Quote:
Originally Posted by nearmiss
A warbird in a flight simulator?
Producing warbirds for FSX or X-Plane?
IMO, flight simulators make sense with competent navigation, instruments and procedures for the current time.
Don't get me wrong I do admire some of the outstanding 3rd party aircraft, just don't see the value.
I tried the FA/18 in FSX, and found it was more interesting to fly the Jane's FA/18 in combat situations. Afterall... warbirds are for shooting, bombing and causing havoc.
If I were training to fly the FA/18 as a real pilot I would definitely spend alot of time flying instruments and charts in FSX or X-Plane. You can definitely improve your real world flying skills in a flight simulator.
When it comes to air combat... that's another story.
|
There is much more to a sim than the looks. Fidelity is a huge part of it as well.
Combat flight sims (IL-2, DCS, & ROF, for example) have a much more realistic flight / damage model than sims like FSX or X-Plane.
In combat flight sims, if you push your aircraft outside of its flight envelope, you can destroy it without touching anything, like in real life. FSX isn't going to let you shed your wings, even if you are pulling 12G's at speeds exceeding VNE.
The way the aircraft handle feels much more realistic in combat sims, with things like sideslipping and spins, largely based on my experience flying Cessnas. DCS BS compares well to my one discovery flight in a helo. IL-2 feels good to me, and FSX feels like a cheap toy. It's like a Formula 1 sim where you can jump curbs, go offroading, all without fear of damaging your car.
The only reason to run FSX or X-Plane seems (at least for me), for particular aircraft, airports, or ATC. The flight experience though, is lacking.
I'd rather fly non-combat flights in a combat flight sim than fly in FSX or X-Plane.
11-13-2010, 01:57 AM
Threaded Mode