ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ก.ค. 2024
- Timestamps:
00:08 Default Boeings
02:25 CaptainSim 767
03:06 FSS Embraer Early Access
05:14 DC Designs Concorde
09:21 Bredok Eurofighter
----
Editor: ShyRiderYT
/ shyrideryt
----
Outro Music: "KIDS OF YESTERDAY" by Amber Jay
/ amber_jay_x
----
Channel Discord:
/ discord
----
Donators / Super Thanks:
Andrei Dulcu
MattDesigns
Layla
Rensemiddel
Captain Megaxenon
Tech Guy
RFA727 - เกม
![เบิ้ล ปทุมราช - อ้ายกินดอง น้องลาบงัว ft. สแน็ก อัจฉรีย์ [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-OK--KaSPcI/mqdefault.jpg)
![อยู่ได้แล้ว - LIPTA feat. Mirrr [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-9-hpntNym4/mqdefault.jpg)
MSFS AAU2 arrives on June 23rd and fixes the default Boeings! Check out my preview here th-cam.com/video/hgt07L8hsn4/w-d-xo.html
Finally! Brutally and realistically honest evaluations instead of vague overviews. Thank you, thank you. Please do more.
I personally like the concorde, i cant fault it. Mainly because im not a hardcore flight simmer, but i enjoy the experience of flying anywhere i want, and the graphics etc.
That sums up MSFS, a game, designed for anybody, fly from the outside with Xbox controller. I wish it was more hardcore to appeal to those types.
@@iain8837 As far as im aware it can be made into a proper hardcore flight sim with the right settings/graphics, etc. Some of the setups ive seen for MSFS/Xplane are crazy.
IMO it caters well for both markets
@@TiJayFLY Agree, and I only think its only a good thing. If we're being honest the days of fs, p3d etc and devs having this "closed society" take was getting pretty toxic. You can see that by how they're still clinging on in the forums. I mean the outrage over the asobo atr daring to be £12~? How dare someone maybe find a passion in flying planes.
Airplanes such as the Concorde would greatly benefit from a multiplayer shared cockpit mode, making them more fun to fly
this video is really well edited, good pace and straight to the point. Will be subscribing for more 👌
I think you should make a note that this is for people who are interested in doing the ultra realistic stuff, I for example feel quite at home with the default A320N but I also enjoy flying the PMDG 737s as they are some of my favorite aircraft.
It isn’t though IMO - this video mostly just flags basic functional issues that affect everyone. Stuff like random uncommanded descent, nosedives on approach, having to babysit fuel trim when the computer should do if for you.
I would actually say these issues affect those who want a simple, easy flight *more* than it affects the hardcore players.
The FSS Embrarer has some good potential imo. At least they got active devs that actually cares too. Being able to fly it early means users can give feedback to further improve the plane. Downside of that are bad reviews though.
Also CaptainSim really does have a bad reputation haha.
Especially with the latest update that adds the E170. Its actually not a bad aircraft. You just need to do some extra work when it comes to following the decent path.
The Embraer should have stayed in the development hangar for 2 more years instead of trying early access.
The bad reviews are from ignorant people who didn’t take the time to actually READ the description
Captain Sim is now a joke. Sad because prior to MSFS they actually made some pretty decent aircraft. I believe they could do the same in MSFS , but they've just gotten lazy and don't give a crap.
Virtualcol E Jets are good too. Physics are hardcore and the cockpit door quality looks a##. But the cockpit itself is just good.
Also one thing to add about Concorde, when on console, below a certain throttle output on the ground with the snoot droop Down is a siren that blares at the loudest setting possible until either you throttle up or put the nose back
That’s a new one on me… 😆
You've got to sit the engines just up above idle and it stops.
Yea it gets very annoying
That means you’ve done something wrong, I forget what it is tho, something on the engineer panel.
it's also horrendously overpowered with flight dynamics closer to a SU27 than Concorde
great stuff.
Very pleased with this important video.
Many thanks
Barty
C130 with no cockpit should be high on that list
Fair - I don’t have it 😆
But it does state clearly that it doesn't have any cockpit. . So apart from that it's okay.
Spot on video, there need to be an MSFS buyer beware video series!
