Author Topic: X-Plane 8.0 Due Soon (Read 1129 times)

Halo · « **on:** November 09, 2004, 05:51:46 PM »

Especially for fans of how aircraft simulators work, here is a little preview of X-Plane 8 due before Thanksgiving:

http://www.x-plane.com/v8descrip.html

ASTAC · « **Reply #1 on:** November 09, 2004, 09:37:15 PM »

IMHO the best "simulation" out there. Not as purrrrrty as MSFS but flies a whole hell of alot better.

Yeager2 · « **Reply #2 on:** November 09, 2004, 10:11:59 PM »

Great sim, best flight physics available for a pc

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #3 on:** November 10, 2004, 03:06:13 AM »

last time i played x-plane was version 5.x or so, the physics felt
allways "arcadish", same goes with MS fs9. Try to stall a plane
in fs9 and see how it reacts *g* Its good for sightseeing,
but i preffer 2 different online combat sims for the more "realistic"
flight feeling.

R
Gh0stFT

Wolfala · « **Reply #4 on:** November 10, 2004, 06:40:22 AM »

Try orbiter.

http://www.orbitersim.com

And hey, its free!

Chairboy · « **Reply #5 on:** November 10, 2004, 10:44:47 AM »

Ghost, you should maybe try it again. 5.0 is like 5-6 years old. X-plane physics can hardly be called 'arcadish', and in 6.x the developer made some fixes to the flight model that really beefed up the realism. Before then, you couldn't loop a plane because of limitations in the math he was doing. Nowadays, booya.

It actually calculates lift dynamically, not via a lookup table the way MSFS and most other sims do.

Don't take my word for it, though. Just note that there are at least two aircraft companies I know of by name that use X-Plane to simulate their aircraft (Carter Copter & Scaled Composites (the X-Prize winner)), plus a bunch of smaller builders too.

mora · « **Reply #6 on:** November 10, 2004, 11:15:47 AM »

X-Plane has the best flight model and very smooth graphics. It lacks in the avionics and scenery department compared to MSFS.

Halo · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:37:46 PM »

Was surprised to find X-Plane 8.0 at Best Buy. Bought it to get the manual and disk instead of on-line upgrading.

It's still interesting. Different. Its own thing. And everything is on one DVD. Seems like a good idea.

I'm not a real pilot so I can't appreciate the various authenticities it's most praised for.

So far, just fooling around with the usual demented things a ground-pounder tries, I like its full spectrum aircraft selection, its runways with dips and rises, and the water swells.

But I'm still surprised at some of the weird stunts you can do. Like taking a 767 off an aircraft carrier. Like ditching a 767 in the water, throttling it down, then up again and taking off.

Like ditching a plane inverted in the water and driving around like an upside down submarine.

And planes still survive unusual landings and race right through buildings and other obstacles.

X-Plane flight feels okay but I still prefer MS Flight Sim 2004 viewing, especially the unmatched external smooth flowing panoramas.

Somehow X-Plane strikes me as more cartoonish. Not sure why. Maybe needs more shadows and subtleties.

Still enjoying both MSFS 2004 and X-Plane, and still like Aces High best of all. The proof is I keep buying new versions of all of them. If that isn't money talking, my intercom is busted.

Gixer · « **Reply #8 on:** March 13, 2005, 12:17:36 AM »

X-Plane is ok and does have good physics for a desktop flight sim, but falls short in the global scenery,weather,aircraft systems/avionics department imho simply because it isn't supported by the number of major professional and freeware developers like MSFS.

~~...-Gixer~~

Chairboy · « **Reply #9 on:** March 13, 2005, 12:43:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gixer
X-Plane is ok and does have good physics for a desktop flight sim, but falls short in the... aircraft systems/avionics department

I do not understand this statement. The avionics/system detail in x-plane is one of the reasons that it's certified by the FAA for use in airline certificate training/etc (unlike MSFS).

Here's an excerpt from an incremental bug update (8.03 to 8.05). This doesn't list all the features, JUST the avionics features added in a typical mini update:

Quote

2 hydraulic systems, with hydraulic pump and hydraulic containment failures, and a new check box in Plane-Maker to determine whether the hydraulic systems are pressurized by the engines or not. Of course this is usually checked TRUE for most airplanes, but craft like the Space Shuttle and X-15 have hydraulic systems that work whether the engines are running or not! This check box is set in the "equipment" screen in Plane-Maker.

As well, you can have hydraulic OVERPRESSURE failures as well!

2 electrical systems now simulated! One fails? You may have another for SOME systems.
2 vacuum systems now simulated! One fails? You may have another for SOME systems.

Look at the panel editor in Plane-Maker...
You can now specify which vacuum system or electrical system each instrument is on.
This will determine which instruments are brought down with which systems failures. The right instruments will fail with the right systems.

