Question for Jomni, PanzersEast or other Flight Simmers

Tuna · December 11, 2013, 06:53:58 AM

I'm planning on getting 2 or 3.. just bought the RealAir Duke Turbine, so I can't be too bad!

Tuna · December 15, 2013, 01:45:54 PM

Was about to 'return' the Milviz Baron B-55, cause of the horrible frame rates once you turn on the Avionics. But found a download for non-reflective guages and that made it tolerable.. I really is a beautiful plane.. I think it's sale ends tonight..

The RealAir Duke Turbine is awesome.. was flying in the snow/rain yesterday and got to enjoy the windshield affect (I don't' think any other plane if have simulates that, it's really cool).. The bird screams.. I have to keep remembering to watch the airspeed so as not to over-stress it!..

Tuna · December 17, 2013, 10:41:23 PM

Well, I took the Airhauler Plunge.. I can see how this will be addictive!

Gad the 172 is slow!!!.. Someone on AVsim described it right - "Like flying a balloon"..

And I guess I was stupid picking my base in the Pacific Northwest with all those mountains! But of course I want to get some use out of my Orbx software. I'll need to pick up the Northern Rockies next while their still on sale...

I love taking off with a fully loaded plane, it's a challenge!

JudgeDredd · December 18, 2013, 02:21:54 AM

lol. Welcome aboard Captain! ;D

bob48 · December 24, 2013, 07:18:34 PM

Maybe not the thing for civil flying, but I've just been looking on the Saitek site at the forthcoming X-55 combo. Very impressive - no price yet - but no doubt it will be expensive. More switches and rotaries than you can shake a propeller blade at!

Jarhead0331 · December 24, 2013, 07:27:28 PM

Quote from: bob48 on December 24, 2013, 07:18:34 PM
Maybe not the thing for civil flying, but I've just been looking on the Saitek site at the forthcoming X-55 combo. Very impressive - no price yet - but no doubt it will be expensive. More switches and rotaries than you can shake a propeller blade at!

It is supposed to be "affordable" so it shouldn't be too bad. My bet is somewhere between $150 and $250.

republic · April 21, 2014, 08:51:19 AM

I recently discovered the Aviatorcast podcast and I've got the civilian flight sim bug (again). I didn't know there were virtual airlines that would be ok with my fickle gaming time. I just assumed they'd be as rigid as other gaming "clans" I've seen.

Toonces · April 21, 2014, 04:42:27 PM

I joined up with Delta Virtual Airlines. There only requirement is that you log onto their website at least once a month. Not a big deal.

I actually wish there was a bit more structure. As it is, you can fly any route (they have a route finder) that Delta flies, in any aircraft in which you're rated. I think I'd prefer being forced to hub somewhere and given a list of required flights.

But, at any rate, it does add structure to the game and some purpose.

WallysWorld · April 21, 2014, 05:47:44 PM

I'm a member of Atlantic Sun Airways and really like the VA as it's schedule is quite extensive with lots of routes to fly and the VA does use pilot ranks that restrict the routes and aircraft you can fly. You get a certificate from the hub manager when you get promoted to a higher rank.

http://www.atlanticsunairways.com/

Skoop · April 21, 2014, 06:14:04 PM

I've always been a military flight sim guy, but I am always seeing great screen shots coming from the civil aviation guys, that it's got me thinking that I should start exploring the more practical side of flight simming. If I was to get started, what is the best civil aviation sim to start with, and which one can evolve to an intermediate level if I like it ? Also which ones have the best and most immersive terrain / environment to fly in?

I've seen some discussion at simHQ about FSX vs Xplane10, but I'm still clueless on which one would be the best.

Tuna · April 21, 2014, 07:09:44 PM

FSX is the prettiest has the best systems.. Can frustrate you trying to get the best performance.. but at times it is beautiful and you can end up spending a LOT on add ons..

I think flight in Xplane is more realistic.. Add on Planes are actually a lil cheaper.. lots of free stuff.. performance is a lot better..

Yskonyn · April 22, 2014, 09:54:22 AM

The aerodynamic model in Xplane is better, but FS still has the most detailed package overall.
Aircraft are much better simulated in FS with clickable cockpits and true 3D pits.
Xplane has the potential, but the availability of decently modelled aircraft is not on par with FS.

PanzersEast · April 22, 2014, 09:58:51 AM

Just so you know..... Flight Simming can be an expensive hobby, but also worth while. I currently fly FSX because of the vast amount of add-ons I own. The flight model in various a/c are not bad and some of the systems are quit in depth. If you decide to go the FSX route, let us know as we can recommend how to get started and what add-ons are good to start with.

Blue Skies

PE

Skoop · April 22, 2014, 12:52:05 PM

After so much time with dcs I would have to say clickable cockpits are a must, especially since I have a touch screen monitor to use. Sounds like fsx is the only one that supports clickable cockpits. I'm thinking a Cessna to start, then a commercial AC like a 727.

On a different note I saw a thread at simhq about the NorCal orbix scenery and saw some screenies of fire fighting AC. With how big air drop firefighting is here in California I'm surprised there's not a dedicated sim for this, or is there?

Tuna · April 22, 2014, 01:22:56 PM

x-plane has clickable cockpits as well.. it's just the level of detail in general some FSX payware add ons have a lot of detail..

If you're gonna get a 172, I would suggest the A2A one.. don't have it yet myself, I know Jomni does.. I have their B-17 and it is awesome detail/immersion wise..

Only Tube Liner I have is the pmdg 737 NGX and it's pretty awesome...

default aircraft that come with FSX.. I dont' think any of us fly, they are very simple..