Amazing video!
Can’t forget about the CaptainSim C-130. With no cockpit view
It literally has the name „exterior“. So you already know that it‘s just for asthetics
One of the most bullshit adds I’ve seen
Wish I realised before I got it :/
If you play in VR is even funnier! There is cockpit view but with Nintendo 64 graphics level and a hardcoded copilot that I like to call "Juanito"
Im glad to realize that i wasnt losing my mind with the 787 i always thought i was doing something wrong with the autopilot when something would randomly break
I recommend the PMDG 737 - you can use the knowledge you already have and it’ll fly reliably :) should be a positive experience for confidence in your abilities
@@TiJayFLY ive started using the FBW a320 and am loving it
I've been noticing a lot of atc problems lately, it has been broken since the last big update, but I never hear anyone else mention it. Same with the autopilot systems. General aircraft seem fine, but all jets have gone buggy since update 13.
Just make sure any add on planes you have are updated - there was an AAU1 update to the sim which changed a load of avionics stuff, so any out of date planes will likely break
I have the Concorde. it is the best!😊
Amazing, Asobo must have seen this video because we're getting a default Boeing 747 & 787 avionics overhaul in June...😄
😄 right?? 😂
@@TiJayFLY, looks like you can finally rename & edit this post to "4 MSFS Airplanes you should Avoid" 😄
Really enjoyed this video, I think you got your points across rather elegantly, some people (including me at times!) can be too sensationalist. This was well-balanced and enjoyable :)
Thank you, I appreciate the kind words :)
whats up pilot studd! love your content
@@twowheelzzz Hi mate, thanks that's very kind of you!
@@PilotStudd no worries man, just glad you enjoy my editing and TJs work and ideas :)
imo the DC Designs Concore cockpit feels completely unrealistic esp looking at the pilot pov. Like the modeling just seems very wrong compared to other concords like the colimata concorde tho idk abt what other ppl think about it haha
this list should be full of every cs and bredok and demio product ever made for mfsf and sure the dc designs concorde might have its faults but it better then any product made by any of the three i just named
A major update is coming to the 787 and 747 next month!! Looking forward to it. I avoid anything from DC Designs after buying their f-15!
Indeed, I’ll cover it at the time
better then most the garbage on the ingame marketplace
DC Designs are the best dumbass🤦🤦🤦🤦
If you play DCS then all the fighter jets in MSFS look rubbish :)) like they really have rubbish cockpits.
cant understand the logic in flying military aircraft in msfs when dcs exists
@@jonnie2bad people who just can't get DCS.
Just to add onto your first points with yhe Boeing's. Working title are working on a custom autopilot for the 787 (with vnav).
Also salty sim are doing the sane for the 747 (can be instslled from the fly by wire installer)
Yup, updates are coming in AAU2 which should change things hugely - this video was made before the announcement.
There’s also the Heavy Division 787 in the meantime of course.
I never found Salty to be very good - every route I tried it on was actually worse than the default, so I’ll wait for the official update :)
Yeah, I can see these being fairly true. However, I only tend to focus on higher fidelity planes and the FSS E-Jets are pretty fun. They feel the niche of a lot of regional jets and have come a long way. They're updated frequently.
I’m told FSS changed a lot since the publication date of this video
Something about the default 787, the LNAV doesn’t work for me as well. It always veers the aircraft off course so I have to babysit it as you said in the video
That can sometimes happen too, but first of all make sure you don’t have any discontinuities or “MANUAL”/“VECTORS” waypoints in your plan
@@TiJayFLY i always make my own custom waypoints on the world map screen and use LNAV from there, it used to work but now it doesn’t so idrk
Thank you TH-cam for this suggestion. finally an honest review of things to avoid. I hope there will be more of these videos.
i'm gonna be honest. i've been flying the standard boeings quite a lot and i haven't encountered any problem with them. one plane i do have problems with is the Cessna Citation Longitude as the power keeps flickering off and on at random. doesn't affect the flight but does affect the Standby attitude indicator, if you're on the ground it's even worse, it flickers and makes the route go away before i've even started to taxi to the runway-
Make sure you uninstalled any Working Title mods, they’re incompatible with AAU1 as Asobo integrated them by default. Also make sure that any hardware fuel/power switches are set to ON
@@TiJayFLY i don't have any Working Title mods. And the switches are on since i use the Honeycomb flight controls there seems to be a conflict between switches somewhere i guess since the power switches and generator switches flicker in the cockpit when it happens.
