X-Plane 12 is now available.

[Dry Creek]

If anybody's interested, the beta version X-Plane 12 download is now available.
Same as with XP-11, there is a free trial to allow you to determine whether or not your system is capable of running the new simulator.

 

[Skyrys62]

Checked it out a couple days ago.
I like that they added the helicopters.
It is still a bit glitchy, and the controls didn't work right for me on the RV10 (prop, mixture, etc.) even after calibration. As long as it's rental power full forward, it was ok.
A 15 minute setup/test run didn't overwhelm me, but I'll give it more time later. Hoping the controls on the gps/instruments are better..especially with the VR headset.

 

[LesGawlik]

The video reviews were largely positive. It's still a weak sister compared to its resplendent sister, MSFS. But 11 does what I need, and I will probably get 12 tonight.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Ran the trial this morning. I'm really so new to this having bought a computer that can run it well for the very first time, so grain of salt: I really don't care about the visual graphic realism at this point and I don't see anything really different from XP11.

 

[LesGawlik]

The reviews showed much better detail in the background, like trees and grass. I know that doesn't seem like much in a flight sim, but the difference between 11 and 12 was noticeable in the video.

Sometimes I buy software upgrades not for this version, but for the next. IOW kick 'em some money so they keep on improving.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The reviews showed much better detail in the background, like trees and grass. I know that doesn't seem like much in a flight sim, but the difference between 11 and 12 was noticeable in the video.

Sometimes I buy software upgrades not for this version, but for the next. IOW kick 'em some money so they keep on improving.

Sure. If that's what is important, it's a lot. If you don't care about it, it's not. Now, if they made their avionics more like the real thing so I didn't have to wonder whether I can do something in their 530 I can do in a real one, I'd jump at it.

 

[TCABM]

Sure. If that's what is important, it's a lot. If you don't care about it, it's not. Now, if they made their avionics more like the real thing so I didn't have to wonder whether I can do something in their 530 I can do in a real one, I'd jump at it.

For me, this.

As I look at what it costs to build a sim pit that replicates my plane w/dual G5s and a GTN650, I want that stuff to work correctly, otherwise there’s no benefit moving off Garmin’s training product. And at the cost it takes to get stuff working correctly I might as well spend the money on a BATD and log away so I can justify the investment.

 

[midlifeflyer]

For me, this.

As I look at what it costs to build a sim pit that replicates my plane w/dual G5s and a GTN650, I want that stuff to work correctly, otherwise there’s no benefit moving off Garmin’s training product. And at the cost it takes to get stuff working correctly I might as well spend the money on a BATD and log away so I can justify the investment.

Depends on the BATD. Some are no better fidelity-wise. But yeah, you get something loggable.

 

[Baked Potato]

Depends on the BATD. Some are no better fidelity-wise. But yeah, you get something loggable.

Oh, man... If my time spent in DCS flying cold war-era jets was loggable, I'd have enough hours for an ATP cert by now...

 

[Dry Creek]

I am tempted to download it tonight.

For the record, I have MSFS-X. I like it because it runs flat out on any newer computer, and that's what I started out with. The only model I use in it is the C-172, and it matches the dated C-172's in use at the local flight school. The characteristics model the real thing very accurately.

I also have X-Plane 11. It is very accurate as far as performance modeling on the C-172. The visual clarity is not very accurate and it has one very annoying glitch*. As a student pilot, I rely on being able to find landmarks that are familiar for establishing the pattern points. I was having issues with XP11. ( * Go to KGDJ and check out the runway designators.) It is still my favorite.

Due to my whining about picking the points for crosswind/downwind/base/final turns based on topography, my son bought me a copy of MSFS 2020. I love the scenery detail and accuracy! I had to build a better computer to run it though - although I reused my older processor since I was given a great motherboard. Now for the dislikes - the C-172 in the stock version is dual G-1000. It will be 20 years before a small local flight school gets equipment like that. So, I use the C-152 instead. As far as accurate flight modeling, uhmmm, no. I have never had to use left rudder on takeoff, and the C-152 mimics a lightly loaded C-172 even if I set it for full fuel and it has real-world weather with a DA of 4,000'. If a loaded C-152 can climb out at 750 fpm @ 80 kts IAS, I would have them on the top of my shopping list.

