Are you sure?, because if it doesnt model canards it also doesnt model a horizontal stabiliser on a conventional layout as the primary difference is simply one is behind the centre of pressure and generally provides a downwards force and the other is the reverse of this, the physics are the same.
1 Like
Yes I’m sure 2020 does not model Canards, the stabiliser is part of the flight model but you have all the basic surfaces like wings, flaps, stabiliser, rudder, spoilers but nothing to add extra surfaces like Canards.
I’m 100% sure because I was working as a tester for a project and there was no way to model the extra surfaces that the plane had, you could find cheats as having extra flap positions trying to model how those surfaces act when moved or things like that but in the end the flight model was not right.
I’m 99% sure 2024 does have Canards or extra surfaces in general but so far I don’t think we have a single add-on using that capability.
And again I could be wrong but I guess that is why we haven’t head from JustFlight about the Starship for a while… It wouldn’t make sense to release this for 2020 if you can have the right flight model in 2024.
5 Likes
You will love X-Plane if you’re into simulators and not just a “few minutes a week” gamer. It’s for hard core simmers, as well as DCS, in my book, can’t be beat for the pleasure of flight simulation over flight eye candy. The Zibo (free) is by far hands down, much better than any plane in MSFS>
2 Likes
Excellent observations. Agree on all points. This should be a sticky at the top of any list. Asobo made a huge mistake abandoning 2020 and going forward with 2024 in its present state. It will never recover from this. It’s truly a shame. Had so much potential.
6 Likes
The flightmodel that FS24 (and very similar MSFS) provides, IS as good as XPs.
BUT, not every single default aircraft is developed “to the book”.
Fly some quality 3rd Party aircraft which the devs have put much more attention to the flightmodel.
You cant compare free 0815 default aircraft against XP HQ 3rd party aircraft.
Rarely any of the default aircraft are developed with the intention to “fly according to the books”.
Even in XP there are AddOns that dont fly accurate, or need many tricks by the devs to make it fly “like the real one” in XP. This includes adding invisible flaps/spoilers etc.
The imagination that you can just throw any shape into the XP Planemaker and it will fly to the books is COMPLETELY wrong. You can fk up the flightmodel even in XP, if you dont care about it.
TLDR: The Flightmodel the sim provides acess to, is great. But not every plane makes full use of it, or is even completely bad.
9 Likes
Last time I used X-Plane12 was for the feeling for Taildraggers during my TW endorsement using the free Tiger Moth.
I totally agree, that the complete immersion is better in MSFS.
Plus the flight model in FS2024 really improved. One of the biggest points of XPlane in the past was landing training for me, everything from flare to touchdown was more accurate compared to FS2020 - saved me some hours for my PPL I guess.
That point was totally adressed in FS2024, planes get heavy on idle thrust, no exaggerated ground effect and no super stiff undercarriage that bounce you directly in the air again like in 2020 anymore. The touchdown feeling is great, at least on the same level like X-Plane.
For me personally, MSFS in VR is the clear winner.
4 Likes
I may be a parrot. But I do know the planes and helicopters that I fly in real life. They are all more accurately modeled in XP12. But only by a small margin that makes MSFS 20/24 more than enjoyable for me.
1 Like
I used X-Plane for a very long time. Starting with MSFS2020 and after, looking at the larger picture, I would only consider going back to X-Plane it they have comparable satellite and aerial coverage, photogrammetry and weather data.
4 Likes
XPlane 12 is great, they recently added better lighting and 3D volumetric clouds.
The control setup of XP is much more streamlined than FS24, far simpler to understand and use.
Per plane settings and a tree structure of all aircraft and their chosen profile. Very flexible and it is well documented.
For multi-monitor XP is years ahead and Vulcan gives good frame rates on average hardware.
The one thing XP lacks is satellite imagery. As soon as Austin sorts out better imagery, and he will, XP will be a very strong competitor.
Rather cheekily, 2 days after the train wreck launch Austin emailed users to download the next XP12 beta. I’m sure It wasn’t a coincidence.
4 Likes
I think it is a very difficult choice considering, when MSFS 2020 is working the visuals are out of this world and almost life like.