@@finalframe8223 yup it’ll be an errant hardware key. The flicker is because MSFS is automatically switching it back on and your controller is constantly polling “Off”
@@TiJayFLY the thing is. The button on the yoke is ON. so idk what's happening really cuz every other plane works fine. I'm using the Honeycomb Alpha Flight Yoke and Bravo throttle quadrant and have customized it so only the yoke has the battery switch but i guess there is a conflict somewhere or the longitude is just being a little bit of a POS.
@@TiJayFLY update. found the issue. TLDR: i'm an idiot. the default setting on the battery and Alternator buttons is on "Set Master Battery" or "Set Alternator". had to configure it to the "Master Battery ON/OFF". same with the alternator. now it works great. so it was my fault basically. just wanted to give you an update.
Luckily there are plans for updating the 787/747 in AAU2.
I think the best thing with these planes though are being included with the game. Although yes, freeware such as the FlyByWire does a much better job, I think it is difficult to complain about the 747 in particular. The 787 is improved by the Heavy Division mod, but that isn't a good excuse, especially being in the premium deluxe edition of the game. Where I find issues with the use of these systems are in things like the Captain Sim planes, where they are payware and use the default systems (not even changing the aircraft type in the FMS).
Yeah it’ll be amazing when the default 747 and 787 are in a good place.
Arguably they should have been shipped in working condition to start with, but that’s what happens when a developer who usually makes Disneyland games attempts a flight simulator 😂
@@TiJayFLY They really should have. Although the 747 is more excusable than the 787, and they are meant for probably the more casual crowd
At least they are being improved, and not just left with the excuse of the Heavy Division mod, and being free with the sim
1:16 Love how they added the legacy default FSX liveries
I fly all of the Boeings and Airbuses using the Autopilot BUT I control Altitude and Heading using Vertical Speed and Heading inputs to follow the flight plan. I cancel Flight Following when descending and approaching the destination airport and later ask for landing clearance prior to final approach. This allows me to continually stay involved during a long flight but is still relaxing. This method seems to be a good work-around to avoid the shortcomings of the sim while still providing an adequately realistic experience.
Yup, as I mention, you can fly them fine using selected altitude modes :)
You hit the mark on MSFS developers!!! Thank you.
I too have noticed how Concorde lands slightly to the right at JFK when using approach mode. I find the engines shutting off at 37% fuel when I'm on finals more angering though as I don't have enough altitude to perform a quick autostart.
Ah, the developer actually answered me about this some months ago. This is due to certain tanks being empty. Concorde can only feed the engines from some tanks - the others are used for trim. With a virtual flight engineer, you wouldn’t have to worry about it… but without one, you need to manage the transfer yourself (or just put more fuel in).
@TiJayFLY okay ill just have to add more fuel nearer the destination. Thank you
@@TiJayFLY is the virtual engineer available on the marketplace?
@@ProAvgeek6328 no, the DC Concorde has no virtual flight engineer. Other Concorde add ons for other sims (Colimata for Xplane, FSLabs for P3D, SSTSIM for FSX, PSS for FS9 etc) do have a virtual flight engineer.
@@TiJayFLY so there is no way to get virtual flight engineer for msfs?
Solid review...however, this is somewhat the problem in the flight sim community. I feel like people think there's only one way to sim and that's "realistic" as possible. Yet there's a massive market of people who aren't expert level flyers and don't want to mess about with Cold/Dark and realistic operations like myself and others. Some folks just want to get home from work and fly whatever no matter how "high fidelity" it is. Just some food for thought
I very much sit on the casual side of the fence - if you check out my tutorial content, it’s hugely simplified and aimed at beginners.
For example, personally I always recommend planning flights with the in-sim map instead of Simbrief, and I rarely fly from cold and dark - unless I’m specifically making a video on it!