BUILD:
Intel Extreme ATX MB
Intel i7-7700
32 GB RAM Corsair
Western Digital 500GB SSD (X2)
EVGA - NVIDIA RTX 2060, 6GB DDR6
EVGA 750W PSU
Zalman S3 mid-tower case

Peripherals:
Honeycomb Alpha yoke
Flight Sim Stuff Cessna T/P/M with trim & flaps control
Logitech Rudder Pedals with the Cessna-Style Rudder Pedal conversion.

Monitor:
Generic Proscan 32" HDTV bought at thrift store (for now).
Wish list: Curved 32" monitor

Replaced - Saitek/Logitech Yoke & TPM (boxed and up in attic).

 

[LesGawlik]

I tried to download X12 tonight. The Windows loader would not install. XP12 uses something called Vulkan, and that needs high-powered graphics cards. I bought a new computer about 6 months ago which was specifically recommended for gaming. I guess it's not enough. X11 runs fine, though, so I guess I'll stick with that.

I bought MS2020 when it first came out, and never installed it. I might give it a try. A friend has a Focke Wulf 149D and I found out the plane is modeled on MS2020. I might give it a try so I can "fly" his plane.

 

[Baked Potato]

I tried to download X12 tonight. The Windows loader would not install. XP12 uses something called Vulkan, and that needs high-powered graphics cards. I bought a new computer about 6 months ago which was specifically recommended for gaming. I guess it's not enough. X11 runs fine, though, so I guess I'll stick with that.

I bought MS2020 when it first came out, and never installed it. I might give it a try. A friend has a Focke Wulf 149D and I found out the plane is modeled on MS2020. I might give it a try so I can "fly" his plane.

Make sure your video card drivers are up to date. I'm assuming you have a discrete GPU and are not using integrated graphics?

 

[LesGawlik]

I read some articles on the best laptops for gaming, and several recommended the Acer I ultimately bought. I am using whatever graphics Acer put in the machine.

 

[Baked Potato]

I read some articles on the best laptops for gaming, and several recommended the Acer I ultimately bought. I am using whatever graphics Acer put in the machine.

The task manager will tell you which video card you've got, assuming it's a discrete card. Any modern gpu should support Vulcan, assuming the drivers are up to date as well. I'd recommend doing that regardless.
Of course if it's integrated graphics then that's all out the window. But if you can run X-plane 11 well enough then I'd assume that's not the case

 

[Dry Creek]

Downloading the demo now. It's gonna take some time. But, not nearly as long as downloading all eleventy-bazillion GB of MSFS 2020.

I don't think you have to use the Vulkan engine, but it improves performance by leaps and bounds. I don't think AMD supports Vulkan yet, just NVIDIA (and never by Intel).

ETA - I was wrong. AMD supports Vulkan API. Sorry about the misinformation there.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I tried to download X12 tonight. The Windows loader would not install. XP12 uses something called Vulkan, and that needs high-powered graphics cards. I bought a new computer about 6 months ago which was specifically recommended for gaming. I guess it's not enough. X11 runs fine, though, so I guess I'll stick with that.

Make sure your video card drivers are up to date. I'm assuming you have a discrete GPU and are not using integrated graphics?

This. I have a pretty new MSI with a 6Gb video card and got the same no install massage. Updated my drivers and installed with no problem.

 

[bflynn]

For me, this.

As I look at what it costs to build a sim pit that replicates my plane w/dual G5s and a GTN650, I want that stuff to work correctly, otherwise there’s no benefit moving off Garmin’s training product. And at the cost it takes to get stuff working correctly I might as well spend the money on a BATD and log away so I can justify the investment.

it’s not that expensive - you can’t buy a batd anywhere near the cost of a new system. The least expensive I’ve seen was around 9k.

