The Great Debate: X-Plane or MFSX?

The Great Debate: X-Plane or MFSX?

  • Total voters
    43
HighFlyingA380

HighFlyingA380

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,035
Location
St. Louis
Display Name
Jim F.
Home Airfield
KSTL
What's your favorite and why?

I've been using MFS for years, with no experience with X-Plane. It's been suggested to me that I switch over to X-Plane. Would that really be helpful and worth the money? (I use the sim mainly to just keep my proficiency up with instrument flying and procedures.)

If I were to switch, Does all the Saitek hardware interact well? Does X-Plane need a better computer? My current one is enough to get the aircraft realism high, but the terrain textures suffer. (Not that big of a deal because I focus on actually flying.) If X-Plane needed much more computing power, then my realism and frame rate would suffer. If it doesn't need as much, then I definitely wouldn't mind some better graphics.

Thanks!
 
Flight Simulator really helped me on my first solo cross country landing at a towered airport by giving me the exact radio calls that would be made. Quite remarkable.

It actually seems better for the more advanced stuff such as IFR approaches than anything it could teach about VFR flight.

Also, its fun to turn on the real weather at some part of the country that's having a hurricane or blizzard conditions. Flying in other parts of the world is fun, too -- Paris anyone?
 
tinerj said:
Flight Simulator really helped me on my first solo cross country landing at a towered airport by giving me the exact radio calls that would be made. Quite remarkable.

It actually seems better for the more advanced stuff such as IFR approaches than anything it could teach about VFR flight.

Also, its fun to turn on the real weather at some part of the country that's having a hurricane or blizzard conditions. Flying in other parts of the world is fun, too -- Paris anyone?
Click to expand...


Wait till you start practicing instrument stuff. They really help you get the process down with some youtube & IFR study course research on procedures
 
MSFS is my choice. I have X-Plane but have never been able to get it set up like I want it.
 
I use FSX. I tried X-Plane 9, but honestly I just wasn't that impressed with it.
 
I feel that Xplane better simulates crosswind landings and visual ground rush.
 
Tarheel Pilot said:
I use FSX. I tried X-Plane 9, but honestly I just wasn't that impressed with it.
Click to expand...
Any details on why? I've only flown the current version briefly, but so far I'm quite impressed.

X-Plane is now up to version 10 and is still actively supported by the developer and the sim enthusiast community.

MFSX might still have a strong user community, but MS closed down development two years or more ago, and there is no indication they'll change their mind.

Like Meigs field that any MFS user from the 80s or 90s remembers well, MFS is history.
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
What's your favorite and why?

I've been using MFS for years, with no experience with X-Plane. It's been suggested to me that I switch over to X-Plane. Would that really be helpful and worth the money? (I use the sim mainly to just keep my proficiency up with instrument flying and procedures.)

If I were to switch, Does all the Saitek hardware interact well? Does X-Plane need a better computer? My current one is enough to get the aircraft realism high, but the terrain textures suffer. (Not that big of a deal because I focus on actually flying.) If X-Plane needed much more computing power, then my realism and frame rate would suffer. If it doesn't need as much, then I definitely wouldn't mind some better graphics.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I've used both over the years and enjoy them for what they are. In my experience, X-plane feels more fluid and closer to the real thing. The flight models and instrumentation is more convincing to me.

I don't sim much these days due to lack of time (gotta fix that), so I haven't upgraded to X-Plane 10. XP-9 runs great on my latest build...core i5-2500k, 16GB, GTX-580 gpu, Windows 7-64bit. Multi-monitor setup.

Yes the Saitek hardware works great. I have the Pro Flight yoke & Combat rudder pedals.

X-Plane also detects your computing power and automatically scales scenery to give you the best frame rate (or you can manually tweak settings).

Another thing it does way better than MSFS is, yaw! The rudder is actually functional in the sim! You can slip:yes:
 
I make use of both, and I enjoy spending time working with them, as they sort of meld two worlds that I love: Technology and Aviation. That said, I've tried to put a lot of effort into making X-Plane work for me, since it's still being actively developed. I've fully modeled both BTR and HZR, but it annoys me a bit that you are required to manually download any other airports you want. I realize it's a daunting task to model all airports, but some sort of built-in crowd-sourced airports feature inside of the application would go a long way towards resolving this problem. It seems like every day a new user goes onto the X-Plane forum and asks why there are no buildings at any of the airports.

Another issue I have is that they are using OpenStreetMap data to provide the road and water features inside of the sim. I thought this was a great idea, so I spent many hours updating the area where I live with missing bodies of water, along with streets and buildings, but I've never seen that work incorporated back into the game.

Just so this post doesn't seem too negative, I want to reiterate that I think they're both neat pieces of software and I do try to support both people and companies who devote time, money and energy into creating inspiring aviation related products.
 
One more thing X-plane excels at over MSFS is.......Helicopters! I know you're using it for IFR practice, but if you do get it...and you have a good set of rudder pedals....you've gotta try the choppers:yes:.

I know very little about helicopters and have only been a passenger in one (once), but X-Plane taught me something about VRS (vortex ring state)!:hairraise:
 
When you want a sweet juicy apple, do you want the plastic or the wax one?

For what it's good for, x-plane is probably the better sim. But it's not flying, at best you can use it to practice procedures.

MSFS has become a game, I think you can link the decline in MSFS directly to the first airplane they have you flying. I still remember playing "White knuckle landing at Miegs" and thinking it was crazy. Flying the 737. Then it became a 172. Now you start out flying a micro-trike.