My issue with these airplanes is that the stuff that makes flying *easier* for casual players is flawed.
For example, using VNAV is much less hands-on than manual flight or FLCH mode - which in turn actually makes VNAV a *better* option for casuals. The same is true of a decent ILS mode and automatic landing, as it happens.
Broken VNAV and broken ILS modes just make life more difficult - either through having to babysit the airplane, or forcing use of more complex flight modes.
Same issue with Concorde - my entire argument is that it’s a pain to fly without a virtual engineer taking care of stuff for you. IMO the main flaw with the DC Concorde is that its omissions make life *harder* for casual players.
So don’t worry - I got you, casuals 😉 because I am one!
@@TiJayFLY lol i bounce in between both some days I feel like setting up SimBrief or going from Cold/Dark other days I just want to turn on the Cessna and just take in the view. Appreciate the content!
Just use the free headwind mod for 787 and the salty mod for 747. Then both Planes are good to fly
Heavy Division does improve the 787 for sure. Salty 747 is a bug-filled disaster last time I tried it (Feb 2023), even less reliable than default… has it been updated since?
@@TiJayFLY You must've been really unlucky then as everytime i've used the salty 747 there's been no problems and flied quite nicely
Oh yeah not headwind . Heavy division!
Headwind 330 neo is also great
@@clemensbogner3045 the headwind 330 is awesome, FBW systems in a 330 cockpit with 330 flight model... just amazing for freeware
I know DC Designs are not very high fidelity but I hate that concorde (especially considering the price), the cockpit looks like its made of lego.
Well that’s too bad cuz I already bought the Concorde and the 767 (and I’m not regretting it)
Oh !! I had 3 of the four 😅 🎉
It might not be perfect, but the concorde is still definitely enjoyable from my point of view: I wouldn’t feel msfs complete without it and it’s the plane I like flying the most (definitely not an expert simmer though, I recreate just small flights purely for fun, I don’t know how to proper trim all the settings)
It’s fine for small flights or hand flying, but if you try to take it across the pond supersonic it’s awkward
You are right.. 😊
you could extend no. 2 to the entirety of captainSCAM's line
Thing is if you want a 777 (or atleast something that *looks* like it inside and out) you have no other option
@@TiJayFLY You always have the option of by a copy of P3D and then buy a PMDG777, well, actually CS's own 777 for P3D is much better, I still fly CS757 and CS767 in P3D regularly and fell they are still feel a little better than FF757/767 for XP.
Having more than 3 sim on a computer is a great option to start with...
Yeah, in terms of early access modules i have learned my lesson with DCS and the harrier. Still a buggy mess..
Might have to update your list after the working title update
I’ll add a pinned comment for sure 😄 this video was made before the announcement
I will use all of them
FSS has been a very great aircraft so far and the devs are dedicated. It's also the best ERJ in MSFS period. Hard to complain when it's the only real option.
Not complaining, just saying IMO wait until it’s done 😄
hopefully the new update will make the default boeings semi-realistic, I'm not gonna try the beta and wait till its released
Yeah I feel like it’s difficult to judge it fairly until it’s released
Completely agree retarding the typhoon I really can't wait for the Indiafoxtecho version! It will be so much better
I will take the The Concord any day over any captain SIM or MS scenery products.
Absolutely. Concorde can be hit and miss in many technical ways, some of which are beyond my comprehension. However, it’s such great fun to fly anywhere in the world, which for me at least is what it’s all about.
all is good except for the fact that the saying is actually "if its not boeing, im not going" sooooooo take that as you will XD
Almost as if I was aware of that and reversed it for comedic effect ;)
so I should use the airbuses and the cj4 for long haul because the 2 boeings are bad?
I’d recommend the Fenix or FlyByWire A320. The default Airbus (and those built on default systems such as the Project Megapack 330) are not bad, but the Fenix & FBW are better.
@@TiJayFLY last time I checked in the marketplace I couldn't find the fly by wire a320, but I will look for it again
@@ProAvgeek6328 it’s not on Marketplace. You need their launcher - PC only
@@TiJayFLY do I download the a32NX from their website?
