Another MFS Pilot Switches to X-Plane
As a former Microsoft Flight Sim pilot, I would like to second the opinions expressed so well by John Allen in his review dated October 15, 2008. There is a growing community of ex-MFS pilots who have made the switch to X-Plane, and there is a reason for this.

There's a reason why Precision Flight Controls, Inc. uses X-Plane as the software platform for its FAA-approved flight simulation systems.

There's a reason why the Cirrus Corporation used X-Plane to help design and test its newest private jet.

There's a reason why many airline pilots, while on layover, will use X-Plane (loaded on their laptops) to simulate the next day's flight and approaches.

There's a reason why the National Test Pilot School uses X-Plane as a part of its training program.

The reason is actually found in the first few sentences of the X-Plane manual: "X-Plane is the world's most comprehensive and powerful flight simulator for personal computers.... X-Plane is not a game, but an engineering tool that can be used to predict the flying qualities of fixed and rotary wing aircraft.... Since X-Plane predicts the performance and handling qualities of almost any aircraft, it is a great tool for pilots to keep up their currency in a simulator that flies like the real plane, for engineers to predict how some new airplane will fly, and for aviation enthusiasts to explore the world of aircraft flight dynamics."

Regarding ATP Jim's comments from August 10, 2008, where he stated that he was not able to get a Cessna 172 off the ground: Every day, thousands of X-Plane pilots happily get their Cessna 172s, Bell 206s, Boeing 777s, etc off the ground. Just as most mishaps in the physical world are not the fault of the aircraft, most mishaps in the X-Plane virtual world are not the fault of the software. In both environments, the problem usually results from pilot error, and that certainly seems to be the case in this situation.

Regarding J. Boggs' comments from November 10, 2008, where he dared anyone to find a customer service phone number anywhere in their literature or website: May I suggest he go to the X-Plane website (conveniently named X-Plane.com) and click on "Contact and Support." There he will find four different phone numbers including one specifically dedicated to tech support. I have personally called that number on two occasions and each time the phone was answered by a real person who was both extremely knowledgeable and helpful.

In conclusion, while X-Plane may not be a game, those who love aviation will find that it is one of the most interesting, challenging, and immersive experiences you can have using your personal computer.

Dilbert works there!
I dare you to find a customer service phone number anywhere in their literature or website. I've had the product for two weeks and have been exchanging emails with their "customer service" for most of that period. No joy. I've got 16GB free on two year old Windows XP machine built for high end graphics use and can't even get it to install. I've never seen a company so good at avoiding direct contact with paying customers. Buyer beware!

Staunch MS Flight Simulator Flyer converts to X Plane 9.0
I have purchased every Microsoft Flight Simulator since FS '98, and have found each one to have it's own unique quality. So when Flight Simulator X came out, I was eager to see it's contribution to my ever increasing world of flight simulation. While I enjoyed it, it was not as promised. The DX10 feature was the biggest let down, as even on max settings it looked nothing like what we were promised. Oh, it looked okay as flight sims go, but it lacked the real punch I expected from a Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The flight physics are still adequate, set to maximum realism it can be fun, even. However, I still felt something was lacking. So, in a fit of boredom, I purchased X Plane 9. $[...]? "Well", I thought, "we'll see what we can get out of a flight sim that costs a third less than FSX standard."

I installed the program on my PC. It took about 30 minutes to install the primary program, and about 10 minutes to install the North America/Europe scenery disc. That's right, scenery on separate DVDs, and it's all worth it.

I started up the program and configured my graphics settings. Just for a hoot, I set them all to maximum settings. 4X Anti-aliasing, Ansitropic filtering, 1680x1050x32 resolution, turned on the rain and weather effects, and started it up. It loaded in about 20 seconds, which was 3x faster than FSX, and the opening shot was enough to catch my breath. It was superb. I'm not talking just nice resolution, the realism was astounding. Everything looked and moved like I was actually flying through a real world environment. So I flew around for a while, and the handling feels better. It responds more like an aircraft would whether it be rainy, sunny, windy, what have you, the plane behaved accordingly. FSX had done this also, but it was only mediocre compared to the flight physics this program was employing.

