4 replies to this topic

[PhillyPennPilot]

First off, this is my first post and I'm a total newbie to simming, so apologizes in advance.  Just bought FSX a couple of weeks ago and barely know how to fly -- but that's improving.   There are many scenery options, but it seems like there's a consensus and it basically comes down to two formats/systems:

Ultimate Terrain X + Ground Environment X  vs.  FTX Global + FTX Vector + a landclass layer.

Ok, so maybe there are other viable options out there, but these are the two I've narrowed it down to.  And I know you can mix & match to some extent, but it seems like it makes more sense to stick with one since there will be fewer possible incompatibilities.  Anyway, here are my questions:

1) Lots of people say that the Orbx FTX combo looks the best, especially if you add a landclass layer (which they currently are working on apparently).  Will this supposedly better looking suite of programs be harder to run on my machine?  Basically does it come at a cost of FPM?

2) If I do go the FTX route, will what landclass layer should I buy?  Until they put out their openLC, it looks like basically my options are SceneryTech and Cloud9 XClass.

3) Either way how much of an impact will getting terrain mesh (probably FS Global 2010) impact the visual experience.  There's only so much I can afford right now and I'm not sure if this is something that should just wait.

Fyi, couple of things to consider your advice: I fly mostly in North America, but I think that will change once I start to get more into it; I'm a bit more inclined to prop planes at lower altitudes, but again that might change as well; my computer isn't quite a potato, but it's not a marvel of technology at all (AMD A10-5700 @ 3.5 GHz, 8 GB / Radeon R7-260x, 2 GB, DDR5 / Win 8, x64bit).

Thanks so much for whatever input you can offer.  Like I said, I'm a newbie and am completely overwhelmed by all the many options -- and all the money that I could easily spend.  

Edited by PhillyPennPilot, 15 April 2014 - 02:12 AM.

[PhillyPennPilot]

Hate to bump my own post, but, un ... bump?  Nothing -- really?  :-/

[FlyThomsenX]

I'll try and answer as much as I can here:

1) Not only do I think the FTX combo looks better than the alternative, it is also my experience that it runs a fair bit better. UTX/GEX combo used to bring my fps down to 20-25-ish when flying generic VFR in medium-detail 3rd party aircraft, while the same situation, but with FTX, let me hit my 30 fps cap. So performance-wise, the difference might not be huge, but I'd say FTX runs better. Your specs are so-and-so quite like my own PC's, so this should apply to you too. A well tweaked FSX is the most important aspect here.

I don't know what to answer, since I use neither... A landclass layer would likely improve your flying experience, but FTX Global and Vector are in themselves great improvements.

3) Depends where you fly. If terrain affects your flight routines in any way, or especially if you are familiar with the area in which you fly, do use terrain mesh. Using hills, mountains, valleys etc. (particularly combined with FTX Vector rivers and lakes etc) as navigation landmarks for VFR is vastly more immersive than gawking at a GPS to determine your position


Caution: I am about as biased as one can be. While I do occasionally fly transcontinental passenger flights and all, my true love in Flight Simulator is low-level VFR flight, difficult visual approaches and navigating by scenery, not screens. But if you like those aspects of flight simming too, I'd say FTX Global, Vector and a good terrain mesh are must-haves for you.


Enjoy your Saturday -- cheers!,

- Thomas / FlyThomsenX


EDIT: If you're just learning how to fly, and are willing to take up the task of flying a very realistic aircraft, get the Diamond DA20 Katana 4X. It is without doubt the best GA aircraft I have flown to date. Best thing: it has no autopilot, so you're forced to learn all sorts of techniques just to manage straight and level flight. Having flown the Airbus X Extended on a regular basis and shifting to the Katana within the past week or two, losing the ability to just dial a course in the autopilot, autoland the aircraft et cetera and instead forcing myself to fly by hand, manage three or four instruments at once and control a steep descent over a row of trees has been exhilarating. I've gone from barely managing a decent landing on a good day to dropping past treetops into a managed stall a foot or so over the runway. Plus, if you mess up, it will affect the aircraft's performance, and damage done must be repaired (yep!). Great training aircraft, I tell you

Edited by FlyThomsenX, 19 April 2014 - 07:53 AM.

[PhillyPennPilot]

Hey FlyThomsenX,

Thank SO much for your thoughtful response.  I think I've pretty much decided to go with this all-Orbx option -- though I do realize it's technically possible to mix and match.  It seems like from what I've read on other forums (backup up by what you said here), they do have an edge.  I'm a little anxious about by frames bc right now (even though we have similar-ish systems) I'm dipping well below 20 fps, and that's with default GA aircraft in somewhat complex/densely populated area & airports.  Config tweaking is something I'm a total newbie at, and I realize that's a whoooooole other animal for another post.

I, too, am definitely more interested in low & slow aircraft and VFR flying in general, and since I won't be 30k+ feet in the air having a mesh will be a significant boost too.  And I'll definitely consider the DA20 -- it looks exactly like the kind of thing I want to fly, esp since I'm still learning the basics.

Too bad there aren't limitless funds though.  Looks like I'm gonna be spending ~$250 US on the FTX Base, Vector, & mesh.  Sigh.  Thanks again!

[FlyThomsenX]

Don't worry, I get equal or lower framerates in regional hub addon airports with little AI and 1024 clouds in GA planes, so it's not like I rock a quantum computer either

If you're worried about frames, your best bet is a good study of FSX.cfg tweak mechanics and a bit o' fiddlin' with nVidia Inspector or whatever equivalent you may use for your respective graphics card. Doing these two things near doubled my fps in yonder days. As per usual, ORBX has done the flight sim community a favor by creating a little (and cheap) utility called FSX GO, which is basically a FSX.cfg tweaking utility which makes changing cfg values a breeze even for the most inexperienced flyer (though as stated above, read up on what should be tweaked and what should not) and serves as a FSX.exe launcher (it's even possible to use GO to launch another program that launches FSX, like if you run it through Shade). It's also capable of storing multiple FSX.cfg profiles, so you might have one for VFR and one for high-level flight, or one for normal flying and one for screenshots, or anything you desire, really. Highly recommended! If you get it, I can send you my profile, which works wonders on my machine.

Once you dip into more advanced passenger-carrying flights, look into some of Aerosoft's slightly older and less performance-demanding airports, as these offer all the pleasure of realistic scenery without bringing your computer down to a stutter. Also, as an intro to advanced flight, I recommend Aerosoft's Airbus X Extended, a great semi-complex aircraft, easy to fly, easy on the frames and offers fully automated checklists for all stages of flight, as performed by your virtual copilot (or yourself, if you dare). On my rig, I fly regional services in said aircraft between said airports, and hardly ever go below 17-18 fps.

But that's a thing of the future. Master the art of basic flight first, then you can start thinking about that

If you have any more questions, feel very free to post them here - will do my best to answer!

Edited by FlyThomsenX, 22 April 2014 - 09:30 AM.