Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: New Microsoft FLIGHT

  1. #21
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    I must congratulate the people at Icon.
    I think they are the ones that come best out of this.

    Millions of people trying FLIGHT for free and forced to make at least two flights with the A5.

    And you know what? It's a lot of fun. And the plane has a lot of appeal.
    It's a mixture between a jet-ski, a sport car, and a plane.
    Every rich guy will want one.

    I, to begin with, do. (except I'm not rich so I don't count).

    And even more after visiting the Icon web site.

    What this guys did with the plane is pretty amazing (or what they say they did).

    Let's compare it with my beloved Tomahawk.
    7 knots less of stall speed (42 vs 49)
    12 HP less (100 vs 112)
    10 knots faster cruise (100 vs 90)
    While burning less fuel.
    And all that with a seaplane, which ads more weight and aerodynamic drag, and being retractable, which ads even more weight.
    Plus, they put an angle-of-attack indicator, and you know how much I have been advocating for that.
    And on top of all that, they made the first plane ever that is fully spin resistant to FAR 23 standards (while they didn't need to do that because the plane will not be certified under the FAA-mandated FAR 23 but under the industry-consensus ASTM standards required for the sport light airplane -SLA- category).
    And if it flies anywhere near the handling qualities of its virtual FLIGHT version, it will be a delight to fly, especially for the non-puristic stick-and-rudder pilot.

  2. #22
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    ...Plus, they put an angle-of-attack indicator, and you know how much I have been advocating for that...
    The Colgan crash was caused by a faiure to monitor speed due to inattention or some other distraction...and you want pilots to monitor one more thing?

    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    The Colgan crash was caused by a faiure to monitor speed due to inattention or some other distraction...and you want pilots to monitor one more thing?

    No. They removed the VSI to cpmensate.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    Maybe, just maybe, things will not be that bad (if you wait enough and pay enough)

    http://soldant.wordpress.com/2012/02...flight-review/

    ... The default flight model with all the “assits” turned on is actually far more unforgiving than the “easy” flight model in Flight Simulator X. Turn off the assists, and the commentary coming from real-world pilots in the beta suggests that the aircraft actually fly closer to reality than the base content ever did in FSX. I’ve seen particularly good comments about the RV6 from pilots who actually own and fly one ...

    ... Yes, there is a bar up the top that by default shows you the heading, airspeed, throttle setting, wind speed and direction, altitude and fuel quantity. Yes, you can turn it off if you want...

    ... You can fly entirely on instruments without referring to that bar at the top, it isn’t a problem. VOR, NDB and ILS stations are in the game, you can set the radio to lock onto them, and there are cockpit instruments that fuction the same as in FSX...
    Note the navigation avionics:





    Note the nav-aids on the map (that I could not find):


  5. #25
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,458

    Default

    Show me a sun-faded and cracked cheap composite decorative instrument panel cover like off of a 1970-something 172....

    Do I see a little cowling extending out in front of the windshield?

    How is the balance between a full instrument panel & controls versus a good look out the window? (I noted FSX has IFR and VFR modes which equates to minimal vs significant windshield combined with a full vs a little bit limited panel )
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    6,867

    Default

    I'm gonna give this a shot tonight and report back.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Do I see a little cowling extending out in front of the windshield?

    How is the balance between a full instrument panel & controls versus a good look out the window? (I noted FSX has IFR and VFR modes which equates to minimal vs significant windshield combined with a full vs a little bit limited panel )
    One thing that I can report that is a big improvement is the let's call it view management.

    With the hat switch you rotate your head like a swivel, very smoothly and controllable. Displacing the mouse with the center button (wheel) pressed you displace your head up and down and left and right. So you can actually stretch to look over the panel (and see the full cowling) or move your had to the side to taxi a taildragger.

    And with backspace, the head return to the center (both linearly and angulary), so you never become disoriented.

  8. #28
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,431

    Default

    Well, downloaded it and tried it. Not impressed at all. My machine runs FSX well but for Flight I had to turn everything down. It may well develop over time but I rather think it's going to wind up costing a lot of money for a programme that's nothing more than a game.
    If you are a serious flight simmer then this is not the software for you.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  9. #29
    Member yash777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    278

    Default

    I think it's crap.

    Will stick to fs2004. Nothing beats it

  10. #30
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yash777 View Post
    I think it's crap.

    Will stick to fs2004. Nothing beats it
    Hey, at least in X when you dial in stratus at 200 ft AGL you don't see the damn rabbit and runway 2 miles out......
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  11. #31
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yash777 View Post
    I think it's crap.

    Will stick to fs2004. Nothing beats it
    Actually, I have to agree with you there. Although FSX runs reasonably well on my machine, 2004 with all the bells and whistles turned right up and some pretty heavy add on sceneries included runs at a steady 30fps all the time.
    ...and I'll never quite understand why some people complain that they can't get a sim of any type to run well above 30fps !! The human eye can't distinguish any difference above 30fps anyway !! All you're doing running at rates in excess of 30fps is using processor power unnecessarily.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  12. #32
    Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brianw999 View Post
    Well....having read all that and had a try with it all I can say is that it's a damn good thing....a damn good thing that is that it's free !

