Which flight sim is best for my situation (not a which is best, but for my needs)

Hi, this is my first post here and I have some questions I hope someone can help me with.

My situation

I'm not a gamer. I'm a student pilot (so far ground school ongoing and 10+ hours flight time in a Piper PA-28-161 Warrior II) and what I want at this point in time from a flight sim is probably different than real gamers priorities.

Also I live in Norway.

Equipment

I have an HP pavilion laptop (as set up from out of the box, 239G usable disk space)

A Logitech X3D joystick (twist for rudder)

A MS flight sim 2004 that I used on my old laptop dvd.

A Xplane 10 DVD, but it is out out by Graphsim, and says "REGIONAL: EUROPE" that I bought in a pilot store here.

My only experience is with the Ms Fx2004. I'm open to buying yet another flight sim if it fits my needs better.

Major priorities

- realistic aerodynamics, that the plane handles as it would in real life.

- very much want to use a PA-28-161 plane, Piper Warrior II and I beleive this is not stock with either. So it comes down to maybe how correctly the modeling is done by other gamers? I believe I can get this model for both (also fsx2004?) and would like it to react as the real things does as much as possible and definitely have the instrument layout be similar.

- disk space!! As you can see, I messed up and don't have a whole ton of it (using also the laptop for music production)

So if there is one flight sim that is roughly the same experience, maybe slightly less good, but that takes up way less space that woud be a factor. Anyone know the actual space used by each of the two?

- scenery not a huge consideration. I am not needing trees, mountains etc. to look perfectly realistic. I need though to have it be good enough to navigate by. To be able to recognize landmarks, etc, (and it would be good if it matched somewhat the actual area)

- Norway woud be a huge plus.

- since actually flying has a bit more sensory input (g forces, etc.) I am not relying on this for my training but as an extra. Also plan on using it more for instrument flying if I can learn how to use it.

- ease of setup and use. I want to get flying, tutorials are nice though I dislike that in the ms fx 2004 you can't save a flight in mid flight so I can get right to what I want.

On my new laptop I installed Xplane 10 and was dissapointed that though I asked me the areas (the grid was Northern Europe.) to add, I added Norway and only see ENGM (Oslo Gardemoen) airport. Also only GA airplanes were Cessna 172 and I think a Piper Cub. No tutorial. I saw it downloaded LOTS of other areas, lots Angeles, etc. and used up a lot of space. I wonder too if removing scenery actually deletes it from the hard drive or just inconfigures using it.

Anyway, sorry for the length, I didn't want to be a "which is best fs2004 or xplane10" guy, again it is realistic handling of the airplane and its reactions that are most imoritant to me, and ease of use to get started. Also being able to get the Piper.

I know you guys are well versed so maybe a recommendation popped into your mind reading this.

If you think another flight sim (FSX?) would best fit what I want let me know. Or which of these two I have would be best for me?

Thanks in advance.

As Zippy said, you should look into Prepar3d, aka P3D, since it's similar in many ways to FSX but with improved performance. However, I seriously doubt you'll meet your requirement 1, "realistic aerodynamics, that the plane handles as it would in real life." since pretty much all FS flight models leave something to be desired. In addition, the kinesthetic senses (seat of the pants, g-load, etc.) are completely missing on any PC sim, and are a surprisingly important part of your flying "feel."

However as a procedures trainer FSX (or FS2004) can be excellent, including instrument work. Generally, though, you'll need add-ons, especially for the Warrior. Carenado has an Archer add-on for FS2004 and one for FSX -- I'm sure there are others, too. Googling for "fsx piper warrior" turns up several entries.

ORBX has an excellent Norway scenery available for FSX and for P3D (you can certainly navigate with this), but I suspect it takes a lot of room, though a quick search didn't find that detail. There are reviews online, also, plus screenshots, etc.

But once again, don't expect real world handling, though some flight models may not be too bad.

Thanks so much for the replies.

I am aware that it can be a PITA with newbies always asking the same things, and I really appreciate you taking the time to help me.

So what I am getting, and I have been leaning towards this myself, is that I probably am best off removing the Xplane and installing the Ms 2004 on my new laptop and trying to tweak a little and make it as good as possible.

As both you and I have mentioned, I'm not using this for primary training. When I started flying for real I stopped completely using sims, as I didn't want to get used to bad habits. I noticed even as I was getting flying instruction that last use made me concentrate too much on the instruments while the instructor was urging me to use eyes outside to judge and fly by. Mainly just saying, I will use the sim for specific reasons and keep aware that it is a sim and not mix it up.

Just so I am clear, the term "FSX", is that only referring to a specific version of MS Flight Sim, or when you mention to search for extra scenery, etc. will airplane models and scenery built for FSX also work with my fs2004?

It did seem to me that FS 2004 is very forgiving...I have abused the hell out of some planes and kept flying or crash landed but the plane is just fine :-) something I don't expect in real life. But am curious in things such as on turn to final, when banked and a pilot kicks the rudder in an ineffective attempt to "get more bank" and it can induce a roll...or in slow flight when you should use the rudder to correct wings instead of ailerons...is that behaviour reproduced in flight sims?

Or stalls, and secondary stalls, etc. ? When I used flight sims before actually starting training, I was mainly just trying to fly and not crash, so I never noticed if it was realistic or tried specific maneuvers etc.

When I started flying for real I stopped completely using sims, as I didn't want to get used to bad habits. I noticed even as I was getting flying instruction that last use made me concentrate too much on the instruments while the instructor was urging me to use eyes outside to judge and fly by.

An outstanding decision, IMO... In your future use, try to keep your eyes outside as much as possible in the sim, too. Many pilots find the sim is, in many ways, harder to fly than a real aircraft, though the consequences are, of course, nil.

the term "FSX", is that only referring to a specific version of MS Flight Sim

Yes, that "X" is a Roman numeral 10, or in other words this is FS10, just as FS2004 is also known as FS9.

will airplane models and scenery built for FSX also work with my fs2004?

Some may, a lot won't work. There are some internal differences in FSX that make some things incompatible.

But am curious in things such as on turn to final, when banked and a pilot kicks the rudder in an ineffective attempt to "get more bank" and it can induce a roll...or in slow flight when you should use the rudder to correct wings instead of ailerons...is that behaviour reproduced in flight sims?

In some flight models, this is handled to some degree, in others not so well. In general, FS doesn't do slow flight well, though there are a few models that sort of do OK.

Or stalls, and secondary stalls, etc. ?

Stalls are generally poorly handled, either being a non-event or being weird in behavior, though there are a very few models that spin, to some degree.

I would recommend FSX or P3D. The biggest advantage is that you can add ORBX.

https://orbxdirect.com/product/nor

Its very accurate.

An outstanding decision, IMO... In your future use, try to keep your eyes outside as much as possible in the sim, too. Many pilots find the sim is, in many ways, harder to fly than a real aircraft, though the consequences are, of course, nil.

 

 

 

Yes, that "X" is a Roman numeral 10, or in other words this is FS10, just as FS2004 is also known as FS9.

 

 

 

Some may, a lot won't work. There are some internal differences in FSX that make some things incompatible.

 

 

 

In some flight models, this is handled to some degree, in others not so well. In general, FS doesn't do slow flight well, though there are a few models that sort of do OK.

 

 

Stalls are generally poorly handled, either being a non-event or being weird in behavior, though there are a very few models that spin, to some degree.

Thanks so much for your patience and help.

I have "uninstalled" XPlane10 now. At least as I understand it this is just simply to delete th Xplane10 directory, and nothing more. Am I correct in that?

So then I installed MS Flight Sim 2004 (fs9 as I have no learned from you).

If I could impose just a little more, I have really searched and tried to find an airplane model for the PA-28-161 Warrior II (my first choice, but I guess if not available a 160 is ok) but as I said, im not a gamer and this is all a little confusing. I keep running into "repaint" models but assume they are just the cosmetics of the models. I am just looking for a model I can install in the fs4000 that will give me a Piper warrior II model.

If it isn't too much trouble, could you point me to one and hopefully one that has instructions on how to install it? Seems I find one that it be ok, but lacks instructions.

Also, is there a way for me to incorporate Norwegian airports and scenery?

Again, many thanks for your help!

I googled for "fsx pa 28 161" (without the quotes) and found a LOT of stuff listed.

https://www.justflight.com/product/flying-club-warrior

and

https://www.fslive.eu/download/view/99/pa-28-161-warrior-ii-fsx

are a couple of them.

Installation depends on how they are packaged. If the resulting download is a .exe file, you run it. If it is a .zip file, you'll need to unzip it then follow instructions. If they don't provide instructions, then you may have to ask here for more detailed instructions, because there are various ways they can package them, though the sim wants things located a certain way (different between FSX and FS2004, with FSX having an extra folder in the path).

You are correct that a repaint is just another set of textures (often called a livery in the FS world). And I presume that the fs4000 you reference above is a typo, meaning fs2004.

Also, is there a way for me to incorporate Norwegian airports and scenery?

Yes, search the files section of this site for "Norway scenery" and you should find some items to download. You can also google for "fs2004 norway scenery" (without the quotes) to see if there's more out there somewhere. If the scenery doesn't come with instructions to install, you may have to ask here after you've downloaded (and unzipped) it.

For all this stuff, you really should be familiar with at least the basic concept for files and folders (folders are also known as directories and contain files, files come in many different types) and how to use Windows Explorer to get around among them.

I would recommend FSX or P3D. The biggest advantage is that you can add ORBX.

Ryan, he's space limited, and it appears he has chosen FS2004, at least for now, but otherwise I'd agree with you.

- realistic aerodynamics, that the plane handles as it would in real life.

About that - this IMHO is impossible in a = every desktop simulation. The Piper is not flown with an electronic (fly-by-wire) joystick, so the virtual model cannot in any way react -realistically- to your control inputs - because those inputs are not realistic. A force feedback yoke, pedals, T(P)M controls, exactly trimmed to real world forces, size and placement would be a basic requirement.

Flying (and driving, and playing tennis) is about muscle memory and the sensation of movement. A desktop sim cannot give you either - so every discussion of realism is basically moot - again IMHO. All that you can hope for is a model that looks and moves believeable - because ultimately, all that we simmers are doing is looking at pictures of flight.

If you want really believable virtual flight, IMO you would have to go with FSX and look through the offerings of A2A Simulations, see if there is a plane similar enough to what you fly in RL (maybe the Cherokee?). Other plane of interest could be the new Archer by JustFlight, but I don't know if it is comparable to A2A. For scenery ORBX Norway would be your best bet.

About uninstalling XPlane - yes, just deleting the folder should do it.

FS2004 sounds like a good choice if you are space limited and your computer isn't super high-powered. Here is a map of most of the scenery locations for Norway

if you want, you can also enhance the usually bland stock airport with an object placer like

RWY12

I googled for "fsx pa 28 161" (without the quotes) and found a LOT of stuff listed.

 

https://www.justflight.com/product/flying-club-warrior

and

https://www.fslive.eu/download/view/99/pa-28-161-warrior-ii-fsx

 

are a couple of them.

 

Installation depends on how they are packaged. If the resulting download is a .exe file, you run it. If it is a .zip file, you'll need to unzip it then follow instructions. If they don't provide instructions, then you may have to ask here for more detailed instructions, because there are various ways they can package them, though the sim wants things located a certain way (different between FSX and FS2004, with FSX having an extra folder in the path).

 

You are correct that a repaint is just another set of textures (often called a livery in the FS world). And I presume that the fs4000 you reference above is a typo, meaning fs2004.

 

 

 

Yes, search the files section of this site for "Norway scenery" and you should find some items to download. You can also google for "fs2004 norway scenery" (without the quotes) to see if there's more out there somewhere. If the scenery doesn't come with instructions to install, you may have to ask here after you've downloaded (and unzipped) it.

 

For all this stuff, you really should be familiar with at least the basic concept for files and folders (folders are also known as directories and contain files, files come in many different types) and how to use Windows Explorer to get around among them.

Thanks again for all the help!

And to the others here too. I'm ok with it not being realistic on control inputs, etc. but was hoping for things like stalls, rolls, etc. but that has been explained to me isn't really that realistic either. That's ok. I can at least scale down my expectations and get used to ATC, flying patterns, cross country, etc. as long as I know it is not realistic I can adjust how much stock I put into it. My real training is still with CFI, and experience in actual flying.

Main thing is flying the maneuvers and practices I train in flight, and running drills for checklists, and hopefully the maneuvers since I hope I'm doing them correctly, stalls etc won't be involved. This is still going to be better in some ways than "armchair flying" using just imagination. Though that too helps...

This is still going to be better in some ways than "armchair flying" using just imagination. Though that too helps...

That is why I always recommend A2A. There is more to operating an aircraft than the movement through the air. With most of their Accusim models you can concern yourself with preflight inspections, cold engine start problems, fouled spark plugs, popped circuit breakers, proper maintenance etc. These models will "reward" you if you ignore checklists and proper procedures. When the plane stalls and how that stall looks is implemented the best that is possible in a sim - the numbers will be spot on. Plus, these aircraft remember - they have a persistent state and issues may accumulate to bite you the next flight, or the one after that.