@@ProAvgeek6328 yup. But if you can afford the Fenix I would get that instead
This helps me realize I’m not actually messing up with the 747 flying it in fact I find the autopilot on almost all aircraft to be buggy. I follow the charts from navigraph to a science and still fail to capture the glide slope sometimes. And then the garmin adds extra waypoints that are not even from the world map planner. Dude what’s going on with this sim?
Are you flying the default or the salty 747?
@@jaimes7050 salty is worse
The default routing and auto flight systems are far from perfect. For the 787 you can somewhat avoid these issues with the Heavy Division mod, but otherwise I’d recommend just buying the PMDG 737 and waiting for their 747
@@TiJayFLY I've never flown the default so I can't tell. With the salty I managed some long haul flights with no issues at all. Howerver I'd never dare to take anything except PMDG, FBW or Fenix to VATSIM etc. You can tell that msfs has a very different target audience to other flight sims.
Based video
I have never had any issues with the Boeing 78X. The plane is not perfect, but it’s pretty flyable when you get used to manually descending when needed. I like using the Azure ATC; they do a decent job on telling you when you should start descending most of the time. The only problem I have with the two Boeings is that both the 78X and 748 do not obey cruise speeds after you finish climbing
Yup, as I say in the video - you can fly it just fine in FLCH and ALT HOLD modes following the ATC. The Heavy Division is a huge improvement too.
I bought the Concorde and I really regret it, I just don’t enjoy flying it and I spent way too much money on it
Is anybody using the default 747 & B787 with Salty & Heavy Division around?. I havent used the default 747 since a few months after Salty came along & the Freighter Mod just takes it to another level (but thats not Salty) that did it but a Livery Repainter. If it was upto Asobo we would be flying the Default 747 in Boeing livery.. Well I wouldnt be as I wouldnt have got past single figures where as Im not at 1100 Freighter hrs in 2 1/2 yrs.
Wait for AAU2 to be honest. Heavy div 787 is good in the meantime
the FSS got very good! updates are very often!
So people tell me. I will cover it again
thx (: i would say some stuff is sooo god but then sadly still standad mcdu. but then they have these effects at the landing like fsrealistic its very very very good and bad at the same time. but when they finnish i think this will be a must buy (sry for the bad english haha)@@TiJayFLY
I want this Concorde after watching this.
Almost, CS777 dont makes we sad
L-1011-100 TriStar in FMC
now we are getting AAU2 the default boeings are much more bearable
100%, my most recent video actually covers exactly this. As soon as AAU2 is official, I’ll add a pinned comment to this video
@@TiJayFLY yeah I bought the premium deluxe upgrade today (minor-ish mistake should’ve bought the actual game instead of continuing with game-pass) and knowing about the testing version I installed it and the boeings fly wonderfully
I think you should’ve replaced the Concorde with the 73 max for aesthetic reasons. The cockpit truly looks horrendous and the outside looks pretty bad too. The most important aesthetic is the cockpit aesthetic and it is really fucking disgusting on the 73 max.
737 MAX cockpit was reworked not so long ago
I have not watched the Concorde segment in full but from a buyer speaking here, I do not recommend you buying the Concorde at all (and trust me I wanted it). The intention of this Concorde was to be a not full study level aircraft but close enough study level, however, when you can't even have functioning autopilot and glitchy systems, I get frustrated. Especially in "non study level planes" I still expect there to be working autopilot to some degree. The Concorde really had no proper systems that never seemed to work great. Not a good purchase in my opinion
That’s pretty much my summary too
Any CaptainScam plane should be avoided, and the default Boeings are getting a new update from Asobo soon so it might get them out of the list
Yeah I’ll make a pinned comment when the new 787/747 arrive
I can't explain how annoyed I've gotten when I'm 3 hours into a long haul, over the Atlantic, and I get back from getting a drink and my 787 is inverted nose diving into the ocean
Should be better in AAU2
FSS' ERJ model is great because it was brought from x-crafts who did all the work
😂 same as the Fenix has great systems cos they licensed em from ProSim. Outsourcing and buying stuff in is definitely a thing in flight sim. I think PMDG are the only true “vertically integrated” developer.
God I hate people defending these modules. Thank you for not sucking the .... of these developers.