    I certainly wouldn't part with money for it.

    I'll stick with my FSX thanks very much.
    Yes, +1.

    Could you say which aircraft did you use in MS Flight?

    Afaik, there is a choice between two or three different machines.
    And you don't have gauges but you'll have to fly from the "outside the cockpit" point of view.
    Which is a tricky situation if you think of my favourite aircraft...

    The only thing that I've ever flown without gauges is this motorized paraglider, which is the default choice in fsx.
    So in my eyes, Flight really is rather a game than a simulator.
    Long live the German American friendship.
    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  13. #33
    Member yash777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Has anyone seen trailers of X Plane 10? It absolutely pwns FSX and Flight. You can design your own airfoils too!

  14. #34
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LH-B744 View Post
    Yes, +1.

    Could you say which aircraft did you use in MS Flight?

    Afaik, there is a choice between two or three different machines.
    And you don't have gauges but you'll have to fly from the "outside the cockpit" point of view.
    Which is a tricky situation if you think of my favourite aircraft...

    The only thing that I've ever flown without gauges is this motorized paraglider, which is the default choice in fsx.
    So in my eyes, Flight really is rather a game than a simulator.
    If you read my previous posts, you'll know that MS Flight comes free with one island of Hawaii and the Icon A5 as the only plane. By subscribing a "Games for Windows - LIVE" free account you get access to the Boeing Stearman for free too. And that's all that comes for free so far.

    For a pay you can get the rest of Hawaii and more airplanes. ONE of them (the P51) lacks a cockpit view. The rest of the planes so far come with a pretty functional instrument panel (as complete as you'd find in those planes). And the cockpit view is much more realistic than in previous versions too, and the "head motion" much more friendly and smooth.

    The Stearman and Icon lack any IFR instrument, so you have the VFR panel and all the switches and levers. The Maule and Vans do have a six pack + VOR, ILS, ADF, DME and TXP, what make them IFR worthy. (see photos in my previous posts).

    I've been playing a bit more since my last posts and I am pretty impressed with the flight model. It seems much better than FS9 or FSX. I say "seems" because there was no default Icon or Stearman in FSX. But it feels pretty natural and for the first time I feel that the stalls and spins (or at least the entry of the spins) are somehow realistic.

    The graphics are also quite improved from previous versions and the motion is very smooth even with a high graphics setting and a 2+ years old PC.

    There is no software development kit that would allow third parties to make sceneries and planes, and no word about whether one will be available (rumors say there won't).

    There has a lot of "missions" that give you "points" and let you qualify for a higher "level" which unblocks more "missions". Some of the missions include doing things that should be discouraged rather than encouraged (like running out of fuel, buzzing boats, or smuggling suspicious cargo).

    But except the first two missions that are introductory to flying, the rest you do them only if you want. You can always choose a plane, a location, a time of the year and day, a weather, and go for a free flight, just like in any previous MSFS version.

    So far, yes, it is aimed more to the gamer than the simmers, mostly because of the scope (few planes, very small part of the world, no third party friendliness, not much emphasis on IFR). But the basics are there to make it a very good sim: Flight model, graphics and frame rates, and even the sounds, are clearly better than ever.

    Will it ever become a "real" sim? Time will tell. So far, it's fun to "play" with it a bit, especially when you don't have to pay a cent.

  15. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    6,867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brianw999 View Post
    Actually, I have to agree with you there. Although FSX runs reasonably well on my machine, 2004 with all the bells and whistles turned right up and some pretty heavy add on sceneries included runs at a steady 30fps all the time.
    ...and I'll never quite understand why some people complain that they can't get a sim of any type to run well above 30fps !! The human eye can't distinguish any difference above 30fps anyway !! All you're doing running at rates in excess of 30fps is using processor power unnecessarily.
    I always run FSX or Fs2004 locked at 25 or 20fps depending. Above 20fps is perfectly playable in my opinion.

  16. #36
    Super Moderator brianw999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
    Posts
    11,431

    Default

    I used the Icon in Flight.

    Since this thread started I've resurrected my FS2004/fs9. I've downloaded some free sceneries and some excellent freeware aircraft and reinstalled my copy of FS Traffic from Just Flight.

    .............And it's bloody marvellous. To be honest, it comes close to being better than FSX if only for the fact that it maintains a steady locked 25fps 100% of the time.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !


  17. #37
    Member ALPHA320's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Couldn't agree more, Gabriel, the flight model is the best I have ever seen in any Microsoft Flight Simulator. Flight offers highly realistic flying experience, however I don't like the gaming charakter very much... .
    But there is also a simulator called "aerofly FS", it is not free but offers the best flight model I ever saw in any desktop simulation. It is just amazing. However the sim has no working virtual cockpit, just dummy switches.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •