Best Flight Simulator?

[ibanana]

Which flight simulator game is the best in you opinion ?

[dukebound85]

xplane
http://www.x-plane.com/

[dmr727]

This question comes up quite a bit.

But I agree with the X-Plane answer.

[liptonlover]

x plane hands down.
a) It comes with the plane maker and world maker
b) People can make plugins
c) It's very customizable
d) It's cross-platform
Other than that it also just has a great feel. It doesn't crash, it works with my equipment, it has a very realistic feel, it looks great, everything about it is awesome. There's my two cents :)

[sushi]

Which flight simulator game is the best in you opinion ?
Currently -- don't know.

On Mac OS 9, A-10.

Awesome realistic flight sim. Advance maneuvers like accelerated stalls could be performed. Really enjoy that flight sim.

[dmr727]

On Mac OS 9, A-10.

Awesome realistic flight sim. Advance maneuvers like accelerated stalls could be performed. Really enjoy that flight sim.

I'll second this too - I loved A-10. For me, 90% of the realism comes from frame rate. A consistent ~60fps is what I need. A-10 with no textures at 60fps is far more 'real' to me than the latest and greatest MSFS (or whatever) at 30fps.

And along the same vein - I liked the Hellcats titles too.

[dimme]

X-plane is always the winner in this form. I have X-plane 9 and also MS Flight Simulator X. Both are good, but X plane wins with me for 2 reasons.
1- I do not have to deal with Windows.
2- X plane does not crash like FS X.

FS X has more additions you can buy but some ca be imported into X plane.
To be honest If I was a windows user I might prefer MS FSX.

[sushi]

I'll second this too - I loved A-10. For me, 90% of the realism comes from frame rate. A consistent ~60fps is what I need. A-10 with no textures at 60fps is far more 'real' to me than the latest and greatest MSFS (or whatever) at 30fps.
Even though A-10 was a game, I never ran it as a game. I just used it to fly. I had have a three control set up which made it a lot of fun especially doing extreme maneuvers.

And along the same vein - I liked the Hellcats titles too.
Hellcats was awesome.

I believe programmers for Hellcats were the ones who did A-10. Have to check on that to be sure.

X-plane is always the winner in this form. I have X-plane 9 and also MS Flight Simulator X. Both are good, but X plane wins with me for 2 reasons.
1- I do not have to deal with Windows.
2- X plane does not crash like FS X.

FS X has more additions you can buy but some ca be imported into X plane.
To be honest If I was a windows user I might prefer MS FSX.
Interesting.

I am looking to purchase a current Flight Sim.

My take:

- MSFT FSX is very good procedural wise.

- X-Plane is better for the flight realism.

[iwuzbord]

Google Earth actually has a built in flight simulator. i think that its very interesting to see google doing something like this. they even allow joystick control.

like i said, probably not the best choice, but a very interesting one indeed.

[sushi]

Google Earth actually has a built in flight simulator. i think that its very interesting to see google doing something like this. they even allow joystick control.

like i said, probably not the best choice, but a very interesting one indeed.
Yep, not a flight simulator, but rather a navigation system that allows you to see the Earth much like you were flying.

[costabunny]

Interesting read as I want a flight game too. My problem is that I care not for realism as long as I can dog fight and free fly causing mayhem in anything from a Fokker DR1 to a Mig29...... any ideas on that kind of game for MAC OS X 10.5 on intel?

[dukebound85]

Interesting read as I want a flight game too. My problem is that I care not for realism as long as I can dog fight and free fly causing mayhem in anything from a Fokker DR1 to a Mig29...... any ideas on that kind of game for MAC OS X 10.5 on intel?

haha the best part!

like in sim city, i love destroying them moreso than creating lol

[SolRayz]

Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of micro$oft but they have been developing and releasing FS for some time and have progressively improved a program which no one has been able to successfully compete with, IMO. Ive been a big fan since MS 4.0, so I have to disagree with others about X-Plane. I've tried it. Its ok. I admit both have there advantages and disadvantages, but as far as customization, planes, scenery, fun balanced with overall realism, FSX takes the cake.

Sadly I have to soil my MBP with a windows partition to run it, but its worth it.

Also for someone who said FSX crashes, that has not been a problem for me.

[dimme]

Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of micro$oft but they have been developing and releasing FS for some time and have progressively improved a program which no one has been able to successfully compete with, IMO. Ive been a big fan since MS 4.0, so I have to disagree with others about X-Plane. I've tried it. Its ok. I admit both have there advantages and disadvantages, but as far as customization, planes, scenery, fun balanced with overall realism, FSX takes the cake.

Sadly I have to soil my MBP with a windows partition to run it, but its worth it.

Also for someone who said FSX crashes, that has not been a problem for me.
I m curious what flavor of Wndows do you use? XP, Vista 32bit or 64. I run FS X with XP pro. Is there a advantage to go with Vista.

[dmr727]

I am looking to purchase a current Flight Sim.

My take:

- MSFT FSX is very good procedural wise.

- X-Plane is better for the flight realism.

Once you make that purchase - lemme know what you discover. I haven't done the flight simulator thing in many years, but your take is exactly how I saw things back then. Once I get an Intel Mac, MSFS will be back on the table for me, and I'll re-evaluate.

[sushi]

Once you make that purchase - lemme know what you discover. I haven't done the flight simulator thing in many years, but your take is exactly how I saw things back then. Once I get an Intel Mac, MSFS will be back on the table for me, and I'll re-evaluate.
Will let you know.

But please don't hold your breath, as I am in no hurry to get it and it may be a while.

[dmr727]

No worries sushi - my job requires me to go through a week long butt kicking in a sim every six months. Simming at home isn't a high priority! :)

[liptonlover]

Interesting read as I want a flight game too. My problem is that I care not for realism as long as I can dog fight and free fly causing mayhem in anything from a Fokker DR1 to a Mig29...... any ideas on that kind of game for MAC OS X 10.5 on intel?
Xplane allows dogfighting. You set up teams with up to 20 planes with up to 4 teams, set their planes, and fight! Go to http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?act=idx and check out all the planes they have in the download portal... I do regular WWII dogfights... it's awesome!
The two problems I have with xplane... the multiplayer option is an addon someone made, it's a pain to try and set up. Also, the bullets are white orbs, which is kind of lame.

[Macs4u]

Hi,

Any update on whats the best flightsim for mac?

Ive used fsx and xplane on windows and found xplane to be totally unrealistic in how the airplane handles. Anyone else founf that?

Matt

[dimme]

Hi,

Any update on whats the best flightsim for mac?

Ive used fsx and xplane on windows and found xplane to be totally unrealistic in how the airplane handles. Anyone else founf that?

Matt

Not much new here except when I run FSX now I am using windows 7 x64 and the performance boots is nice.

What do you mean "xplane to be totally unrealistic in how the airplane handles" Is it a matter of Joystick tuning or you don't like the way the sim handles. I find it has a lot to do with the plane, I do find X plane to be realistic in handling and is challenging to fly. And I get to stay in OS X.

[harcosparky]

I have been flying Flight Simulators for more years than I can remember.

Though since my conversion to Mac I have not flown much at all.

Hands down Microsoft FS is the best.

Now that I have Intel Macs, I'll probably put in a partition for Windows/Flight Sim.

At one point Flight Sim was considered to be the premier PC Flight Sim, so much I think the FAA was considering it as being good enough to count as simulator time for pilots.

I have been flying Radio Controlled Airplanes and Helicopters for almost 20 years, if not longer. Microsoft Flight Sim was my computer trainer of choice because of it's true flight characteristics.

In the beginning I flew several different simulators, probably had them all but MS Flight Sim stood head and shoulders above the competitors. They probably have caught up by now, they've had enough time. Even so, it's MS Flight Sim for me! ;)

[Topper]

.
I fly both X-Plane and FSX.
FSX has better graphics but I prefer X-Plane.
X-Plane feels better to me, more realistic.
But I've been running X-Plane a lot longer than FSX so that could be why I am so biased toward X-Plane.
.

By the way, if you have either an 8800 GT or GTX 285 video card, run X-Plane under Boot Camp.
It is a lot faster, I mean a lot faster.

X-Plane runs 2.3 times faster running under Boot Camp (WinXP) with the 8800 GT Mac Edition than with the 8800 GT running under OS X.
X-Plane runs 1.4 times faster running under Boot Camp (WinXP) with the GTX 285 Mac Edition than with the GTX 285 running under OS X.

[BestPilot1]

I just bought this 24" top of the line iMac, installed Paralells (software that allows you to run Mac and Windows simultaneously without the need to reboot each time) with Microsoft XP and then loaded up my Microsoft Flight simulator (Gold Edition Delux with Accelerator). Big disappointment. First, it takes FOREVER to load up the FS and get it running, and second the screen is ONLY about 1/5 of the whole 24" screen

What am I doing wrong? HELP, please :)

[dimme]

I just bought this 24" top of the line iMac, installed Paralells (software that allows you to run Mac and Windows simultaneously without the need to reboot each time) with Microsoft XP and then loaded up my Microsoft Flight simulator (Gold Edition Delux with Accelerator). Big disappointment. First, it takes FOREVER to load up the FS and get it running, and second the screen is ONLY about 1/5 of the whole 24" screen

What am I doing wrong? HELP, please :)

You need to use Boot Camp!

[Macs4u]

Not much new here except when I run FSX now I am using windows 7 x64 and the performance boots is nice.

What do you mean "xplane to be totally unrealistic in how the airplane handles" Is it a matter of Joystick tuning or you don't like the way the sim handles. I find it has a lot to do with the plane, I do find X plane to be realistic in handling and is challenging to fly. And I get to stay in OS X.

What i mean is...

Its almost like the flightsim doesnt take into consideration drag? , If i fly level at low speed(close to the stall) and go to a seriously high climb angle, it will do so instantly , no lag , no drag , no bogging down , nothing. That isnt realistic!

[Huntn]

You need to use Boot Camp!

Seconded!

What i mean is...

Its almost like the flightsim doesnt take into consideration drag? , If i fly level at low speed(close to the stall) and go to a seriously high climb angle, it will do so instantly , no lag , no drag , no bogging down , nothing. That isnt realistic!

X-Plane calculates drag based on airframe components and power based on what the designer of the airplane designates. It's the only retail flight sim that I know of that does this. And X-Plane as been certified by the FAA. That means something. I used to fly a DC9 (a real one) and took an X-Plane DC9 on a cross country trip and it's performance was very realistic. Now there are thousands of aircraft out there that have been designed by individuals who could have been unrealistic in their power designation or created fantasy planes. :)

The best way to test this is see if you can find a WWI aircraft modeled in X-Plane and try your maneuver. If you don't stall post haste, then I might agree there are some holes in the flight model. The other possibility would be to email the X-Plane author, Austin Myer at X-Plane.com (http://www.x-plane.com/pg_support.html).

[Aikiman]

I liked Falcon 4.0 unfortunately it was never released on OSX. It was more than a flight sim, it was mission based fighter pilot adventure in South Korea...very cool.

[GreatDrok]

When I was learning to fly a few years back the weather was bad one day when I had booked a flight so I was told I could have some time on their flight sim setup. They had both MSFS and X-plane. Since I only have Macs and hadn't had a chance to try MSFS I thought I would give it a go. I did a perfect takeoff, circuit and landing. At that stage, there is simply no way I could have done that. X-plane wins my vote for being much more realistic although I have to admit that for practicing my procedures for circuits I thought FlightGear was also very good because it had mouse-look so I could look over my shoulder down at the runway as I paralleled it.

9/10ths of the realism comes from taking it seriously though. Have a proper yoke and pedals and act like you're really flying - I bought all the stuff so I could just drill myself without having to pay for time in a real plane and for that it worked really well.

[dmr727]

I used to fly a DC9 (a real one)

::drool::

[lairdjtk]

xplane
http://www.x-plane.com/

Hello the xplane looks very good but anyone know of good controls that work on xplane & imac

would like a joystick then maybe throttles and pedals

though price may rule this idea

[maccompaq]

Hello the xplane looks very good but anyone know of good controls that work on xplane & imac

would like a joystick then maybe throttles and pedals

though price may rule this idea
I'm using Saitek Pro Yoke and Throttle Quadrant on my Core i7 desktop for X-Plane 9 with Snow Leopard and MS FSX with 64 bit Windows 7. I'm using CH Flightstick Pro on my Core2Duo 2.8 GHz desktop for X-Plane 9 with Leopard. Both the joystick and the yoke work great for me with X-Plane.

FSX did not like my joystick, but it somewhat likes my Yoke. X-Plane likes both units. I have the yoke and quadrant programmed for utmost efficiency in X-Plane, and everything works to perfection. Same for the CH joystick and X-Plane.
I am having a problem getting the yoke and quadrant programmed in FSX just like I had with the joystick. Some programming would take, but then would not work with the next flight. Other programming just will not take. Anyone have clues to make it work?

[Kaver]

I liked Falcon 4.0 unfortunately it was never released on OSX. It was more than a flight sim, it was mission based fighter pilot adventure in South Korea...very cool.

There is a note on the GraphSim website - to the effect that an OS-X version of Falcon 4.0 (Allied Force) is currently in beta testing at Lead Pursuit - no details of a release date.

http://www.graphsim.com/
http://www.lead-pursuit.com/

This was confirmed by an email I received from GraphSim when I enquired further!

I can hardly wait ...... Now, if only they would release a new version of F/A-18 Hornet (OIF) with updated graphics. Along with X-Plane, OS-X would be fairly well served with flight simulators.

[maccompaq]

http://www.graphsim.com/




What's up with Graphsim charging $49 for X-Plane 9 for Mac and $29 for X-Plane 9 for Windows?

Just buy X-Plane 9 from the X-Plane 9 web site (http://www.x-plane.com/pg_store.html) for $29 and get all three versions for that price (Mac, Windows, Linux)

[Huntn]

This question comes up quite a bit.

But I agree with the X-Plane answer.

I also agree with X-Plane except that it has no damage modeling. If you want to dogfight other people, I'd recommend Warbirds (http://www.totalsims.com/) although my disclaimer is it's been a decade since I've played it and I believe it requires a subscription.

[ComputerPilot]

After reading so many good things about X-Plane I downloaded their trial version for both Mac and PC. Both failed miserably. I don't have a joystick or rudder pedals so for demo purposes I had to use the keyboard/mouse.

On the PC, pressing F2 to open the throttle simply started Microsoft Word software. On the Mac it increased the screen brightness.

Pressing the "b" key to release the brakes did nothing in either case.

Lower half of the instrument panel was hidden in both cases. Couldn't move it and could not operate those controls.

Clicking the mouse in the center of the windscreen brought up a white box but nothing else happened.

The only thing that seemed to work was that I could listen to tower chatter.

[Topper]

After reading so many good things about X-Plane I downloaded their trial version for both Mac and PC. Both failed miserably. I don't have a joystick or rudder pedals so for demo purposes I had to use the keyboard/mouse.

On the PC, pressing F2 to open the throttle simply started Microsoft Word software. On the Mac it increased the screen brightness.

Pressing the "b" key to release the brakes did nothing in either case.

Lower half of the instrument panel was hidden in both cases. Couldn't move it and could not operate those controls.

Clicking the mouse in the center of the windscreen brought up a white box but nothing else happened.

The only thing that seemed to work was that I could listen to tower chatter.

I wouldn't say that X-Plane is the easiest software to learn.
I think your main problem is your keys are conflicting with other applications.
I do not understand why "b" wouldn't work. You could try "v" as that will apply and release the brakes also.
I know this is obvious but make sure you don't have your caps or numbers locked on the keyboard.
Go to Settings>>Joystick & Equipment>>Keys. You can change your keys there.

With a little practice the mouse should work okay for you.
I like using my Wacom tablet and pen.

[saxon48]

xplane. without a doubt

[maccompaq]

I also agree with X-Plane except that it has no damage modeling. If you want to dogfight other people, I'd recommend Warbirds (http://www.totalsims.com/) although my disclaimer is it's been a decade since I've played it and I believe it requires a subscription.
X-Plane 9 is a very good simulator for flying and keeping flight skills current. It was not designed to be a "shoot m up" game.

[dimme]

I like using my Wacom tablet and pen.
Do you really fly with a wacom tablet. One of the reasons I like MSFSX over X-plane is the controls feel better in MSFSX that in X-plane. I X-plane things are always jumping around.

[MindBrain]

Do you really fly with a wacom tablet. One of the reasons I like MSFSX over X-plane is the controls feel better in MSFSX that in X-plane. I X-plane things are always jumping around.

You might want to try turning down all of the wind speeds in the weather panel. I've heard they are greatly exaggerated.

[Topper]

Do you really fly with a wacom tablet. One of the reasons I like MSFSX over X-plane is the controls feel better in MSFSX that in X-plane. I X-plane things are always jumping around.

Yeah, I do. I've been doing it for a long time so it feels good to me.
I've got a Saitek Pro Flight Yoke with a quadrant throttle. I suppose I should set that up one of these days.

I've got MSFS also. The main reason I prefer X-Plane is I am used to it.
I've got some nice planes and plug-ins for it.

Right now I am using Reality XP's GNS 530 WAAS. Very, very nice.
It's got all the bells and whistles of the real GNS 530.
I program it with my flight plan, throw it up into the top right hand corner.
All my keys are programed.
I turn off the cockpit view and nagivate strictly by the GNS 530 and keyboard.
Great fun!

[maccompaq]

I've got a Saitek Pro Flight Yoke with a quadrant throttle. I suppose I should set that up one of these days.

I've got MSFS also. The main reason I prefer X-Plane is I am used to it.
I've got some nice planes and plug-ins for it.


Your Saitek Pro Flight Yoke works great with X-Plane.

But I cannot get it to accept programming with FSX so I have to use the default settings.

[dmr727]

I turn off the cockpit view and nagivate strictly by the GNS 530 and keyboard.
Great fun!

Sadly, too many pilots do the same thing in a real airplane these days. ;)

[ducatidog996]

hey guys, i know i am a bit of a "noob" here and all but can you run a flight simulator on a macbook, not a desktop? and still use a joy stick with it?

once again sorry i know i am a noob i just need answers please!

[NewGenAdam]

hey guys, i know i am a bit of a "noob" here and all but can you run a flight simulator on a macbook, not a desktop? and still use a joy stick with it?

once again sorry i know i am a noob i just need answers please!

Let's see... In principle the only difference whatsoever between a laptop (MacBook) and a desktop is the form factor. Pretty much everything else is common between them. The main differences will be processing capability; but you get this between desktops and between laptops too. A MacBook should be fine from this stand-point.

I can think of no reason why a joystick wouldn't work!

We're normally quite kind to 'noobs' here; there aren't many flamethrowers either!

/geek's way of saying 'no'

[Topper]

hey guys, i know i am a bit of a "noob" here and all but can you run a flight simulator on a macbook, not a desktop? and still use a joy stick with it?

once again sorry i know i am a noob i just need answers please!

There are many people running X-Plane on MacBook Pros and MacBooks and using a joystick.
You can find most of them at forums.x-plane.org (http://forums.x-plane.org/)

[ducatidog996]

haha ok thank you guys...i am going to download the demo, see how she is :):apple:

[Huntn]

X-Plane 9 is a very good simulator for flying and keeping flight skills current. It was not designed to be a "shoot m up" game.

X-Plane is a very good flight sim, but damage modeling is essential for bragging rights. :)

[maccompaq]

hey guys, i know i am a bit of a "noob" here and all but can you run a flight simulator on a macbook, not a desktop? and still use a joy stick with it?



A Macbook has integrated graphics, so I do not know how well it will run X-Plane. One thing I know for sure, from the X-Plane web site, that the program will not run on Intel integrated graphics.
Anyone have comments?

[Topper]

A Macbook has integrated graphics, so I do not know how well it will run X-Plane. One thing I know for sure, from the X-Plane web site, that the program will not run on Intel integrated graphics.
Anyone have comments?

This is my understanding...the newest MacBook and MacBook Pros have both an NVIDIA video card and integrated Intel HD Graphics.
They will actually swtich from one to another seamlessly depending upon the workload.
For gaming, the NVIDIA video card will kick-in.
Apple calls it automatic graphics switching.
Apple also claims that the MacBook and MacBook Pro give up to 1.8 times better gaming performance than previous generations.

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/Macbookgpu.jpg

[maccompaq]

This is my understanding...the newest MacBook and MacBook Pros have both an NVIDIA video card and integrated Intel HD

How does the 9400 graphics work with X-Plane?

[Topper]

How does the 9400 graphics work with X-Plane?

I don't know. I don't use my MacBook Pro for X-Plane. I use a Mac Pro.

This is what MacWorld says:
"The 2.4GHz MacBook with Nvidia graphics was able to crank out over 39 frames per second in our standard Quake tests. That may not seem like something to crow about, until you compare it with the old 2.4GHz MacBook with the GMA X3100—that system managed a meager 7.6 frames-per-second in the same tests. When we switched from the 9400M to the MacBook Pro’s second GPU, the Nvidia GeForce 9600M GT, we saw an extra graphical push. The 9600M GT helped the 2.4GHz MacBook Pro get a respectable 58.9 frames per second in our Quake 4 tests."

It sounds like the 9400M would do okay as long as you keep X-Plane's renderings a little lower.

If you want to get better performance from the same video card (if it is Nvidia), run X-Plane with Windows under Boot Camp.

I made the following graph just for you (per MacWorld):

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/MacBook.jpg

[maccompaq]

I don't know. I don't use my MacBook Pro for X-Plane. I use a Mac Pro.
It sounds like the 9400M would do okay as long as you keep X-Plane's renderings a little lower.

If you want to get better performance from the same video card (if it is Nvidia), run X-Plane with Windows under Boot Camp.


I get very good performance out of X-Plane with my Core i7 machine.
MS FSX is not bad with Win 7 64 bit, but I prefer X-Plane.

[Topper]

I get very good performance out of X-Plane with my Core i7 machine.
MS FSX is not bad with Win 7 64 bit, but I prefer X-Plane.

I've got FSX.
I wanted to use it because at the time the only Garmin G1000 simulators were made for FSX.
But I am just too used to X-Plane.
Now Realty XP has a very nice GNS WAAS 530 for X-Plane which I really enjoy using.
FTS has come out with a Garmin G1000 for X-Plane which I'll probably purchase sooner or later.

[bart4u]

I have a Mac Pro 2x2.8 Quad Core 6GB Memory and an ATI Radeon HD 2600 graphics card and I am running 10.5.8 Is X-Plane going to run slow on this or do I need to upgrade the graphics card. If anyone knows please let me know. Thanks

[Topper]

I have a Mac Pro 2x2.8 Quad Core 6GB Memory and an ATI Radeon HD 2600 graphics card and I am running 10.5.8 Is X-Plane going to run slow on this or do I need to upgrade the graphics card. If anyone knows please let me know. Thanks

You'll need to experiment with the "Rendering Options" menu.
You can get X-plane to run just fine with the computer that you have but you will probably have to make some sacrifices.
"Texture resolution" has six settings; minimal, low, normal, high, very high, and extreme res!.
You may need to keep it down to high or very high. But you do have a Mac Pro with 6GB of memory so maybe you can get it to run at "extreme res!"
X-plane has 5 anti-aliasing settings; none, 2x, 4x, 8x, and 16x.
I seriously doubt the HD 2600 can handle anything above 2x. You may have to keep the settings to none.

Experiment with the Rendering Options menu.
If X-plane isn't running smoothly at the renderings that you desire, then maybe you should think about getting a better video card.
The new ATI HD 5870 should be a beauty.

[bart4u]

Topper thanks for the info. I fly radio control planes and use a flight simulator from Aerofly and it runs great with my computer. I want to try the X-Plane sometime soon but I think I will upgrade the video card.

[Huntn]

I made the following graph just for you (per MacWorld):

http://homepage.mac.com/ctopper/.Pictures/MacBook.jpg

Integrated graphics is the pits for high demand gaming. However it will run a wide variety of casual games. My wife plays everything from Spore (Mac) to Nancy Drew (XP) on her MB.

[sushi]

Well, I decided to get X-Plane. Purchased three copies:
- Mac
- iPhone
- iPad

Ended up using it on the iPhone and iPad the most. The flight model seems fairly accurate. Fun to use and a great time killer.

Only complaint, is that the developer has the collective move the wrong way for helicopters. Up should be pitch up and not pitch down.

On the Mac, I mostly do the following.

I fly radio control planes and use a flight simulator from Aerofly and it runs great with my computer.
I use Phoenix via VMware Fusion running Windows XP. I connect to my Spektrum DX7 controller. Works great.

Still thinking about getting MSFT FS, but right now just don't have the time to really use it.

Also want to set up my A-10 with the three controls (stick, throttle and pedals) on one of my older Macs.

[Topper]

Only complaint, is that the developer has the collective move the wrong way for helicopters. Up should be pitch up and not pitch down.

Have you seen the helicopter forums at forums.x-plane.org? (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showforum=65)
Maybe you could register your complaint there.
A guy called brett s seems to be the helicopter guru.

[sushi]

Have you seen the helicopter forums at forums.x-plane.org? (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showforum=65)
Maybe you could register your complaint there.
A guy called brett s seems to be the helicopter guru.
Thanks, but too much work.

E-mailed the company with the suggestion that they make the collective realistic or at least have the option to choose.

In all the "real" helicopters that I have flown, not one has a collective operate the way X-Plane does. It results in backwards (reverse) inputs for maneuvers and really messes up your mind if you have flown real helicopters.

[Kaver]

... if you have flown real helicopters.

Hmmm... If you want a realistic helicopter simulation (combat) you should try "Black Shark";

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=950&scr=default

Windows only, though!

[chrfr]

Thanks, but too much work.

E-mailed the company with the suggestion that they make the collective realistic or at least have the option to choose.

In all the "real" helicopters that I have flown, not one has a collective operate the way X-Plane does. It results in backwards (reverse) inputs for maneuvers and really messes up your mind if you have flown real helicopters.

Assuming you're using a joystick of some sort, you can reverse control directions in the joystick setup. Does that not do what you want?

[sushi]

Assuming you're using a joystick of some sort, you can reverse control directions in the joystick setup. Does that not do what you want?
Thanks for the tip.

Unfortunately, I wasn't clear on my original post above. I am referring to the iPad version.

Hmmm... If you want a realistic helicopter simulation (combat) you should try "Black Shark";

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=950&scr=default

Windows only, though!
Hmmm... Interesting. Thanks.

250197

[Skald]

I would be doing it on a new MacBook Pro 13" with (alas) just an Nvidia 320M, 256MB, using (cough, hack) Windows 7.

I have and plan to try IL2 1946. I was surprised that no one on this thread mentioned it.

[dmr727]

E-mailed the company with the suggestion that they make the collective realistic or at least have the option to choose.


Everything you crazy helicopter guys do is backwards anyway - and now you're whining about which direction the collective moves? Bah!



:p:p:p

[sushi]

Everything you crazy helicopter guys do is backwards anyway - and now you're whining about which direction the collective moves? Bah!



:p:p:p
Hello, my name is sushi and I'm flying impaired. :p

Dang starched wing folks. :D

[maccompaq]

It looks like X-Plane 10 might get released by the end of this year.
It has been totally rewritten.

[Topper]

It looks like X-Plane 10 might get released by the end of this year.
It has been totally rewritten.

Yes, from what I have seen so far, it really looks nice.
It looks like it will use all eight cores of my Mac Pro.

[Thezez]

+1 for X-Plane

[RichardI]

Which is best? Depends on what you want. I have no idea which "flies" better because I'm not a real-life pilot. How each sim performs is very much related to your hardware - here I give X-plane the nod. If you like flying "low and slow" like me, to look at scenery, FSX has the nod right now, comparing out-of-the-box to out-of-the-box. To me, X-plane is easier to "fly" which makes it more realistic. I know several real-life private pilots and have flown for real with them and they say X-plane has the most realistic flight model.
I say right now X-plane has a path going forward, FSX does not.
1 more for x-plane.

Rich :cool:

[ofiaich]

Hi!

can I use a Wingman joystick with my MacBook Pro and X-Plane?

Off to research, but someone might know here from expereince!

Ofiaich :)

[Topper]

Hi!

can I use a Wingman joystick with my MacBook Pro and X-Plane?

Off to research, but someone might know here from expereince!

Ofiaich :)

Not from experience but X-Plane forum members use Wingman.
It is the belief of many forum members that just about any USB joystick will work with OS X and X-Plane.
Of course, that doesn't mean they are all created equal.

LINK (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=26490)

LINK (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=35422&st=40)

LINK (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=15651)

LINK (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=30665)

[dimme]

Hi!

can I use a Wingman joystick with my MacBook Pro and X-Plane?

Off to research, but someone might know here from expereince!

Ofiaich :)
I have one and it does not work that great with Xplane. I works fantastic with FSX, which is what I fly the most. For me it's the most realistic.

[ofiaich]

Thanks for your replies, dimme and Topper!

I don't really want to use FSX on my MacBook Pro, because that would be the only reason to use BootCamp or Parallel

I think to do that would take up a lot of space.

I will read more about Xplane!

Ofiaich :)

[Mowgli21]

Hi I am looking at getting x plane flight sim but also interested is there a realistic flight sim / fighter game. Control and fly planes in fighter planes?

Thanks

[Topper]

Hi I am looking at getting x plane flight sim but also interested is there a realistic flight sim / fighter game. Control and fly planes in fighter planes?

Thanks

X-Plane has many fighter planes that you can fly but they can't engage in combat.
There are no combat flight simulators for Macs.
If you have an Intel-Mac, you could play a combat flight simulator under Boot Camp with Windows.
I know nothing about it but I believe you can run a combat flight simulator called "Warbirds" (http://www.totalsims.com/) on the internet.

[LOLaMac]

There is also a new A-10 sim in development by the same team that made Black Shark - DCS: A-10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUu4SV3GjVw

Watch and be blown away. *All* in game footage.

[dmr727]

^^^ holy ******! If that game is half as cool as it looks, I'll spend whatever it takes on hardware to play it to its potential.

[Huntn]

There is also a new A-10 sim in development by the same team that made Black Shark - DCS: A-10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUu4SV3GjVw

Watch and be blown away. *All* in game footage.

Nice movie. I assume this will be PC only?

[Topper]

Nice movie. I assume this will be PC only?

I am 99 percent certain it is Windows only with DirectX 9.
DCS: A-10C Warthog (http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=107)

[JackAxe]

There is also a new A-10 sim in development by the same team that made Black Shark - DCS: A-10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUu4SV3GjVw

Watch and be blown away. *All* in game footage.

:Q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _|

If that game supports the G940 and its force feedback, I'm SOOOOOOOO buying one. :O

Here's the developers link;
http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=2452&scr=default&lang=en

[LOLaMac]

As a licensed pilot and avid user of Pro Flight Sim. This is by far the most realistic you can find. Check for yourself. Have a good day to all!

http://80d335uemh8zog9j58ieu2qr1z.hop.clickbank.net/?tid=4984SN5M

Hmmm. Nice video of some animated words, I guess? And why is that when I click on 'screenshots' it says "check out the amazing rendering" then gives me a bunch of 320x200 pictures to look at. Yeah, the rendering looks amazing.....if I could actually make it out lol. And why when I click on some of the screenshots, presumably to enlarge them, it just takes me down to the "ORDER NOW!!!!" part of the page? Tacky.