Scenery wise, MSFS is better out of the box. X-plane can be made to be a whole lot better with add ons. I'm still disappointed that X-plane can't put a nuclear power plant in when it's the biggest landmark for 20 miles.
 
I'm a total idiot, but I could never look around like I wanted to in X plane! Seems simple, I couldn't figure it out to my satisfaction. It seems easy to zoom in, zoom out, and look around in FSX.

FSX is just more intuitive to use. I wanted to like X plane, I spent good money on it... but it just sits there, and I use FSX regularly for practicing approaches.
 
I use FSX with VATSIM for "flying" heavy metal, such as the PMDG 737NG and Level D 767, and X-Plane 10 for GA flying, including practicing my scan, approaches, holds, etc.

The VATSIM flying is mostly fire and forget, except for takeoff and landing, but it's a good practice for ATC when there are controllers around.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
 
StevieTimes said:
I'm a total idiot, but I could never look around like I wanted to in X plane! Seems simple, I couldn't figure it out to my satisfaction. It seems easy to zoom in, zoom out, and look around in FSX.

FSX is just more intuitive to use. I wanted to like X plane, I spent good money on it... but it just sits there, and I use FSX regularly for practicing approaches.
Click to expand...

You just need the right tool....TrackIR:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP6LjTWPHO0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
 
roddie said:
I use FSX with VATSIM for "flying" heavy metal, such as the PMDG 737NG and Level D 767, and X-Plane 10 for GA flying, including practicing my scan, approaches, holds, etc.

The VATSIM flying is mostly fire and forget, except for takeoff and landing, but it's a good practice for ATC when there are controllers around.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

FSX & VATSIM kept my head in the ATC game during the years I couldn't do any real flying. Loved the Level D 767.
 
I don't want to get into the debate, I never used X-Plane and only infrequently used FSX but I think it makes sense what some of the people I trust are saying on other forums - vanilla X-Plane is probably better than vanilla FSX in terms of basic aerodynamics but if you look at individual aircraft, specially some of very top-notch custom-made aircraft for the FSX where no effort was spared to achieve the best possible results than those aircraft are much better than their X-Plane counterparts. For example I experienced phenomenal cross-wind landing capabilities using Cessna Skyhawk from Flight1 or their ATR but you take some vanilla FSX aircraft and I agree it is a x-wind dud. Frankly I don't think any of the out-of-the-box FSX aircraft is much good for anything for a serious simmer.
 
Last edited:
redtail said:
FSX & VATSIM kept my head in the ATC game during the years I couldn't do any real flying. Loved the Level D 767.
Click to expand...

For my part, it got me interested and motivated to actually go ahead and get my PPL. Because of VATSIM and some of the FS9/FSX lessons, I was already comfortable with the navigation concepts and radio-work.
 
I've used both. I think X-Plane's modeling of flight dynamics is superior, but FSX works better for me when it comes to simulating G1000 ops in IFR. The built-in Mooney Bravo with G1000 is a workable facsimile of my real-world Acclaim, but I also purchased the Flight 1 Citation Mustang because the G1000 simulation in that product is superb, with most of the buttons and softkeys working just like they do on the real unit. It's great for mastering the workflow behinds holds and approaches.

This is a pretty interesting product based on X-Plane that I've also tried for practicing G1000 IFR ops. The bonus is that you can log the time for currency. One of the flying clubs on my field has one, and since I use their instructors they let me use it: http://flythissim.com/.
 
colojo said:
The built-in Mooney Bravo with G1000 is a workable facsimile of my real-world Acclaim, but I also purchased the Flight 1 Citation Mustang because the G1000 simulation in that product is superb,
Click to expand...
This G1000 Mooney is built into X-Plane, yes-no?
Question about any G1000 in any sim, are they really good - for example do they offer detailed missed approaches, approaches with the next phase annunciated in the navigation bar at the top of the PFD? Not only next waypoints coming but anticipated turns, countdown to turns, holding pattern entries, missed approach segments requiring constant hdg, no turns before certain altitude, etc?? (In other words all the key stuff that comes in Garmin's trainer)
 
Last edited:
I have X-Plane 9 and MSFS X. I've had nothing but trouble every time I've tried to use X-Plane.
 
olasek said:
This G1000 Mooney is built into X-Plane, yes-no?
Question about any G1000 in any sim, are they really good - for example do they offer detailed missed approaches, approaches with the next phase annunciated in the navigation bar at the top of the PFD? Not only next waypoints coming but anticipated turns, countdown to turns, holding pattern entries, missed approach segments requiring constant hdg, no turns before certain altitude, etc?? (In other words all the key stuff that comes in Garmin's trainer)
Click to expand...

I have X-Plane version 8.6 and it does not have a G1000 Mooney. Don't know about the current version.

There's nothing in FSX that rivals the Garmin trainer, but the Citation Mustang I mentioned comes close. I haven't spent enough time with the touch trainer sim to know how detailed it is.
 
OK, you said something about built-in Bravo with G1000, I don't think there is such a thing in FSX either.
 
olasek said:
OK, you said something about built-in Bravo with G1000, I don't think there is such a thing in FSX either.
Click to expand...

Yes, one of the aircraft included with FSX is a Mooney Bravo with a G1000 panel. They have a Bravo with steam gauges, too.

I just spent an hour with the Garmin G1000 trainer and concluded that none of the G1000's in FSX even come close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top