSX simmers give x plane a bad rap. Too much freeware that was made in a matter of days when in reality, it would take weeks to months to make a proper flight model in x plane. It took me a year to make the Saab flight model in Planemaker. I question these developers you speak of who are serious about flight models, because I have seen many who THINK they know what they are doing. When I have a look at what they have done, it makes me chuckle. A payware developer (I won't mention his name) told me, when I questioned him on his engine performance figures, that it "still flies on the numbers" and he was 100% confident that what he did was correct. He decided to NOT listen to my advice and he is now suffering the consequences of many people complaining about the engine performance and the effect on the aircraft. This person was absolutely convinced that he knew what he was doing. Yet I saw errors in his flight model that could have easily been fixed. So in saying that, where there is one, there is sure to be many more.

My position is to still use both sims. I just don't find an overwhelming edge in X-Planes flight dynamics. And across the board, it's not an edge all. I use a third party FSX aircraft, that's always a comfortable and natural transistion from flying my real plane, which I do often. That has to also say something for FSX. L.Adamson --- Van's Aircraft, RV6A. 180HP Lycoming, Hartzell constant speed prop. (note: the default X-Plane RV's are horrible)

You say there is no overwhelming edge. So by that interpretation, you are saying there is SOME edge in x planes flight dynamics. But overall you consider them both pretty much equal. Your final words are purely your opinion and what works for you and gives you enjoyment. No one is saying you should do anything contrary to your beliefs. But I cannot help thinking that you believe your word to be gospel when it comes to which sim has the edge. You will notice I said FOR ME, X Plane has an edge. I am not pushing X Plane onto anyone. You, and anyone else is free to choose your sim of choice. As passionate as you are about your point being delivered, I am as equally passionate. If you cannot understand that, then there is nothing I can do and trying to prove the edge will always be an exercise in futility. It's the same debate as Vegetarians vs Meat eaters. Apple vs Windows. Republicans vs democrats. Bernt,Without misinterpreting this as an argument, but you are incorrect. It is possible to accurately tune a flight model in x plane. By default settings in planemaker (a few adjustments that can be made from settings largely unnoticed by many developers). Like I said earlier, PMDG has said it is an FSX limitation that Stall behaviour is not modelled correctly. I do know that these can be adjusted or even added into x planes flight model. I know because I have done it. Is it 100% accurate? Hard to say. I would need extremely detailed information on weather, wind, temp, aircraft type, weight, engine speed, prop angle, airfoil data (something FSX does not even have), and a myriad of other details pertaining to the conditions to truly compare in sim. In saying that, I can safely say that no developer in FSX can accurately (100%) replicate those things you mentioned without the same data and work involved.

The one thing I have seen with X Plane that I have not seen in FSX is the number of aircraft manufacturers who use X Plane to design and test their products. Garrow Aircraft. Carter Copter. And several others I am not allowed to mention. They design and test their aircraft on x plane because x plane DOES have that edge of realism. They will never design an aircraft in FSX because they can't.

It beats first design on a napkin.... Other than that, X-Plane is designed to give a "ballpark" value, in regards to flight characteristics and numbers. FSX is designed to simulate the actual flying product..............with "known" flight characteristics and numbers. L.Adamson

No it doesn't. It goes a lot further than that. No it isn't. It is FAR more accurate than that. No it isn't, it has proven limitations. I'm far too busy doing contract work for an aircraft manufacturer as well as my own products to keep discussing this. This thread is for the new developer coming to X Plane. If you want to discuss it further, PM me and I'll reply when I can.

If you compare FSX and x-plane 9 it's still fact that a plane can be more precisely tuned to replicate real world planes in FSX than in x-plane.E.g. in FSX you can tune e.g. the stall behaviour, wing rock at high AoA, spin entry, -rate, -attitude, -recovery etc....I haven't seen any of these design capabilities in x-plane 9.

This is true only in the EXTREME cases like a spin/fall. In XP we can only control to the point where you enter a deep stall. At this point the aircraft/wing basically turns into an uncontrolled falling object. Calculating forces in such a scenariowith lateral airflow, blanking of wings/surfaces from fuselage, turbulent air from all possible directions, passing through your own propwashbackwards etc etc is close to impossible - chaos. As you know, not even $15 mill simulators model this. FS doesn't even attempt to do it. In these extreme cases I agree with you and LA that the FS approach of just "telling" the plane how it should handle in better.However, for the "normal" flight envelope, XP is superior (offcourse depending on the designer capability's).

It beats first design on a napkin....Other than that, X-Plane is designed to give a "ballpark" value, in regards to flight characteristics and numbers. FSX is designed to simulate the actual flying product..............with "known" flight characteristics and numbers.

This is nonsense and I will prove it to you soon. If you know what you are doing, you will hit real numbers DEAD ONin the "normal" flight envelope. Yes, it requires plugins and extreme knowledge of the aircraft you are making plussa lot of time reverse engineering, but the end product is superior. M