[maccompaq]

As a licensed pilot and avid user of Pro Flight Sim. This is by far the most realistic you can find.

http://80d335uemh8zog9j58ieu2qr1z.hop.clickbank.net/?tid=4984SN5M

Looks like X-Plane 9. Just wait until X-Plane 10 is released. There will be no equal.

[RollTide]

IL-2 1946 Amazing windows game. Very steep learning curve but you can practice at "noob" levels and bump it up as you get better.

[Huntn]

Looks like X-Plane 9. Just wait until X-Plane 10 is released. There will be no equal.

Fingers crossed that someday they will get some damage modeling inserted. :)

[RAHelland]

Hi everyone.

I am currently a owner of X-plane 9 together with a Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System, Pedals and Quadrant setup.

The System/setup worked fine together with only the standard setup with 3 levers, but when i added the 3 extra levers in the setup x-plane got crazy.

First time when i fired up the game with the quadrant I programmed the buttons as i like it within X-plane setup, it worked fine and I was happy.
But, when I shutdown the game and start it up another day everything is changed and i need to reprogram the setup, meaning the yoke, levers, pedals and buttons.

Running this on my mac with OSX.

Any ideas on what the problem is? :)

[flymacscruffy]

Don't see how xplane is so great. It does not have other air traffic to contend with as does Microsoft. Why would you want to fly alone in an empty sky? or at an empty airport? If you have xplane that includes other air traffic please let me how you got to that point.
Thanks.
flymacscruffy.

[yanr]

I'm a huge fan of the MS Flight Simulator series. Having a few quality add-on aircraft (e.g. anything from PMDG, Level D Simulations) and flying online with VATSIM/IVAO makes the game extraordinarily realistic. I only recommend this if you are a serious simmer though, this path is definitely not for someone who wants to boot up the game and start flying.

[maccompaq]

Hi everyone.

I am currently a owner of X-plane 9 together with a Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System, Pedals and Quadrant setup.

The System/setup worked fine together with only the standard setup with 3 levers, but when i added the 3 extra levers in the setup x-plane got crazy.

First time when i fired up the game with the quadrant I programmed the buttons as i like it within X-plane setup, it worked fine and I was happy.
But, when I shutdown the game and start it up another day everything is changed and i need to reprogram the setup, meaning the yoke, levers, pedals and buttons.

Running this on my mac with OSX.

Any ideas on what the problem is? :)
I have the Saitek Pro Flight Yoke System and the Quadrant setup connected to my Core i7 Hackintosh running Snow Leopard and X-Plane 9. Everything works fine all the time. Perhaps you messed up the settings when you added the extra levers. Re-check every setting again.

In that same computer, I have 3 hard drives. On the second hard drive, I have installed Windows 7, 64 bit and also the latest version of MS Flight Simulator X. The problem with it is that it refuses to accept most of my attempted settings to the controls. The ones that are accepted no longer work the next time I boot up. After many attempts, I have stopped using MSFSX.

[everafter]

Excellent product. Scenery and clouds looks super realistic. Been flying the sim for over 20 years and this is the best one yet. Even if you have owned previous Flight Sims before, try ProFlightSimulator (http://mega4ever.com/proflightsimulator/) you will definitely like it

[Huntn]

Excellent product. Scenery and clouds looks super realistic. Been flying the sim for over 20 years and this is the best one yet. Even if you have owned previous Flight Sims before, try ProFlightSimulator (http://mega4ever.com/proflightsimulator/) you will definitely like it

Wow, Mac compatible. It would interesting to see how it's flight model is set up. X-Plane computes drag/performance based on airframe computations. Most home flight sims compute performance based on chart data. Does it make much difference? On some levels, no. On others, yes.

[Brian33]

To quote the OP:

Which flight simulator game is the best in you opinion ?

The best flight simulator in my opinion is Condor, The Competition Soaring Simulator (http://condorsoaring.com/about.htm), but that's because I'm a glider pilot!

Unfortunately, it's a Windows-only app, but it does a superb job of modeling the flight dynamics and weather that soaring pilots are interested in. You get to fly all the modern racing sailplanes, connect to servers to fly with others in realistically scored competitions, and use scenery from great soaring areas around the world. Both aerotow and winch launches are simulated.

OK, I know it's quite a small niche, but if anyone is interested in flying gliders / sailplanes, they should check it out.

Regards,
Brian33

[simon48]

X-Plane!

[Anonymous Freak]

Wow, Mac compatible. It would interesting to see how it's flight model is set up. X-Plane computes drag/performance based on airframe computations. Most home flight sims compute performance based on chart data. Does it make much difference? On some levels, no. On others, yes.

On a "playing a game on a computer" level, it makes no difference. When flying stock planes, I can't really tell the difference between a Cessna 172 in Microsoft Flight Sim, a Cessna 172 in X-Plane, and my (limited) experience in a real Cessna 172. Both sims are very faithful recreations.

But as a former Aerospace Engineering student (when X-Plane 1.0 came out,) I can attest to the HUGE difference between MSFS and X-Plane when designing. In MSFS, you design a physical model, and you specify flight characteristics. The two have nearly no bearing on each other. You could make an SR-71 that flies like a Sopwith Camel; or a 747 that flies like an aerobatic soarer.

But in X-Plane, the physical design *DEFINES* the flight characteristics. If your physical design is incapable of flight, guess what, it won't fly.

[barryswanson]

I would like to buy a mac compatable yoke and controls to play x plane. I also dont want to pollute my mac with windows. Any suggestions other than the CH product?

[jlc1978]

Excellent product. Scenery and clouds looks super realistic. Been flying the sim for over 20 years and this is the best one yet. Even if you have owned previous Flight Sims before, try ProFlightSimulator (http://mega4ever.com/proflightsimulator/) you will definitely like it

Better yet, try Flight Gear; a F/OSS Sim at::
http://www.flightgear.org/

Also check out their wiki:
http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=FlightProSim

for some important background info.

[avro707]

I've always found MS FSX (aka ESP/Lockheed-Martin Prepar3D) really involving, mainly due to the very advanced addons available for it.

We can get addons with very advanced features, I'm thinking of planes like the MD-11 by PMDG.

Example: Fly at 210kts around 6000ft with flaps down. Retract the flaps. What happens? Siren goes off and "lo-speed protection" kicks in, speeding the plane up to 240kts.

Though I'm not often flying that - I prefer Concorde X, it's faster to get from one place to another and a lot more involving. I love the older style navigation techniques used for that, the inertial navigation system, flying holds the traditional way, flying over the beacon at Ockham and entering the hold on the required heading, watching the distance from the beacon and then doing your turn for the other leg of the holding pattern. That's really involving. Same with the descent, no automatic "top of descent" features, you've got to look at the winds and weather and work out from the charts how long it will take to descend - and keep a close watch on wind and temps in order to avoid slowing down too soon (slow and inefficient) or not soon enough (meaning too high/too fast).

But I also like the fact that once you are up and running, it can be highly automated - and you really just keep a watch on it to make sure it does what you expect. And it's a challenge for me to try and find ways to make trans-atlantic crossings faster. ;) I also love that I can follow the real Air France Concorde checklists and procedures I have on a computer simulator. That's good. It was so much like the real thing.

I only wish FSX wasn't so computer heavy. My old computer was a Quad-core Intel i7 920 PC with a GTX295 video card - fast indeed, but not fast enough to do steady 30fps at mid to high detail.

I'm out of that at the moment since that machine died - and will hopefully get back into it when the new Mac Pro arrives (a dual use machine for work and gaming).

[Benjy91]

Microsoft Flight Simulator X, it's brilliant.

[foiden]

MFSX is a major resource hog. I was amazed actually at the timing of when MFSX was made. I mean. How in the world did they actually have a machine that could run that game well, back when they made it? As far as consumers were concerned, no machine at that time, existed. We have PCs made multiple generations since the machines of that time struggle with that game trying to do anything like the advertisement screenshots had shown.

[avro707]

They allowed you to have too much detail for the time when it was made. It was way above what any machine could handle back then, with the detail levels it could generate.

Now, it's not so bad - you can crank the detail levels up and still get good frame-rates. And it still looks great:

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2010-12-19_17-17-26-769.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2010-12-19_17-18-1-289.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/crazy_hk1.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/crazy_hk2.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/crazy_hk3.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/crazy_hk4.jpg

I'll still take more frame rates if possible, but only if it doesn't come at the expense of planes with full systems simulation. As you might have guessed, I don't fly the default planes in Flight Simulator. ;)

[quagmire]

I love X-Plane. It runs great on my parents 27" iMac Core i7. My favorite aircraft is the Boeing 737-800 done by the x737 project guys. They have done a great job with the aircraft making everything realistic with the wings, turbines, etc all move. I often fly between Orlando and Daytona Beach for short haul trips and use the auto land feature at Daytona( I land it manually at Orlando). And then for my long haul trips is between Daytona and Washington Dulles.

I fly other aircraft just for fun around without a destination. X-Plane 10 looks great. Can't wait until it comes out. :)

I love the customization of X-Plane as well.

http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100252/screenshot_0/web.jpg?ver=12936560620001

http://gallery.me.com/quagmire2/100252/screenshot_1/web.jpg?ver=12936560660001

[dmr727]

^^^ looking good, quagmire! I approve of your choice of airline, too. :)

Curious, what kind of frame rates do you get with that quality level?

[avro707]

Just curious, does anyone do a full real B747-400 for X-Plane like this:

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2010-12-29_20-40-45-134.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2010-12-26_12-24-53-585.jpg

I'm think of one with the full realistic FMC and everything else. The one above is officially licensed by Boeing (and apparently done with their help).

Unfortunately I've got the MS flight-sim X blues, it locks up occasionally and the crash-logs don't help in solving the problems. It runs beautifully until that.

I'm also interested if there is a Concorde for X-Plane that is fully modelled with all the systems of the real one (like this one for MS FSX):

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/conc18.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/conc5.jpg

That's got the full Concorde AFCS simulated, the Inertial navigation system, along with the fuel tank simulation and nearly everything else of the real plane (pressurisation, airconditioning, electrical systems, green/blue/yellow hydraulic systems, yaw dampers, anti-stall systems etc).

Unfortunately, this FSX addon used to be the best performing on my old machine (even despite its hundreds of gauges and masses of systems), but with Mac Pro at 2560x1440 resolution it seems to run really slow. I've done my best to optimise things, but this one runs slowly. I really looked forward to more supersonic flying - but it's no good when it runs at 12fps... It used to do 35fps on my old PC (i7 920 2.66ghz, Nvidia GTX295) - although that was at 1680x1050 resolution. Even reducing resolution has not much effect now. Yet all the other addons run very fast.

