Avsim Exclusive Screenshots For X-plane10

[h2egc 31]

Over on the Blog, for those who don't normally visit, check out the new screens of KSEA!AWESOME!http://xplane10.wordpress.com/

[rojantrojan 17]

Over on the Blog, for those who don't normally visit, check out the new screens of KSEA!AWESOME!http://xplane10.wordpress.com/

Beautiful images. Very dramatic, almost foreboding!

[Simmo W 24]

Thanks, just saved me posting the hint! Receiving those pics for the first time, seeing them on a large screen, wow. Now you see the interaction of clouds, scenery and that lighting.

[h2egc 31]

Your Welcome, Just trying to draw the masses over to the Blog & X-Pilot!

[Minos 26]

Those screenies are exciting. I have been monitoring the X Plane communities for months now and my interest does not stop growing. Repeateadly, I see that X-Plane has better flight dynamics because of the aero code they have.What I am wondering is whether inaccurracies in the visial model will result in inadequate flight model? For instance, I know that the area rule for the 747-400 was fundamental in reducing the 747 drag. Now, if you mismodel one part of the plane, for instance if you model a 747 hump that is not a 100% replica of the real 744 hump because it is too rounded, too blah blah blah, will that affect the flight dynamics of the beast?In that regards, I guess that a 100% acurate modelling of the wings would be even more criticl.My regards,Minos

[manuthie 242]

Prepare for more jaw dropping ! i know mine did when i read the railroad crossing was autogen and not custom scenery , the world at ground level is at the top of its class , amazing work ..

Hmm - I wonder if there will be traffic lights as well and if cars will use indicators when making a turn. Also how about some pedestrians walking down those numerous sidewalks.Ok - I'm just kidding

[tkyler 88]

Minos, nowadays the visual model is USUALLY separate from the flight model by the author. It does not have to be this way, xplane still have facilities to texture up the same geometry used for flight calculations, but it also allows a separate visual model to be shown in place of the flight model. Most authors choose to model the visual aircraft in a separate 3D program and "attach" this visual model to the flight model in the plane-maker program. So you can make a flight model that resembles a 747 and then attach a Cessna 172 visual model on it if you like. The implication of this is that if you misshape your flight model.....and recall that xplane's flight model resemble the actual shape of the aircraft, then yes...that will affect some of the forces on the aircraft, though which forces exactly are a topic of another discussion.-TomK

[LAdamson 240]

So you can make a flight model that resembles a 747 and then attach a Cessna 172 visual model on it if you like.

Ah...............that explains the video I saw. A Cessna 172 was dragging a 747 through the skies. The 747 was even just hanging on the end of the rope. sometimes. But in reality, it must have been the 747 dragging the 172 along. I wondered how they got X-Plane to do that.. Anyway, keep up the work everybody!L.Adamson

[airlinejets 709]

For what it's worth, I'm yet another of the MSFS veterans who's really interested in what X-Plane 10 has to offer. I've just reloaded my old copy of 9 and I'm trying to get the feel of it - having the usual issues with controls that feel too jumpy but I'm assuming I'll be able to resolve that once I finish adjusting my control setup. Am hopeful that X-Plane 10 takes us somewhere good.

I reinstalled my copy last week and I'm glad I did. One thing you need to know, don't use the plane that loads at Innsbruck. That is certainly not representative of X-plane 9 and will discourage a lot of people from exploring further. The Cessna isn't bad, but I wanted more. So I went out and bought the CRJ200. A very nice package, that flies as good as it looks. Then I wanted bigger, so I got Peter's A380, and that was a revelation. I haven't been using anything else since. Is it the perfect add-on? Probably not for everyone as it's not complete or I should say, not completely functional. You see, Peter works with his creations on a continual basis and updates his clients as he progresses. This is probably the nicest flight model I have had the opportunity to test.This is the most fun I've had in flight simulation in a long time, and apparently, it's going to get better, like real soon!

[manuthie 242]

Yay - new stuff to look at:http://www.x-plane.com/2011/10/the-x-plane-10-world-is-dawning/

[dm123 19]

Yay - new stuff to look at:http://www.x-plane.c...rld-is-dawning/

"with low forest density and few objects"Well now I know how it will look on my slow computer!

[Simmo W 24]

Thanks! The coast on that first one, with the streets looks handmade..

[alainneedle1 97]

Can't wait for the release....look to me like FSX is on it's last leg.

[strider1 575]

RIP FSX !!

[Guest HowardHughes]

Over on the Blog, for those who don't normally visit, check out the new screens of KSEA!AWESOME!http://xplane10.wordpress.com/

"and that even so the detail is easily on par with the best in MsFS/FsX (though I’m tempted to say it may be better even from these limited images)."Not even close. How on earth you can say that this is anywhere near the level of 'the best of FSX' is beyond me;

Yay - new stuff to look at:http://www.x-plane.c...rld-is-dawning/

They look quite poor to be honest, barring the first shot in there.X-plane 10 has shown much better things than are demonstrated in those screenshots, which is a bit odd. The city scapes looked promising, but as yet the clouds havn't impressed me - nor have rural shots.