A flight simulation software should be visually appealing as well as technically full fill the requirements of professional label certification process and use. If X plane had the same visuals there will probably be no contest. X plane forum moderators can be a bit sensitive as well.
No. I tried it again. No. Not even close to 2024.
2 Likes
Every time I try the XP12 demo I struggle with the visuals after having being used to the FS20 scenery for the last 4 years plus.
The anti aliasing in that sim is also incredibly bad too.
I like however that it is a standalone sim, it is not online or streamed, that you never get low bandwidth mesages and that you are never forced to update (if you get the sim direct from Laminar). The short time I played it I also quite liked the flight model too.
If MS Server Capacity proves to be a long term issue (I have been getting a lot of low bandwidth messages on FS20 recently) I might have to re- evaluate and consider switching to XP12.
I have purchased multiple generation of XP and each time I felt it was a waste of money.
This time around with XP12, I purchased it out of my frustration with FS2024. After playing around with XP12, it reminded me why I didn’t like it.
I am a real world pilot and have flown simulators. I have to agree with many here that the flight dynamics between XP12 and FS2020/2024 are not that different. I have seen quite a few people who claim the control of XP is much better only for me to find out later that they don’t even fly real airplanes.
Personally, I don’t enjoy XP. And whether it’s XP or MSFS, unless you fly real airplanes, neither are so-called realistic. You are playing with a joystick that is unable to simulate real world dynamics. When you are pulling the stick to take off, for example, each airplane will have its own dynamics. I don’t see how XP is that much more accurate.
12 Likes
Thank you all very much, there was more info as I expected. It sounds like I need to try by myself with the demo. I will do so in the next days. Both seems to have advantages and disadvantages.
2 Likes
They do. And there is a charm to X-Plane.
Just be prepared to have to learn a whole new system to configure your gear and whatnot. Transferring to a new sim can be like learning a new aircraft and systems. It can take weeks or months to really set everything up. And to learn to search for how to get the most out of it.
1 Like
I bought XP12 during last Steam sale. I don’t mind outdated graphics, but I expected more from it. ATC is not better than in MSFS, very often gives me crazy vectors for approach. AI traffic is very basic and likes to get stuck on runway forever. Last time I had to go-around because of it and ATC forgotten about me. There was no way to get clearance for another approach.
The worst part is the program stability. I have ZIBO 737 and its xlua scripts constantly crash XP12. It’s so annoying. I just spend 30min preparing the plane and the game decided to CTD with an error “Zibomod plugin: Error”.
Every free addon I find is either a few years old and abandoned or in super early alpha stage of development.
Another thing I noticed, paid addons are a lot more expensive than for MSFS. A319, A320 and A321 from Toliss cost $99 each!
3 Likes
Yes, you really don’t have to convince me or show me what the benefits of XP are. I know this for years now. From early 1996… I bought it too and use it with much pleasure. Fact is that the stock scenery still looks like Sim City. But with OrthoXP and some descent Photo scenery it becomes very good looking. I bought all three parts of ORBX UK scenery for XP12 and imo it looks better then the same scenery in MSFS.
I just love XP in it’s own way, especially the fly by view when landing…
Sorry but this is wrong.
zibo is fully stabile here as one can wish, no crash at all since years. do you have some obscure plugins loaded ?
ATC got just overhaul with SID and STARS. did you test actual beta 12.1.3 ?
there are many free addons like the C90 which are up to date.
yes Toliss is more expensive but its 89$. userbase is less than in MSFS.
there are other addons for traffic like live traffic or Traffic global from justflight.
2 Likes
A comparison screenshot would be nice here 
Because this image in particular is a bad example when you try to make the point XP looks nicer than MSFS2024 - maybe a comparison image was omitted due to this fact 
What airfield is this, so that we can make a comparison?
For me MSFS 2024 produces the way superior image quality compared to MSFS2020 … and even more so in comparison with XP. But I also don’t have the issues some have with low res textures, low draw distance, …
Especially in such rural environments as shown in the screenshot, MSFS 2024 shines and blows both, MSFS2020 and in particular XP out of the water… (if it works correct, I may add) 
1 Like
well in x-plane you can do many improvements like put in your own ortho scenery, self generated textures. the platform is very open. so it really depends.