Last time I looked at X-Plane, the Concorde I saw seemed really basic (manually controlled altitude, no max-climb/max-cruise feature for instance). Surely someone has done an advanced version?

And I'll re-iterate DMR727's question. I'm eager to compare frame-rates too.

[quagmire]

^^^ looking good, quagmire! I approve of your choice of airline, too. :)

Curious, what kind of frame rates do you get with that quality level?

You're lucky that I think the Delta paint scheme looks the best out of the others on the 737.

How do you determine the framerate?

Also, I don't think this is very realistic. Was flying a 747 at 35,000 ft I believe it was. Full throttle with a 20 knot tailwind I was breaking Mach 1. It didn't like it, but I broke the sound barrier in a 747.

Another unrealistic thing in X-Plane is takeoff and landing a 737 on an aircraft carrier...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb8XIFKfs2A

[dmr727]

^^^ it's been so long since I've played with X-Plane, I don't remember how to have it show the frame rate. It can be done, though.

Just curious, does anyone do a full real B747-400 for X-Plane like this:

Impressive models, although IMO if you're having a good time, does it really matter? It's a game - it's supposed to be fun. If I wanted to merely push buttons, turn dials, and do everything the way it's done in real life - I'd go to work.

I've said it before - my favorite sim experience is A-10 on a PowerMac driving three displays at 1024x768. It's not nearly as 'realistic' as the latest and greatest, but IMO, a heck of a lot more enjoyable! :D

[avro707]

I'm happy with it, I just wish I could sort out the FSX crashes. :rolleyes:

The realism of it is enjoyable - because it doesn't take a lot to get it running, that's the beauty of it. Someone needs to pull apart FSX and give it a thorough going over.

If the same was ever available for X-Plane, I'd swap over.

[dmr727]

^^^ that's what I've always like about simulators - there are so many different ways to enjoy them. I've always been a "push the levers forward and go tool around" kind of guy. My needs are pretty simple! :o

[dimme]

I already have MS FSX and X-Plane 9 and will be getting X-Plane 10.
.

When will we be seeing X-plane 10?

[maccompaq]

When will we be seeing X-plane 10?

It was scheduled for release Dec 2010, but Austin decided there was more tweaking necessary. Now it looks like close to the 2nd quarter of 2011.

[beowulf70]

I'll second this too - I loved A-10. For me, 90% of the realism comes from frame rate. A consistent ~60fps is what I need. A-10 with no textures at 60fps is far more 'real' to me than the latest and greatest MSFS (or whatever) at 30fps.

And along the same vein - I liked the Hellcats titles too.

Ditto! We used to play A-10 and Hellcats at work all the time, (when possible). Both were really quick, even on a Quadra 700 (25 MHz processor)! :cool:

[Arowe]

What about this flight simulator (http://e2c0bovlrkhwar2a6msko3qfad.hop.clickbank.net/)?

[dimme]

What about this flight simulator (http://e2c0bovlrkhwar2a6msko3qfad.hop.clickbank.net/)?

It looks like a paid version of flight gear. You can download flight gear for free so there is no need to pay for the one you linked to.

Still I do not think it is as good as x-plane

[AndyMoore]

In X-Plane you can even fly Serenity from Firefly :)

Serenity (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaSfXafWvq4)

[LOLaMac]

What about this flight simulator (http://e2c0bovlrkhwar2a6msko3qfad.hop.clickbank.net/)?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but....what the hell is up with this? You go to the website and watch the "trailer" which is just some flashing words on the screen, no gameplay whatsoever. And then there is the blurb about how it "Doesn't get any closer than the real thing" with some teeny, tiny screenshots below, and when you go to click the link, instead of showing a full size screen, as you would assume would be the case, it takes you down to the obnoxious "BUY NOW!" link. And all the screens on the 'screenshot' link are 320x200?

And every time this link is posted, it is by someone who just joined in the same month they post the link. If I didn't know better, I'd say this is just some sort of scam thing. I wouldn't lay out any money for this just because of the way it's presented. It might be a nice game, but the way it's marketed really needs to be tweaked. lol

Also, I just watched the one video I could find of an F-4 flying around the bay area, and no offence, but that is horrible.....it looks like an old version of MSMS (and maybe it is). But, at any rate, buyer beware.

[maccompaq]

What about this flight simulator (http://e2c0bovlrkhwar2a6msko3qfad.hop.clickbank.net/)?

How much are you getting paid to post this?

[BRLawyer]

I liked Falcon 4.0 unfortunately it was never released on OSX. It was more than a flight sim, it was mission based fighter pilot adventure in South Korea...very cool.

It's gonna be released soon on OS X; just check the following beta test program by GraphSim:

http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ID=19574

[sushi]

I've said it before - my favorite sim experience is A-10 on a PowerMac driving three displays at 1024x768. It's not nearly as 'realistic' as the latest and greatest, but IMO, a heck of a lot more enjoyable! :D
I hear ya! :)

Definitely a fun game, but also some fairly realistic flight parameters. Sure the scenery is not all that good, but who cares.

[BRLawyer]

^^^ it's been so long since I've played with X-Plane, I don't remember how to have it show the frame rate. It can be done, though.



Impressive models, although IMO if you're having a good time, does it really matter? It's a game - it's supposed to be fun. If I wanted to merely push buttons, turn dials, and do everything the way it's done in real life - I'd go to work.

I've said it before - my favorite sim experience is A-10 on a PowerMac driving three displays at 1024x768. It's not nearly as 'realistic' as the latest and greatest, but IMO, a heck of a lot more enjoyable! :D

Same here, but my fun was with something EVEN more old-school: Chuck Yeager's Air Combat ;)

[Huntn]

Don't see how xplane is so great. It does not have other air traffic to contend with as does Microsoft. Why would you want to fly alone in an empty sky? or at an empty airport? If you have xplane that includes other air traffic please let me how you got to that point.
Thanks.
flymacscruffy.

Can you see other airplanes flying around in the MS sim? Do they clear you to follow another airplane to the airport? Don't get me wrong, I'm not being critical, just curious...

What is most interesting for me is that when I am flying in the mid 30's (RL not simulated) and look out the window, usually I see no other airplanes, but if I look at my TCAS there are planes all around.

Same here, but my fun was with something EVEN more old-school: Chuck Yeager's Air Combat ;)

I loved CYAC, but that was definitely in the arcade category. Considering when it came out, all the sims back then probably qualified as arcade.

Anyone correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that X-Plane has the best flight modeling. It is the only home simulator that calculates drag based on the shape of the airplane. Most home simulators like the MS product just rely on performance charts. I guess you could argue that if the charts are good what does it matter? My response would be if the program calculates based on shape, it should always be more realistic, maybe only slightly, but still it is an advantage.

[Topper]

Anyone correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that X-Plane has the best flight modeling.
.
A FSX person will probably disagree.
I prefer X-Plane but I've been playing it for over 15 years.
My hope is after X-Plane 10 comes out, X-Plane will be the clear winner over FSX.
The only reason I care is I want more FSX third party developers to jump over to the X-Plane side.
I'd like to see more planes and more Garmin avionics (G1000) for X-Plane.
Although I really like using Reality XP's Garmin GNS 530W with X-Plane. Unfortunately I have to use the PC version of X-Plane under Bootcamp in order to use the Garmin GNS 530W but I am happy to do so as it is very realistic.
X-Plane 10, some more third party planes and avionics and I am as happy as a pig in shlt.

X-Plane vs FSX (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25FJn4iQUNo) (be sure to throw it into 720p)

http://idisk.mac.com/ctopper//Public/GNS 530.jpg


.

[dmr727]

^^^ that's a good looking 530 simulation, but I have to admit, the resolution on that display looks far higher than that of a real 530. Does it accurately simulate how frustratingly slow the damn thing is too? ;)



Anyone correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that X-Plane has the best flight modeling. It is the only home simulator that calculates drag based on the shape of the airplane. Most home simulators like the MS product just rely on performance charts.

I once ran into a guy that helps to model one of the high end FSX addons, and that's pretty much how he explained it. He said the look-up tables in FSX can get pretty detailed, so as long as a designer takes the time to match them up with the real aircraft, it should be realistic. Where X-Plane has the advantage is that all its aircraft should be realistic across the board.

[Topper]

^^^ that's a good looking 530 simulation, but I have to admit, the resolution on that display looks far higher than that of a real 530. Does it accurately simulate how frustratingly slow the damn thing is too? ;)

You caught me. I did a full screen capture but it didn't look good so I manipulated it in Photoshop.

It's not slow by any means. But I am using a powerful computer and video card. My GTX 285 works beautifully with Windows.

[dmr727]

It's not slow by any means. But I am using a powerful computer and video card. My GTX 285 works beautifully with Windows.

Heh - I actually meant the real Garmin 530. Its response time is a bit slow to user inputs - only a fraction of a second, but long enough to be somewhat annoying. I was wondering if the simulation built that small delay in as well.

[Topper]

Heh - I actually meant the real Garmin 530. Its response time is a bit slow to user inputs - only a fraction of a second, but long enough to be somewhat annoying. I was wondering if the simulation built that small delay in as well.

I did not know the real Garmin 530 lagged a little bit.
But I don't find any response time delay with the Garmin 530 in X-Plane.
I've got a couple forums that you could ask that question if you want to.

[dmr727]

I've got a couple forums that you could ask that question if you want to.

Nah - I was just bitching. :D

[Les Kern]

Check out Flight Gear.
http://flightgear.org/
Still looking it over, but it appears to be excellent.

[rsbrauer]

I've been a pilot for almost a decade and I've spent tons of money on flight simulators. When I switched to Mac computers I had a really difficult time finding a great simulator. The one I'm using now is called Pro Flight Simulator, and you can download it online. Check it out.

[dimme]

I've been a pilot for almost a decade and I've spent tons of money on flight simulators. When I switched to Mac computers I had a really difficult time finding a great simulator. The one I'm using now is called Pro Flight Simulator, and you can download it online. Check it out.

Odd another post from a new member singing the praises of Pro Flight Simulator. The paid version of the free open source flight Sim.

[maccompaq]

I've been a pilot for almost a decade and I've spent tons of money on flight simulators. When I switched to Mac computers I had a really difficult time finding a great simulator. The one I'm using now is called Pro Flight Simulator, and you can download it online. Check it out.

How much are you being paid to hawk free software for pay?

[LOLaMac]

Odd another post from a new member singing the praises of Pro Flight Simulator. The paid version of the free open source flight Sim.