Look at the panel editor in Plane-Maker...
You can now specify which cockpit side (pilot or copilot) each instrument is on.
This will determine which settings apply to which instruments. The barometric pressure, for example, can be different for the pilots and copilots altimeters!

APU and Pressurization Systems Modelling for Engine-Start and Pressurization:

The APU is more fully modelled... now you have "ON", "OFF", and "START" for the APU.
Put it to START and let it start up, then let the switch come back to ON. The APU is now supplying bleed air and generator voltage to the rest of the airplane. What do you do with that? Read on!

BLEED AIR (button for the panel is in pressurization folder in the panel-editor) is now more fully modelled... you can select bleed air as: off, left, both, right, or APU. Bleed air is used for both starting jet engines, and pressurizing the airplane if you have pressurization controls. Here's how it works:

If the bleed air is set to OFF, then you will not be able to pressurize the airplane,
or start any jet engines.

If the bleed air is set to LEFT, then you will not be able to pressurize the airplane,
or start any jet engines unless the LEFT engine is running.

If the bleed air is set to RIGHT, then you will not be able to pressurize the airplane,
or start any jet engines unless the RIGHT engine is running.

If the bleed air is set to BOTH, then you will not be able to pressurize the airplane,
or start any jet engines unless the first TWO engines are running.

If the bleed air is set to APU, then you will not be able to pressurize the airplane,
or start any jet engines unless the APU is running.

So, to do a full start up in X-Plane (and a real jet, by the way):
1: In Plane-Maker, equip your plane with both an APU (buttons folder) and a full bleed air knob (pressurization folder).
2: run X-Plane and start the APU ("start", then "on")
3: set the bleed air to APU so you have bleed air coming from a running APU
4: hit the engine starts to start the engines
5: set the bleed air to BOTH to get bleed air from the engines for the pressurization and any in-flight starting
6: turn off the APU
This is how you start up a real plane, and how you do it in X-Plane if you equip the plane with APU and bleed-air switches.
Question: How can I start the engines in flight if they are not running, and the APU is off?
Answer: whatever engine IS running will provide the bleed-air, and the engines windmill even if shut down.. 10% N1 is enough to drive the systems.

New Failure-Modelling:

New engine failure type option: engine fire.
If you specify an engine fire, then the engine smokes as it fails... regular engine failure does not leave a trail of smoke though.

New Instrument failures: Specific Instruments.
This lets you fail specific instruments on the panel, so if you have 2 attitude indicators, for example, you can fail just one of them. This is already possible, of course, by putting them on different electrical or vacuum systems, but this is a way you can fail any instrument you like without that failure affecting other instruments if you like.

Pitot system failure resulting in airspeed indication error.
Engine SEIZURE, and engine INDICATION failures.
Low battery failure, resulting in inability to get up to starting N1.
Transponder can fail.
Left and right brakes can fail! Awfully fun on landing in planes with free-castoring gear!
The throttle can fail to low, current, or max setting!
APU pressurization failure... so you can't start the engines on a jet.
Cabin depressurization!
ITT runaway, compressor stall, and fuel-flow fluctuation failures... all with varying results in power output.

New Instruments:

New instrument type: ALTERNATE AIR. This lets air into the engine through an alternate path... with a 5% power reduction due to the inefficient path the air must take to get to the engine!

New instrument type: fuel pump annunciator, along with better fuel-pressure simulation: The fuel pressure and fuel flow are properly affected by the fuel pump.

More pressurization instruments to simulate more aircraft.
See the pressurization folder in the Panel-Editor in Plane-Maker.

New autopilot button: Instrument source. This can either use the pilot or copilot-side instruments for autopilot reference.
Remember that in Plane-Maker you can specify if each instrument is pilot-side or copilot-side, primary or secondary system.

New angle of attack indicator: Round with settable maximum angle, above which the stall warning goes off.

New instrument: angle-of-attack anti-ice.

New instrument: Pilot and co-pilot side pitot heat, each for the respective system.

New instruments: transmission oil pressure and temperature.

New button for the panels: Jet Sync. This is an engine sync that can be set to "fan", "off", or "turbine".
This simply syncs the fans or turbines on your jets, getting all the engines to follow engine #1 exactly.

Ignition on/off... this could be used for old World-War 1 airplanes that had separate ignition and starter switches,
or modern jets that have ignition that is simply turned on or off...
though you must still hit the starter to turn the engine over for starting!
New autopilot annunciator panel, with all the terminology and annunciators for typical GA planes with good equipment

New General Features:

NMEA string output: drive any (real) moving map or other piece of hardware or software from X-Plane, where X-Plane acts like a (real) GPS to that device. (currently Windows-version only)

New joystick button for straight ahead view when in 3d cockpit view.

