Ah, I will absolutely be doing that right now then! Again, I’ve been loving the sim for the most part. Colour palette, weather and performance are my only gripes really. I tried Vulcan but that seemed to introduce regular stuttering. Do you know any performance tricks, your vids always seem pretty smooth?

@@IntotheBlueSimulations Tell me about it. Vulcan is indeed really weird with those micro stutters. I’m sticking to Open GL for now as that has always worked fine for me. Besides, open gl also allows me to use most of the mods and freeware packages I was so used to using beforr Vulcan actually came around. Can’t stand the wait for all of these independent freeware developers to update their mods to support Vulcan. No performance tips really mate- there have been many debates when it comes to Nvidia control panel and specifically the threaded optimization setting. Some people like to leave it on whereas others leave it off. It all depends on preference really. Also, in you X-Plane 11 graphics settings, make sure you don’t have reflections turned on. They’re broken and have been for a long time now. Keep that setting to minimal and the rest of the settings to your liking and you should be hitting 40-60fps in most situations. I’ll be releasing more X-Plane 11 videos soon. I’m tired of just flying the 737 or the A320. I want to give my trusty Rotate MD80, 767, 747 and the embraer aircraft another spin.

Yeah, I ended up settling on OpenGL, I thought the whole point of Vulcan was that’s it’s supposed to be smoother though ha. I can usually get decent enough frame rates, but as soon as there’s lots of clouds the sim starts to suffer a bit, which doubly annoys me as I don’t even like the clouds in X-Plane haha. I figured out the reflections thing yeah thanks. Just took the default 747 out for a spin, again I was very impressed! I might look into that Rotate MD80 then, as I really enjoyed my outing in the default one. There are actually a lot of XP addon airliners that look quite appealing. . . Uh oh. . .ha.

Thanks Omar, glad you liked it! : ) I really enjoyed the MD80 and X-Plane 11. I must get back into them both again soon. . .

Thanks very much LLL! This one’s a bit of an oldie on the channel now, but I’m very happy you enjoyed it! : ) All the best!

Thanks very much Eric, glad you enjoyed it! Never flown on a DC-9 myself, but always liked the aircraft. I did travel on an MD-80 years ago as a kid, but unfortunately I was a little too young to remember many of the specific details. Cheers and all the best : )

Very sorry James! Somehow this comment didn't show up in my usual KZfaq app, so I missed it until now. Thanks very much though, really glad you enjoyed the video! : )

I love MSFS for VFR stuff, but overall I do think X-Plane offers a more complete package currently. Cheers Ron : )

Fabulous!!!

Haha, I may have done once or twice Chris, sadly never in an MD80 though. Glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks very much and all the best : )

Thanks very much Phil! : ) Do you mean you would like me to zoom in on the instruments more (as technically you could see the aircraft capture the glide slope in the vid)? I’ve had a few people request that I zoom in further on the instruments in videos. I’m not opposed to the idea, although I do think it might break the immersion in the videos a little bit (as I try to keep the viewpoint realistic). Still undecided on which the majority of viewers would prefer. Cheers

Hi Jonathan, I was referencing a performance data table (doing it the old fashioned way haha). The checklist I was using, provides basic data for takeoff / approach speeds, based on aircraft weight, configuration etc. I hope that clarifies things a little. All the best! : )

Hi Phil I strongly suspect on the real aircraft there would be yes (though I’m not that familiar with the MD80). I couldn’t find any such indication on the default X-Plane version though.

I haven’t yet Sebastian, but I fully intend to give it a go at some point yes! : ) It looks impressive, I’m sure I’ll make a vid with it at some point as well.

Yes, having flown the X-Plane MD82 again subsequently, it does seem to be rather a floaty beast Jurgen. I gather in reality, the MD80 was more or less flown onto the runway with thrust on, but that certainly isn't the way the default MD82 behaves. Still, I have to say I enjoy it for what it is : ) Cheers and all the best!

Cheers, Dolf! To be honest, I’m not using anything special; I actually use a 32 inch, LG, 1080p TV at the moment (though I am currently considering an upgrade). I hope that helps. All the best : )

@@IntotheBlueSimulations Thank you for your kind response . Never thought is was only a TV . 👍

My pleasure, Dolf! Cheers : )

Hello Marcelo, If memory serves me correctly (it’s been quite a long time since I last flew the MD80), you need to “pull” the altitude selector, in order to arm ALT CAP. I hope that helps a little? All the best : )

@@IntotheBlueSimulations Thanks I only have the default md-82 of x-plane 12. I'll try it.

You’re most welcome! Hope it helps : )

I think that’s broadly correct yes. As I say, I’ve only just started getting back into the sim recently, wasn’t a fan before. But, for what my opinion is worth, I think there is a very clear delineation between the two sims currently. If you mostly fly GA, stick with MSFS. If you want to fly commercial stuff, X-Plane is a better bet right now (in my opinion). The default jets (from what I’ve seen so far) are way better in terms of flight modelling and systems are generally “better” as well. Much more fun to fly jets in X-Plane currently. My major gripes with X-Plane are the colour palette, it can be very drab (which can probably be fixed somewhat with a shader plugin), the graphics of the weather (which seems largely irreparable) and the performance isn’t as smooth as I’d been hoping. The X-Plane “world” also feels a little bit lifeless to me, especially when compared with MSFS. Overall, for almost half price, I’d say it’s worth picking up. You’ll probably need to do a fair bit of work to get it up to scratch, but most of the mods I’ve used so far are free. It’ll be a long while before MSFS offers the same fidelity in terms of jet aircraft. $30 ish for an interim solution is probably a reasonable investment. I intend to keep using X-Plane for the most part in the mean time, for heavy metal flying. . . A bit of a long and rambling answer to your question haha, but I hope it helps : )

@@IntotheBlueSimulations Fair enough and thanks for the detailed reply. I'm a long (15 years +) lapsed PPL of 150 or so hours including IMC and night training/ratings. I trained on basic Cessna and Pipers long before GPS was a GA thing. So biggest issue I'm having is managing camera views within the cockpit and learning what role a G1000 can now play. I've had a play with the X-Plane demo today. It feels closer to how I remember real life (could just be the default non-GPS 172) and I like the range of default aircraft from gliders to helicopters. For now I think the best thing for me is to stick with my MSFS investment to nail the basic GA flying in that and as and when I decide to fly the more complicated aircraft consider investing in X-Plane at the time.

It’s funny, the “feel” of a sim can be so subjective. A lot of people would / do argue that X-Plane has a more realistic flight model than MSFS. Maybe it does, but personally I never got on with the GA stuff in X-Plane. It all felt too sensitive to me and one of the big issues I had was it was basically uncontrollable in a significant crosswind (I only really tried default aircraft to be fair). I think MSFS does a pretty good job of recreating the feel of flying a light aircraft (although takeoffs and landings could use some work). Certainly I’m not saying you’re wrong or anything like that, just that things can feel very different from one setup, simmer etc to another. Great that you were able to try the demo anyway : ) Yeah, I’m not too dissimilar to yourself in terms of training. Started my PPL over a decade ago. Never used GPS whilst I was training. I have used G1000s since and whilst they are arguably way better overall, I still “enjoy” steam gauges more, especially in the sim. The MSFS G1000 isn’t great either. . . I take it you went for the standard version of MSFS then? I find the steam gauge 172 quite nice to fly, the 152 as well. Both behave broadly similarly to what I remember. Again, certainly if you want to build back up from the basics, re-learn VFR navigation etc, I’d stick with MSFS for now. It’s a much better sim for all of that. As you say, once you get back into IFR flying and more complex aircraft, it might be a good time to hop into X-Plane (assuming MSFS hasn’t upped its game by then) : )

@@IntotheBlueSimulations Yes I just went for the £59.99 basic sim - I couldn't see the point of paying for more aircraft/airports when just starting out. The 172 in the basic sim includes the G1000 so I'm just using the 152 for sim circuit/camera practice/flying around enjoying the scenery then the 172 for point to point and practicing the autopilot modes. Looking forward to becoming confident in the faster GA aircraft while leaving the intricacies of Airbus and Boeings to the likes of yourself and FlyBy for now :-)

Yeah, well for what it’s worth, you probably made a good decision overall! I bought the Premium Deluxe version, partly for some of the aircraft, partly because it gave me more options for vids etc. The Baron and the steam gauge 172 are the only PD aircraft that I get any use out of now, the quality (ie lack of bugs) is no better with the PD jets. Ah, you know Flyby Simulations? : ) He makes some great content. Did you come over here from his channel then (I know he gave me a little shout out)? By the way, after our little conversation, you actually gave me the idea to do a sim-comparison video. Comparing the 4 main sims and evaluating their positive / negatives. Might be a little late for this round of Steam sales, but hopefully might be of use to yourself / others in the future : )

Thanks Stuart : )