What bout the a310? Auto throttle issues
I never had any… the A310 is one of the more solid airplanes in my experience. Can you elaborate?
@@TiJayFLY must've been fixed as I haven't used it for few months, The auto throttle would drop out & the thrust would be just really inconsistent with auto throttle...
@@TiJayFLY actually I may be wrong it may have been the a319 it would make more sense
@@knowethjc29 A319 uses default AP so likely has issues
Concorde worked, then didnt work and is now working again. Flown properly eg: Managing fuel CG etc its fine. FSS Embraer is early access a concept that should be shot, though I have fronted up $$ for ND-11 and DC-10's that are under development that was with the knowledge they are works in progress. Capt Sim stuff is junk and coupled with the hostile support its just junk. Same goes for the Asobo A320 and the 787 having paid for Premium Deluxe was very disappointed. Want a real plane load the FlyBy Wire A320 allot closer to the plane than the Asobo game. Very surprised you haven't mentioned the MSScenery aircraft all of which are junk, graphics, flight models are all a joke!
I never tried any MSScenery stuff - maybe I’ll give them a go and make a dedicated video ;) I recommend the Fenix A320 over FBW, but both are very good
Free look in cockpit is broken on console. I stopped playing for this reason
Even using the “legacy” control scheme?
@@TiJayFLY yes it only works for like a split second when you hover over one of the control panel buttons and the cursor changes to the little circle. But once the camera moves abit and off of a control button it returns to a mouse pointer and can no longer move the camera until I hover over another button. Ive scoured the internet and for fixes. Tried everything. Just stopped playing eventually
Fortunately I don't touch anything inside the cockpit.
Please do ATR tutorial.
I think MS are publishing a fairly comprehensive set of tutorial videos if you check the official channel :) but I will be looking at them and seeing if I can do better ;)
@@TiJayFLY thanks hopefully you do one because your tutorials are straight to the point.
Your tutorials are better. All the info needed in a tenth of the time
Hi TiJay, this is a very well made, well thought out video.
However, due to me:
1. Not using the VNAV mode in any Flight Simulators (X-plane, FlightGear, FSX or FS2020), I have never noticed the poorly functioning VNAV function in default Boeings.
2. Always flying the Concorde manually, I did not know that the localizer mode on the Concorde is not accurate.
Indeed, you can *mostly* work around the issues depending how you fly
honestly. just CD/SC designs. bought the F15 and F16, dont like flying either one
I don’t trust anything ending “*Designs”. I’ve no idea if there’s any affiliation between them and DC Designs, but the reputations of both don’t seem good.
@@TiJayFLY they're the same guy... same with cj simulaions... i dont need study level stuff, but they all fly and look so bad for what you pay for
I thought it was me
Well, you will have to remake this video in a few weeks..
Why is that?
@@TiJayFLY I think you missed the latest developer live stream, AAU2 will be focussing on upgrading the 787 and 747 systems, all the logics, CDU, LNAV, VNAV PFD, MFD is being worked on by Working Title, its supposed to be launched in the next update. It wont be Payware level but it will definitely be much more flyable
@@ayaanahmad03 nice I’ll add a note at the time
Aerosoft Twin Otter = Buyers Remorse. They have now mysteriously removed from sale. Lucky for you, unlucky for the early adopters.
Use Concorde FXP instead!
It would really help if you put time stamps to the video mate.
Time stamps are in the description…
@@TiJayFLY ah that’s great sorry man, you see lazy asses like me don’t even look there and need it I’m the video itself lol
@@boudewijnzwaal8186 TH-cam should automatically adapt time stamps into chapters - I don’t have any control over that. I always tick the “identify chapters” box, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn’t. I’ve now added a 00:00 timestamp in case it makes a difference, thanks for flagging it
I have the Concorde, and it's basically my favourite plane in MSFS (and possibly even in real life). In my opinion it flies like a dream.