Special Controls in Plane-Maker:
Flaps with pitch and roll can now be customized to apply to either flaps 1 or 2 or both.
As well, they can be set to only phase in above 50% control deflection if you like.

In the "Other Aircraft" screen, you can enter the heading, altitude, and speed ratio for the OTHER AIRCRAFT
for the FORMATION FLYING option in the LOCATION menu.

Check out the Special Controls screen in Plane-Maker...
just like you can have the slats automatically deploy near the stall,
now you can have the FLAPS do the same!

Custom afterburner texture now possible per aircraft... see the example plane... the filename
is simply airplane_name_flame.png. Do any afterburner or rocket textures you like for any plane!

Glider winches are 950 meters, as per reality.
Glider winches disconnect if the cable angle ever gets too steep, as in reality.
Glider winches automatically disconnect if the line forces get way too high.
New RMI type: ADF-1 VOR-2. This is a useful addition to many simple panels... you get an ADF and second VOR
in one instrument... nice to complement an HSI that shows VOR-1 complete with glideslope. Now, of course,
this whole "position-fix/vor radial" thing is a ridiculous old circus-stunt the from medieval days... any plane
should just be using GPS with moving maps and ILS in this day and age, but if you want old-school, here it is!

The 8 and 0 looked similar on the FMS in earlier versions...
close enough that someone thought that 87.8 miles was 7.8 miles!
He reported the bug as an error in the FMS, saying
that the FMS gave too low a readout... CLASSIC mis-direction by a computer!!!
In fact, it was only the FONT that was confusing him... so the fonts have now been improved.

Flight-Model Refinements:

New fuel-flow modelling...
Enter the idle and max SFC in Plane-Maker to get the fuel-flow right at a wider variety of flight conditions.

Turning off (or failing) the FADECs on non-helicopter aircraft will cost you 3% throttle,
as will happen with real jet engines when the FADEC fails or is turned off.

General Refinements:

Real-Weather now checks the entire planet, not just USA. It's about time!

X-Plane will now load any CUSTOM scenery files with precedence over any DEFAULT scenery files...
regardless of who is DSF, and who is ENV.
If you have custom DSF AND ENV, or default DSF AND ENV, then in that case DSF takes precedence for any given area.

On the HSIs and VORs, the glideslope flag is only visible when an ILS frequency is selected.

Gixer · « **Reply #10 on:** March 13, 2005, 01:28:34 AM »

Well I didn't even bother to read past the first paragraph of that post. Mainly because it's boring and all this argument about X-Plane has been hashed out before and not all that long ago.

So how are those PPL exams going?

~~...-Gixer~~

Chairboy · « **Reply #11 on:** March 13, 2005, 02:06:31 AM »

You spending time w/ storch? Similar conversation style.

Doing fine, studying right now, actually. I was supposed to study this week, but... didn't. So I'm gonna try and cram it all in tonight and tomorrow. I'm all loaded up with facts and figures, so I went to Sporty's website to use the study budy to test myself on the sections I've studied... and it's busted. Blargh!

In regards to 'all the x-plane stuff having been hashed out before', I gather that's not entirely accurate considering the errors in your statement regarding a perceived simplicity of avionics in XP. Since the only way to get any detail in MSFS is to purchase plane specific, script driven add-ons, I had to pause a moment to chuckle, then decided to actually post a reply when my wife looked at me strangely.

Gixer · « **Reply #12 on:** March 13, 2005, 02:55:24 AM »

You obviously have a short memory if you can't remember the last thread on this same topic/argument.

Comparing two desktop flightsims is about as interesting as seeing who is the tallest dwarf.

~~...-Gixer~~

mora · « **Reply #13 on:** March 13, 2005, 03:09:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
I do not understand this statement. The avionics/system detail in x-plane is one of the reasons that it's certified by the FAA for use in airline certificate training/etc (unlike MSFS).

I don't think the stock planes are any different in the avionics department in these 2 sims. The difference comes in the aftermarket products both payware and freeware. IN MSFS a designer can create almost any avionic system by himself, if it's not built into the engine. You cannot do that in X-Plane, at least not to the degree you can in MSFS. If you prefer flying around in a Cessna, then I would choose X-Plane.

Of course the MSFS is not certified for training because it basically sucks straight out of the box. The first thing I do after installing it is the uninstalling of the stock planes, they are not worth anyones time.

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #14 on:** March 13, 2005, 02:56:27 PM »

I like to have to operate equipments with they proper operating range or else the subsequent systems will be damaged or fails. Which one of those sims recreate that?

Last time I played FS, the buttons where mostly eye candy, and I never flew X plane. Soon I'll have to buy one of those, thinking of the PMD's B1900D. Looks like a unusual realistic dash

http://www.precisionmanuals.com/html/b1900.htm