I recently upgraded to the 137900 intel chip, 64gb memory and a big SSD. After rebuilding my case for airflow, it was under 1500 and can run almost anything. I could add some external boxes from real sim gear and have a reasonable sim well under 9k.

when I changed CPUs, X plane no longer recognizes the license and I can’t find my key or a disk. I’ll eventually upgrade to xp12 but happy for the moment with msfs.

 

[Dry Creek]

If anyone is currently running XP-12, I wonder if you could do me a favor?

Go to the taxiway at KGDJ (Granbury Municipal) and tell me what the runway designators are? The question is twofold - in XP-11, it shows 14/34. I pointed it out to them, but they were still in development of XP-12 and didn't have time to fix an error like that. They referred me to a website with a tutorial on how to fix their mistakes. The other side of the question is that I was wondering if the release of XP-12 is new enough to have captured our new runway commissioned in November of last year - 01/19. If so, it may be worth me springing for it. MSFS 2020 hasn't updated it - yet, but I assume the next USA World Update should take care of that. The other thing pointed out to me about MSFS 2020 vs. XP-11 was the lack of towers and obstructions. That could come in handy since I use a tower for my aiming point on the downwind for 19.

 

[Randomskylane]

One runway - 14/32

I don’t see any towers

 

[Dry Creek]

One runway - 14/32

I don’t see any towers

Thanks for checking that out for me. Runway 14/32 is now taxiway E. No tower at that airport.

I was hoping that there was a reason to justify me buying XP-12, but from what I have seen in the You Tube videos, not much has changed but the weather effects and just a tad sharper, but no more accurate graphics.

 

[FoCoJayco]

I don’t see much discussion of using an XBox for a flight sim, but I’m finding it pretty decent. Here’s my setup. I went this route as it was less $$ for the entire setup, compared to the PC alone.

• XBox Series X ($575)
• MS Flight Simulator 40th Anniversary edition Platinum Edition ($119)
• ThrustMaster Boeing Yoke Pack Boeing Edition (with throttle quadrant) ($500)
• ThrustMaster TFRP Rudder Pedals ($120)

All in, just over $1300

I’m a student pilot and am finding practicing procedures in the Cessna 172S is reasonably accurate. Definitely need right rudder on takeoff and climb (although I’ve noticed the Cirrus SR22 needs less oddly enough). Practicing the pattern has been quite valuable and has translated quite well to my flight training as far as procedures, altitude, speed, flaps, and turns.

The flight controls do not map well to the real thing, especially rudder controls. They are ridiculous, quite frankly. Not enough tension, and too sensitive. But I’ve gotten mostly used to them.

 

[Dry Creek]

Just for giggles last night I decided that I would try the demo of XP-12 again. I only tried it once, just long enough for the trial to time out while I was on approach.

I started it up and it wanted to update. I figured that if I was going to make a buying decision on the software, it might as well be on the latest iteration. It took quite some time to download and install. After installation I started it and got an error message. It needed the absolutely latest Vulkan drivers issued just last week. That was interesting. After updating I started the demo. It was in the C-172 on the runway at PDX. After takeoff I looked around and the resolution seemed to be only slightly better than XP-11. Water features were more detailed (reflections, ripples), but also the stability was gone. Lots of image tearing and "jutters" - especially near the banks. It looked like they were trying to depict logs or some other flotsam near the bank. Pretty fixating at times. I also noticed that the FPS was much lower than before - almost half! I was averaging around 30 fps. I don't have a top-end machine, buts it's not a "potato" either. It runs MSFS 2020 very smoothly.
Intel ATX motherboard
Intel i7-4771 (3.50 GHz)
32 GB DDR 4 RAM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 with 6GB DDR6 VRAM
WD SSD 500 GB (X2)

I wonder if there was an issue with optimizing the Vulkan handler in this release. It really pulled the frame rate down.

ETA - just went back in to see if that performance drop was an anomaly. Instead of running the demo, I went to KGDJ (waterworld) and took a peek at the runway markers - yep, still WRONG! The runway marker signs should read 14/32 not 14/34. I was amused by the fact that while outside of the demo boundaries and surrounded by water my frame rates were absolutely screaming at over 160 FPS.