To me, reading these 'pro flight' advertisements.....errr, posts, and checking out the guys little links in his sig (doubt that's even his picture), the whole thing gives me the same vibe as WoW gold sellers/account hackers. Has anyone actually bought this thing?

Also, just doing a quick google search, the first links that come up are not reviews from notable gaming or sim specialist sites, but rather short "reviews", some of them in horrible english, on no name sites with absolutely no useful information about the game, other than "is good......buy now." Smells like a scam to me.

[jlc1978]

Odd another post from a new member singing the praises of Pro Flight Simulator. The paid version of the free open source flight Sim.


Yea. It's as if someone greps "flight simulator" and then responding.

[Sniper34d]

Hi guys, I first read this thread about 2 months ago when I first bought a Mac and have decided to now sign up and share my thoughts. So go easy on me as this is my first post lol :D

Anyway apart from Call of Duty on my xbox, I only play flight sim games on my PC... until I bought a Mac that is. I will never go back to PC now or their OS but that means I cannot play MSFS doh.

So I have been through all of the free mac flight sims and some of the paid ones and noticed that like you say above people keep spamming this Pro flight version. So I bought it....not the full thing though, just the $49 version... Its alright, I prefer MS versions but its the best Mac compatible one I reckon. Im building an "unbiased" review of it as we speak and putting it on my mac blog so let me know what you you think. (see sig)

Cheers

[maccompaq]

Hi guys, I first read this thread about 2 months ago when I first bought a Mac and have decided to now sign up and share my thoughts. So go easy on me as this is my first post lol :D

Anyway apart from Call of Duty on my xbox, I only play flight sim games on my PC... until I bought a Mac that is. I will never go back to PC now or their OS but that means I cannot play MSFS doh.

So I have been through all of the free mac flight sims and some of the paid ones and noticed that like you say above people keep spamming this Pro flight version. So I bought it....not the full thing though, just the $49 version... Its alright, I prefer MS versions but its the best Mac compatible one I reckon. Im building an "unbiased" review of it as we speak and putting it on my mac blog so let me know what you you think. (see sig)

Cheers

Here we go again! Another spammer.

[Sniper34d]

Easy - Im only doing a review of it lol. Im not a fake made up person lol

I would even recommend MS Flight sim over it. UNLESS you "want" to stay in mac osx

[jolanta]

There is a new Pro Flight Simulator - Real-Life Flying with Accurate WorldWide Scenery Based On Actual Terrain With Over 20,000 of the World's Real Airports & 120+ Different Planes!!! :cool:

http://tinyurl.com/46fvyc3

[Huntn]

There is a new Pro Flight Simulator - Real-Life Flying with Accurate WorldWide Scenery Based On Actual Terrain With Over 20,000 of the World's Real Airports & 120+ Different Planes!!! :cool:

http://tinyurl.com/46fvyc3

I looked through your link. If you scroll down about 2/3 to the bottom, the 'Still Not Convinced' screen is inaccurate. Proflight advertises over 150 aircraft and 20k airports and world scenery and claims no other home sim has this. X-Plane does. Not only that X-Plane has thousands of modeled aircraft and real time weather.

The other question would be what kind of flight model that ProFlight employs? X-Plane computes flight characteristics/drag based on airfoil shape. Most home sims, use tables to determine flight performance.

One aspect of the program that would give it an advantage over X-Plane would be if it had real dog fighting with damage modeling. Do you know if it does?
Thanks.

[Sniper34d]

I had a combat flight sim bonus program with the Pro Sim. Its not bad for a freebie and yes it has damage...but not modelling changes.

[Huntn]

I had a combat flight sim bonus program with the Pro Sim. Its not bad for a freebie and yes it has damage...but not modelling changes.

While it's nice to pieces flying off the sucker you are shoot'n up, damage is enough if it results in a shot down enemy, thereby confirming your supremacy. :) I wonder what kind of multiplayer it supports (rhetorical question)?

[BubbaMc]

DCS A-10

/thread

[Sniper34d]

While it's nice to pieces flying off the sucker you are shoot'n up, damage is enough if it results in a shot down enemy, thereby confirming your supremacy. :) I wonder what kind of multiplayer it supports (rhetorical question)?

Yep - you certainly get smoke and explosions :)

[Sniper34d]

Flight Sim (http://sniper34d.flightsim.hop.clickbank.net) looks fairly similar also. Anyone tried it? Website looks a little like x plane!

[dimme]

Well as far as eye candy goes none of these come close to MSFX. But I think it great we get choices. That will spark innovation.

[Sniper34d]

I set it to real time last night and flew from london to Lisbon, time flies when your having fun (and have a dominos pizza by your side)

[harrystrike]

my personal opinion would be this http://3b762i5kr9gg4weayfigt0oi9e.hop.clickbank.net/

it puts the other flight simulators to shame

[dimme]

my personal opinion would be this http://3b762i5kr9gg4weayfigt0oi9e.hop.clickbank.net/

it puts the other flight simulators to shame

Save your money and get the free version
http://macflightgear.sourceforge.net/home/

[SolRayz]

Microsoft Flight Sim 11 now renamed Microsoft Flight looks promising and the graphics are visually shocking, stunning, amazing etc etc...:eek::D

You will need quad at minimum for this behemoth....lol

http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/

[JackAxe]

Anybody else here use a Track IR? :)

[decafjava]

Il-2 Series full stop. Assuming you like the old warbirds.

[Sniper34d]

Anyone tried anything else yet?

[Huntn]

To all, be careful when clicking on newbie links.

It is a strange looking URL. Did you try it? :)

[dimme]

+1 for Xplane

[PowerGamerX]

It's not too much of a simulator, but, I loved Combat Flight Simulator 3. I can't think of a better combat flight game thats not arcade style but isn't so much of a sim that it's frustrating. It's a bit old now but I still have fun with it :)

I've always preferred Flight Simulator over X-Plane. However, if you just want a simulator, X-Plane is good. I find FS to be much more fun though. I know some people want the most authentic experience you can get, however, sometimes, when you're in a commercial airplane low through the buildings in LA, a little voice pops in your head and says "Do a barrel roll!"...

[maccompaq]

Haha I havent try it out yet but I feel this link below http://onemansblog.com/2007/02/08/top-free-flight-simulators/ really talks about the top free flight simulator.
Hmm on the second thought I think I should check on X Plane and compare the differences haha XD

Does anyone really want to take the chance of clicking "HERE" when a newbie is involved?

[London11]

do not understand why the x-plane or fsx, do not have a real PANaroma the trees, houses the airport, etc ... unrealistic. Pls sr graphic designer can you work a bit more hard and make it come true?. thanks

[Topper]

do not understand why the x-plane or fsx, do not have a real PANaroma the trees, houses the airport, etc ... unrealistic. Pls sr graphic designer can you work a bit more hard and make it come true?. thanks

X-Plane 10, which is due out near the end of the year, will be better.

Example:

http://idisk.mac.com/ctopper//Public/X-Plane.jpg

[RollTide]

I've kinda beat a dead horse but this game is amazing. Complex engine management has had even experienced simmers grounded or blowing many merlins(not to mention spewing oil everywhere). Prop pitch, mixture, etc. etc. etc. all have to be done by the player with certain features on. VERY frustrating/rewarding experience just to get off the ground. Gauges work... sometimes as they did in real life. Lots of trial and error and reading up on individual planes.

This is intended for combat, but many people spend hours just flying around, look up videos of London, there are plenty. It is stunning to see for yourself. The shadows in the cockpit put other flight sims to shame. At night you can more easily see the fire coming from the exhaust.... very cool.

The game is new and buggy, but patches have been coming out every week and it is getting much better. Check out this footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LMftuei6Fw&feature=player_embedded#at=23

And this was done by a player not the devs!

Sorry about the attachments, I got carried away.:o

[RollTide]

As soon as the new iMac comes out I'll post on here how well it plays. Hopefully there will be a decent graphics upgrade for the 21.5 incher.

[FeminaAthur]

Which flight simulator game is the best in you opinion ?

The Best Flight Simulator For Mac (http://flightsimulatorplus.com/) - http://flightsimulatorplus.com/:apple:

The most comprehensive and realistic flight simulation program in existence today! Including 150+ aircraft models and 20,000 airports.

[Topper]

.
You are a waste of a human being!

http://www.myspace.com/490745663

http://twitter.com/#!/Feminaathur

http://www.squidoo.com/lensmasters/Femina

http://internetbasedkids.com/2009/07/what-is-squidoo/

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=%22flight+simulator+plus%22+is+it+a+scam+or+real+deal&aq=&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=eae50598965cbe94&biw=1472&bih=1048

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=%22flight+simulator+plus%22+reviews&aq=&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=eae50598965cbe94&biw=1472&bih=1048



I did a Google search for "flight simulator plus" review.
I got page after page after page of bogus reviews.
I did a Google search for "Flight Simulator Plus" is it a scam or real deal.
Again page after page of bogus reviews.
These people are so dumb that most of the bogus web sites have the same background music.

The world has become a very scary place when "Flight Simulator Plus" can
use the advertising tricks that they do.

[maccompaq]

Thanks Topper for revealing the trash advertising. Those people should be banned immediately.

[omnimoeish]

I have Microsoft Flight Sim X Gold and like 5 add ons that I can remember (Just Flight Traffic, REX and 3 ORBX), I'm playing it on my Windows 7 gaming rig. I am going to try X-plane 9 soon, but I think it will be interesting to see "X-plane 10" vs "Microsoft Flight". Both have no release dates but should be completed within a year or so. I think they'll be written a lot better to take more advantage of 4-8 cores I'd hope.

[Topper]

...but I think it will be interesting to see "X-plane 10" vs "Microsoft Flight". Both have no release dates but should be completed within a year or so. I think they'll be written a lot better to take more advantage of 4-8 cores I'd hope.

The way it normally works is the people who started out using MSFS, will prefer MS Flight and the people who used X-Plane first, will still prefer X-Plane.

X-Plane 10 should be released before the end of the year but I'm not sure when.
They say the reason it is taking so long is because it's a complete overhaul.
And it is supposed to take advantage of multiple cores.

"In a sentence, X-Plane 10 will have a plausible, scalable, dynamic world. Enter the plausible world for X-Plane 10. We will build every city in X-Plane from the first blades of grass upwards.

Here is how it works: We will start off with grass or field textures for the entire world, including the cities, and then build up from that. We will take each individual parking lot and place it on top of the grass. We will place each building on the parking lot, in 3-D. At no point will the painting of the roof of a building appear on the ground. This will never happen. Every building will be a real 3-D building, planted by an algorithm in a location that is at least physically possible."

I really like using Reality XP's Garmin GNS 530 WAAS. It is extremely realistic.
"Fly This Sim" has a very realistic Garmin G1000 also. But you really should have two computers and two monitors to use it.

Not much word on Microsoft Flight features. I know you can either fly solo or fly it with other enthusiasts.

X-Plane 10 747-400 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Ox--mzFok&feature=player_embedded)

X-Plane 10 release date (http://www.x-plane.com/blog/2011/03/v10-release-date-mania/)
.

[akdj]

Thanks for the links..>X10 is looking very, VERY Cool!!!

I'm excited for both...MS Flight and XPlane10. I grew up playing MSFlight Sim, initially...bizarrely enough, I started playing MSFlight Sim before XPlane, and BEFORE Microsoft even had a OS:) I started playing MSFlight on my Apple IIe! From there...I played a lot of MS Flight sim through the 90s...and grabbed a hold of XPlane in the early 2000s...about the same time I switched over to OSX...for good. I've maintained a partition on my HDD of my Mac Pro for Windows JUST for MSFlight sim and Adobe Audition. Now that Audition is available for Mac...and XPlane 10 is forthcoming, I may need to reevaluate the need to continue using Windows...however, the new MS Flight looks intriguing as well. Not sure about the "Commerce" or "Market" jargon, but we'll see.

Thanks again for the links.

Someone else mentioned it earlier...I, too, enjoyed the MS Combat flight sim games...as well, the F-22 sim that came out 10-15 years ago:) Just seems the decent ones faded away when the console games (XBox/PS2 and 3/Wii) and the handheld PSP, Gameboy, DS, etc...hit the market. It's too bad, as it seems with this thread anyway, that there is STILL a decent Flight Sim crowd out there. And now that most of us are in our 40s and 50s, we have more disposable income to throw at the hardware. It seems a fine time to develop the "Ultimate" flight sim.

I'm really looking forward to both XPlane and MS Flight's forthcoming software. Very exciting times...as well, one can now build an entire airplane sim in his/her garage...with all of the options on the market for yolks, pedals, throttles, radio panels and instrument clusters. Cool Stuff:)

J

[Topper]

.
"I've maintained a partition on my HDD of my Mac Pro for Windows JUST for MSFlight sim and Adobe Audition. Now that Audition is available for Mac...and XPlane 10 is forthcoming, I may need to reevaluate the need to continue using Windows."

I'd still use Windows for two reasons:
The flt sims will most likely get better performance under Windows than with OS X.
I know this to be a fact with a GTX 285 and X-Plane 9 but maybe things will change with X-Plane 10. But I doubt it.
The add-ons that I use are PC only.
.

[Tholian]

Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of micro$oft but they have been developing and releasing FS for some time and have progressively improved a program which no one has been able to successfully compete with, IMO. Ive been a big fan since MS 4.0, so I have to disagree with others about X-Plane. I've tried it. Its ok. I admit both have there advantages and disadvantages, but as far as customization, planes, scenery, fun balanced with overall realism, FSX takes the cake.


A long time ago I loved Sub-Logic's flight sim on the Apple ][. Just curious, but didn't MS buy that company and turn the DOS version into FS?

[techconc]

The best flight simulator is Flightsimulatorplus.com... okay, just kidding. Considering that I just registered, I thought I'd have a little fun.

My flight sim days started on the old Apple //e using the Sub Logic flight simulator. Yes, wireframes were all the rage back then. Flight Simulator 2 actually had full color and it would render a frame every few seconds... If I recall, this was eventually purchased by Microsoft and became the basis for the Microsoft flight simulator.

I agree whole heartedly with those who loved A-10 from Parsoft. That was lots of fun. The F-18 series from GraphSim was very good as well.

Then, for a while, I was getting into the Jane's series of flight sims on the PC. Other PC favorites include Secret weapons of the Luftwaffe.

For general flight sims, I've shifted from MS Flight Sim to X-Plane. Initially, I did this due to the cross platform nature of X-Plane, but I came to appreciate the flight models better in X-Plane.

One flight sim on the Mac that I really miss though is Sky Fighters 1945. The author unfortunately died in 2009. The latest version works in Leopard, but does not work in Snow Leopard (or Lion I presume). I even kept a Leopard partition just for this flight sim. Don Hill Jr. did a great job with this and he was very responsive to e-mails, etc. I've played this sim for countless hours and his loss is a real tragedy to the Mac flight sim community.

[avro707]

Probably MS FLight Sim X - because of one addon:

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-8-13_11-58-25-664.jpghttp://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-8-13_12-36-1-413.jpg
http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-8-6_22-12-55-265.jpghttp://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-8-13_21-20-43-291.jpg

Apologies about the displays inside that plane, they're quite dirty with fingerprints. :D It's amazing how good that new PMDG B737NG is. It really is awesome. Systems are excellent, and it generally seems very realistic.

I'm really looking forward to both XPlane and MS Flight's forthcoming software. Very exciting times...as well, one can now build an entire airplane sim in his/her garage...with all of the options on the market for yolks, pedals, throttles, radio panels and instrument clusters. Cool Stuff:)

J

People already do that with MS FS2004 and FSX. The B737 simulator at Darling Harbour, Sydney is a FS9 based thing using the old PMDG B737NG. That was an addon I never had. I however won't be going that far. :)

I do have a Concorde for FSX, the FSLabs one that is also extremely good - but it's no easy thing, you've got to operate it like the real one. It has all the characteristics of the real thing, including the surge if you throttle back the engines quickly at high speeds. The first time you encounter that, you wonder "what the hell was that" - but then checking the flight manuals reveals the reason why.

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-7-29_23-41-47-118.jpg

It's definitely not a plane for the beginner. I actually have the Air France and BA manuals for that plane (much prefer the Air France ones) and you can follow them very closely.

While I've tried numerous flight sims, I go back to the ones with the very fully simulated add-on planes. The eye-candy doesn't matter that much - I like planes with all the working systems of the real thing.

[joemin]

Just purchased what I thought was a good flight simulator. I am using an iMac OS X with a 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor, 4GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM.
Downloaded it and it came up Flight Gear. I tried to start it and it try's to load and initialize and then goes back to start up page. I have been reading up on ProFlight Simulator and some feel it's a scam. Have I reacted to hastily and have I gotten burned on this purchase or is there a fix. Would love someone to help.

[AndyMoore]

FlightGear is an open-source flight simulator that was started in 1996. It is released under the GNU General Public License v2, and as such, it is free to use, modify and distribute with few restrictions. It has been developed with the collaboration of a large number of individuals over the last 12 years. FlightGear can be downloaded at no cost from http://www.flightgear.org.

FlightProSim is a commercial product very heavily based on FlightGear. Investigation by a number of the FlightGear developers has found no difference between this and the FlightGear v1.9.1 release other than a change of name. FlightProSim is in no way endorsed or supported by the core FlightGear development team.

Taken from FlightProSim Wiki (http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=FlightProSim).

[Cloudsurfer]

X-plane is much more realistic, but Flight Sim is much more polished.

X-Plane is not an out of the box experience. You have to add on a lot of stuff to get it to work just like Flight Sim in terms of eye candy. There is no default scenery (or at least very little), there is very little wide screen support, no flexing wings support (as far as I know), default aircraft set is very laughable and yet a full installation would set you back 60GB. No game shoild take 60Gb of space, especially not in today's costly SSD era.

I prefer Flight Sim any day because of its completeness, but the flight physics are complete crap. I guess someone should step forward and create the ultimate flight sim combined with features from both.

[akdj]

Probably MS FLight Sim X - because of one addon:


...People already do that with MS FS2004 and FSX. The B737 simulator at Darling Harbour, Sydney is a FS9 based thing using the old PMDG B737NG. That was an addon I never had. I however won't be going that far. :)

I do have a Concorde for FSX, the FSLabs one that is also extremely good - but it's no easy thing, you've got to operate it like the real one. It has all the characteristics of the real thing, including the surge if you throttle back the engines quickly at high speeds. The first time you encounter that, you wonder "what the hell was that" - but then checking the flight manuals reveals the reason why.

http://www.totalnfs.net/c_d_files/2011-7-29_23-41-47-118.jpg

It's definitely not a plane for the beginner. I actually have the Air France and BA manuals for that plane (much prefer the Air France ones) and you can follow them very closely.

While I've tried numerous flight sims, I go back to the ones with the very fully simulated add-on planes. The eye-candy doesn't matter that much - I like planes with all the working systems of the real thing.

LOL...Yep, that's why I wrote it...People definitely ARE doing that with MSFS 04 and X...in fact, I'm one of them:)

It's really the one constant throughout my computing heritage...I started, at 16 years old in 1985/6 with an Apple IIe playing MSFS before "Windows" was around! From there, due to the adaptation of MS Windows in the corporate culture I decided to pursue, I had to leave Apple for the next 15 years. I continued to play Flight Sim...and still have the older copies of Flight Sim including; MSFS 2.0, 3.0, 5 and 5.1, '95, '98, 2000 and 2002....and to this day, I continue to use 2004 (COF) and FSX.

Since making the (permanent) switch to Mac about 6 years ago, I gave XPlane a spin...and I LOVE it! It's Awesome as far as flight physics are concerned (I'm a private pilot with my instrument and multi engine rating). You're absolutely correct about the "Eye Candy"...however, with XPlane, the community is incredible!!! The downloads are endless...whether it's scenery or specific aircraft you're looking for, you can find it. As well, I like the aircraft builder in XPlane much better than MSFS-X. Like you though, it's a toss of the coin which sim I use...and why I choose that sim at a certain time. I DO like the eye candy...and I've invested (over the past decade) a mini fortune on add-ons both for scenery and aircraft. Certainly one of the coolest additions to Computer flight-"simming", for me anyway...has been the internet and the ability to connect with other "Sim" folks that have MUCH more time than I to build aircraft and design airports and scenery...as well as ATC these days. Way, WAY too cool!!!

As far as taking up the garage...yep, that's me:) My wife has been very tolerant of my sim hobby...I haven't put the cash in to an actual "Home sim" setup like this... http://www.flyingcity.net/index.php?route=product/product&path=25&product_id=54&gclid=CP_g_vmX6KoCFRZ3gwodUyfU6w

But I will when the next/new line of sims comes out...XPlane 10 and MS "Flight"...I think it's time one of the camps hooks up with Google and Google Earth:) Seems they've already done the leg work for actual world scenery...Imagine being able to fly by your house, with your vehicle in the driveway...dog in the backyard, etc.