I wasn't won over yet. I wanted to see if I set FSX to the exact same specs, how it would respond.

Firstly, FSX doesn't have the same detailed customization as X-Plane 9. You have about half those settings. However, what I came to see was whether FSX could produce a visually stunning image as X-Plane 9. I set everything up, maxed out, as best as I could. There weren't as many visual options either for FSX as there were for X-Plane.

After I mimicked the settings for FSX as I had for X-Plane, I started up the simulation.

I was disappointed. FSX didn't do too bad, but when I tried to take off, I was rewarded with frame skips and stuttering. FSX couldn't reproduce the visuals and physics without cutting it's own performance. This was supposed to be the power of DirectX 10? Pfft. At max settings in X-Plane, I had seamless flying, with rain and thunder, lightning, drops splattering the windshield and shearing up the side, off the wings, too. Unlike FSX where you just see gray colored lines and a reflective runway as if it were wet.

I will state one thing, however: If you like using your keyboard, you can in X-Plane, it's just a little tougher to use. X-Plane does mouseflight (which is neat once you get the hang of it) and Joystick control, which I highly recommend. You will find a more satisfying experience that way.

I am now an X-Plane fan, and unless Microsoft can give me their performance, physics and detail, I'm not sure if I'll even be interested in their next release. Who knows. In the meantime, I'll be flying X air. ;)

~Pastor J

Flight Simulator X or X-Plane 9?
Danielle Townsend's review is incorrect. She apparently left realism mode on "easy". The only reason the turn coordinator wouldn't work is if she left "auto-rudder" turned on, which will result in turns always being coordinated and the coordinator always centered. Also on easy mode, single prop planes won't pull left, etc., making it less realistic. However, I have realism mode set to hard, and I don't really notice any difference between the flight models of FSX vs. XP9.

Anyway, more to the point, I'm not a pilot, just someone who wishes they were. So, I bought Flight Simulator X Deluxe Addition and the Acceleration expansion...and I bought X-Plane 9 since it seemed like the only competition out there. So, I figured I'd write a review since I could make comparisons.

If all you care about if flying from point A to point B and want a large variety of differing aircraft, then you may very well want to get X-Plane 9. If you want to get an idea of what it's like landing the space shuttle or flying on Mars (I was bored after 5 minutes), then get X-Plane 9. If you want to install 60 GB of data onto your hard-drive only to find that the Seattle and San Francisco skylines are GENERIC buildings instead of real models, then X-Plane 9 probably won't disappoint you. You CAN download mods (additional GB) to get more, accurate scenery, and there ARE a lot of cool planes on X-Plane 9...I love the Cirrus "The Jet" default plane...however,

For all other people, definitely get Flight Simulator X. Flight Simulator X installs more easily. It takes up less space on the hard-drive (only 2 DVDs instead of 6 or 7). Has a wealth of information on learning to fly. Has "Flying Lessons" with, granted, a guy who has the corniest sense of humor I've ever heard...but humor aside...still really cool and as far as I (a non pilot) can tell, seems like the tests are fairly realistic with the exception that you "can" bypass startup, mixture, rudders, etc., so that it's less realistic if you choose to. FSX also has a wealth of missions that give you more things to do than just fly from point A to point B. You can take off from the San Francisco airport, see models of real buildings in the city, and fly under the Golden Gate Bridge in great detail...you can fly over Seattle and see Qwest field, Safeco field, the Columbia Tower, Space Needle...etc. If you get the Acceleration pack you can also fly a military jet and try your hand at landing on an aircraft carrier (X-Plane 9 does aircraft carrier landing too, btw).

X-Plane 9 has "situations"...where (for example) someone flew to an aircraft carrier and saved the game on approach so that you wouldn't have to do the "flying to" part. However, this doesn't really compare to FSX's Flight Lessons and Missions. Overall, XP9 simply lacks the polish and "little details" that are in FSX, which makes FSX much more interesting for people like me who want to be given flight lessons and missions...and want to see real scenery.

FLYING HIGH
GREAT GAME WITH LOTS TO DO. NEEDS A LOT OF MEMORY. IF YOU LOVE SIMULATOR GAMES GET THIS ONE.