For those of us that HAVE been Simming since the early days of "Stick-Scenery", the technology has come a LONG way...in fact, playing X-Plane on my iPad is really friggin' cool...much better than just 10 years ago on a home PC! Imagine what the next decade holds??

Jer

[avro707]

I'd personally love to have a home simulator setup, but it's too expensive now. :(

I'd move simulators just to stay with specific addons that I like. I actually don't fly any of the default planes that come with Flight Simulator, only addons. It's also the only reason I hang on to Windows.

If those addons I like went over to X Plane, I'd probably move to XPlane as well.

People have already hooked up Google Maps and/or other mapping facilities to Flight Simulator, I've tried it - but ultimately it's not that convincing when it takes a lot of time for the textures to update (in my experience). It may be better for others.

I hope for computer technology to catch up with flight simulator capabilities, then it's possible to push the details further. At the moment, I can't use ground traffic - it taxes my Mac Pro too much, but everything else can run full detail. :) Or maybe that's the software (FSX) needs to make better use of our modern computers (more likely).

I prefer Flight Sim any day because of its completeness, but the flight physics are complete crap. I guess someone should step forward and create the ultimate flight sim combined with features from both.

I believe that it's already possible to do your own physics for Flight Simulator, some addons already bypass entire functions of FSX physics/simulation to do their own more sophisticated simulations. BBC had an episode recently showing a B747 simulation that used FS for graphics, and something else for physics / simulation. If I'm not mistaken, that was probably intended when FSX was developed - if the default features weren't adequate - the addon developer was to do their own. When you see the work that goes into the high-end addons - it's hardly surprising they are charging more than the cost of the basic Flight Sim software. They are very sophisticated products.

[Hallivand]

I'm astonished nobody has mentioned the IL-2 Sturmovik series, which are pretty awesome if your interested in some WWII dogfighting. Plus there's a descent online community and multplayer if so inclined. Might not be the most realistic flight physics, but the damage effects are unparalleled in any game I've seen so far.

I haven't played the latest sequel, Birds of Prey but the older ones I'd highly recommend such as IL-2 1946 and IL-2 Forgotten Battles. Mind you it's Windows only, but it definitely worth giving a bash :D

[InuNacho]

I've looked at IL-2 Sturmovik when it was first released, saw the bad reviews because of bugs and stuff, and never looked at it again. Are the bugs fixed?
I played the very watered down DS version and though it was pretty cool.

[tinktank]

x plane :D

[Topper]

Good news for me!
X-Plane 10 is finalized and will be available on December 7th.

X-Plane 10 (http://www.x-plane.com/)

Screenshots (http://www.x-plane.com/x-plane_10_multimedia/)

[Les Kern]

Consider FlighGear.
You can make it as pretty as you want.

http://www.flightgear.org/about/gallery-v2-4/

[admanimal]

"Pro Flight Simulator" is just scammers trying to sell Flight Gear, which is free and open source.

[Topper]

See, the think is, as soon as someone uses a link shortener in a forum post where unlike Twitter, you're not limited to 141 characters, I instantly think SPAM or worse and will not click the link.

It's a nasty, scheming, trick used to catch new and unwary users.

Nah, you are probably wrong. I am sure it is just a coincidence that the person became a member yesterday...:rolleyes:

Here is the best part: Pro Flight Simulator is just a rebranded copy of FlightGear.
FlightGear is free (which means it is priced correctly).
The wonderful people at Pro Flight Simulator want you to pay $67 for something you can get for free.
There really is no justice in this world!
.

[existanz]

I have both fsx, xplane and pro flight sim installed, overall pfs gives you the most realism and best graphics with the lowest frame hit.
www.bestflightsimulator.us < i've made a free PDF you can download here if you are interested in flight simulation, also releasing more aviation guides periodically!

[MarsUltor]

I liked Falcon 4.0 unfortunately it was never released on OSX. It was more than a flight sim, it was mission based fighter pilot adventure in South Korea...very cool.

It was released on os9 though, and it was awesome... although the instruction manual was about 500+ pages

[Huntn]

It was released on os9 though, and it was awesome... although the instruction manual was about 500+ pages

It *was* the coolest flight sim I've ever had the pleasure of flying although it was so involved (as in realistic). The weapon systems were outstanding. I flew one mission but got very frustrated with how hard the damn thing was to land and gave up on it. I know that sounds shallow, but the missions were really more work than I wanted to invest in a game.

My biggest complaint with flight sims are when they try to turn you into a one man band. Dogfight in, kill the SAMS, drop bombs on the target, dogfight out. If you are part of a strike force, you should only have to concentrate on one mission.

[Topper]

I have both fsx, xplane and pro flight sim installed, overall pfs gives you the most realism and best graphics with the lowest frame hit.
www.bestflightsim.us < i've made a free PDF you can download here if you are interested in flight simulation, also releasing more aviation guides periodically!

Another hit and run artist.
Pro Flight Sim is just a rebranding of free open-source simulator "FlightGear" except Pro Flight Sim wants money.
Legally there is nothing that can be done against you.
But you are a morally bankrupt SOB.

[soulreaver99]

http://suvudu.com/files/2010/09/tie-fighter.jpg

Hands down... TIE FIGHTER. I was never until flight sims but this is one of the best games I've ever played.

[BubbaMc]

Image (http://suvudu.com/files/2010/09/tie-fighter.jpg)

Hands down... TIE FIGHTER. I was never until flight sims but this is one of the best games I've ever played.

Try Xwing Alliance.

[existanz]

Another hit and run artist.
Pro Flight Sim is just a rebranding of free open-source simulator "FlightGear" except Pro Flight Sim wants money.
Legally there is nothing that can be done against you.
But you are a morally bankrupt SOB.

Topper perhaps you needed to spend a bit more time on that link before running your mouth off about me being morally bankrupt etc etc etc
There is a fully packaged flight sim for download but more importantly a free pilots mini course that I created, this is offered irrespective of a flight sim purchase and took me a lot of time to create... Additionally I am offering support in setting up ANY flight sim on a home computer. Yes some people will buy the flight sim and this is what makes it worth my time however I am not forcing people into anything they don't want.

[Topper]

Topper perhaps you needed to spend a bit more time on that link before running your mouth off about me being morally bankrupt etc etc etc
There is a fully packaged flight sim for download but more importantly a free pilots mini course that I created, this is offered irrespective of a flight sim purchase and took me a lot of time to create... Additionally I am offering support in setting up ANY flight sim on a home computer. Yes some people will buy the flight sim and this is what makes it worth my time however I am not forcing people into anything they don't want.

I don't trust you any further than I can throw you.
Your link doesn't work. It shows server not found.
I love your statement: "I have both fsx, xplane and pro flight sim installed, overall pfs gives you the most realism and best graphics with the lowest frame hit." You are not too biased, are you?!
I've seen your web sites touting Pro Flight Simulator. Again, not too biased, are you? Existanz (http://existanz.hubpages.com/hub/The-Best-Flight-Simulator-For-Realism)
The people on forums of flightsim.com don't share you enthusiasm for Pro Flight Simulator. Why is that? Because it is a ripoff?

[existanz]

I don't trust you any further than I can throw you.
Your link doesn't work. It shows server not found.
I love your statement: "I have both fsx, xplane and pro flight sim installed, overall pfs gives you the most realism and best graphics with the lowest frame hit." You are not too biased, are you?!
I've seen your web sites touting Pro Flight Simulator. Again, not too biased, are you? Existanz (http://existanz.hubpages.com/hub/The-Best-Flight-Simulator-For-Realism)
The people on forums of flightsim.com don't share you enthusiasm for Pro Flight Simulator. Why is that? Because it is a ripoff?

Yes I'm biased, I have bought all three sims, I cant comment on PFS being a repackaged sim as I haven't downloaded flightgear which you attest to being the same thing. Something I intend to download shortly and see for myself! I love microsoft flight sim, and have been using it since '95, i'm not an xplane fan, the scenery i thought was lacking and the flight model wasn't what I had hoped it would be, fsx is fine although to run it with all the addons i want is impossible on my computer. I thought pro flight sim was worth the cost I paid for it... which is why I promote it! Thats not a crime or even morally corrupt last time I checked. I often promote products that I have bought if I think they are good. It's... That... Simple... mate...

Again you didn't read my post... and yes my link was incorrect, http://www.bestflightsimulator.us perhaps you would like to grab the ebook I made (no cost to you) so don't worry it's not a "rip off" and see if it is a waste of everyones time?

[MacsRgr8]

X-Plane 10 is of course the best flight sim for OS X.... IF your Mac can handle it.
Quad Core CPU is quite necessary.
512 MB VRAM really is quite necessary.
4 GB RAM is quite necessary.

IF you have close to double what is "quite necessary" ;) (i.e. a fat Mac Pro or Core i7 iMac with a 1 GB grfx card) X-Plane 10 with HDR rendering on is quite stunning!
Adding some payware and freeware scenery and planes makes it awesome.

If you play X-Plane 10 and need some extra's, here are some hints:
- Get yourself registered at http://x-plane.org/
- Download the excellent free Boeing 737 (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=15544)
- Get Morten's AI Planes (http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showuser=2374). Click on "Files". These extra planes designed specifically to use as AI planes (other planes taxiing and flying automatically nearby you which increases the realism hugely) hardly have any impact on FPS.
You can easily install and use > 10 of these planes!
- Search that site for some very nice scenery. Free Airports like EHAM, EDDM, are superb. Other free airports like EGLL, KJFK look good enough. Scenery add ons like Manhattan really make it great.
- Also on that site you can get nice pay ware scenery airports and planes.

Disclaimer: I didn't just sign up to promote http://x-plane.org/ (:))

[Topper]

Disclaimer: I didn't just sign up to promote http://x-plane.org/ (:))

I'll be keeping my eye on you, buddy. :)
Unfortunately I'm stuck with X-Plane 10 under bootcamp because I need the Garmin instrumentation.
I'd actually buy that X-Plane 10 Professional-Use USB Key if it ran a EFIS App like application to very accurately simulate a Garmin 1000.

[Jazzy Jase]

Falcon 4.0 is available on the Mac app store. Has anyone purchased it? It's an old game, so is it still any good?

[BubbaMc]

Falcon 4.0 is available on the Mac app store. Has anyone purchased it? It's an old game, so is it still any good?

Only one of the finest flight sims currently available.

I'd get the PC version though, and one of the third party mods.

[Jazzy Jase]

Only one of the finest flight sims currently available.

I'd get the PC version though, and one of the third party mods.

Thanks I'm definitely considering buying it. I don't have Windows on my Mac so the App Store version is the one I'd go for. Are the 3rd party mods absolutely necessary?