I do understand your issues tho
I'm on Xbox
Depends what you do with it and what experience you’ve had before :) It just doesn’t compare well to its older and current peers IMO
@@TiJayFLY that's true
Default Boeings - AAU2 Update by WT is good now
CaptainSim 767 - stay away from any CS products, if you are willin to pay, wait for the pmdg and the *freeware* Lunar Sims 767
FSS Embraer Early Access - Too many bugs
DC Designs Concorde - the toy of VATSIM
Bredok Eurofighter - No comment
AAU2 is beta only right now, when it hits the public branch I’ll add a pinned comment :)
@@TiJayFLY Oh yea, forgot about that. Thought it was released :)
That’s why it’s been sitting idle on my computer for the last three years. X-plane all the way.
Why does anyone 'fly' long haul flights in a simulator?
They only practice take-off, landing and bad weather in simulators because they're too expensive to have (student) pilots using up hours of valuable simulator time just to 'simulate' long haul flights.
Because time skip doesn’t exist in MSFS yet 😂
The CaptainSim 767 Is best that HDSimulations
The CS is less buggy but the RHD looks better. Neither are great
@@TiJayFLY Ye Rhd if you need some improvements
The only reason I like x plane is because they have waaaay better planes msfs has the scenery tho and like only 4 good planes but I’m sticking with msfs
I disagree with the 787, ejet and concorde tbh. 787 by itself is really bad yes, but with the 78XH by heavy division it adds an actual vnav. The default 747 has the salty improvement mod which is absolutely brilliant. the fss Ejet while still alpha its not that bad and is still miles better than the Virtualcol ejets. athe concorde sure isnt the greatest but its still loads of fun to fly. Also the captain sim 767 and 777 are horrible by default but also have a salty improvement mod. i havent tried the 767 with it but the 777 mcdu with the salty improvement is probably has the most features of any mcdu in game rn, maybe not fenix and pmdg but pretty close. So that pretty much just narrows it down to the bredok products which are incredibly bad with little to no improvement mods.
I found Salty to be very buggy, but haven’t tried it since Feb. Heavy Division mod is excellent
dont forget the captain scam 777
It’s the only option for a 777 though, so 🤷♂️🥴
Uh, I thought all Captain sim are to be avoided, not just the 767...
Depends how much you want a 777, it’s the only option
The Grumman Widgeon is garbage. It's a port from Flight Sim X and they claim it has updated graphics, and yeah, maybe they "updated" them to 2012, but it still looks godawful.
Unlike the other planes here, at least the FSS E series is actually under active development. You could probably put the new ATR on this list too (with the CRJ).
I’m yet to try the ATR
Mate I gotta disagree. The new ATR should be treated like the FSS E series as it will almost certainly be updated in the near future to fix certain issues.
@@mattstuff4177 You have more faith then me *looks at the non-existent updates for the CRJ* a lot more faith then me.
@@mattstuff4177 The FSS is working to have its own independent system, while the ATR will always be linked to the simulator's standard systems
You forgot everything by MSCENERY
I had literally never heard of them until people started commenting on this video 😂 perhaps I need to make a special feature
What about the Airbus 318 and the A319, physics are garbage, taking off and landing, landing either plane is a joke, the planes bounce like basketball balls when they land, no realism whatsoever
The LVFR planes? I’ve only tried the A321 - so I’d imagine they all fly like the default A320 in terms of systems, just with worse flight dynamics.
@@TiJayFLY The Airbus A320 that came with the game update is alright, its just the other dlc planes are off, physics are terrible, sometimes when i land on a runway atc tells me to land on the runway, plane will be full flaps engines at Idle and speed brakes at full and the plane “Airbus” will hover over the runway and not land, thats not realistic, this simulator and the developers need to go back to the studio and make this simulator more realistic, i also wish the atc voices were different everywhere in the world, this sim needs so many little things to be more realistic, at times it seems too arcadish, i have over a 1000 hours into this sim, needs so many little improvements!
@@hot00head00red The flare physics while landing have been brought up so many times but they just don't seem to care. The sad thing is they can afford to ignore these complaints by throwing out nice new world updates now and then since a vast majority of their audience simply don't care about physics or in depth systems and just want to see nice landscapes.
You forgot the CaptainScam 777
It’s the only 777 available in MSFS - until there’s an alternative, you can’t avoid it if you want something that at least *looks* like a 777 inside and out
@@TiJayFLY there is an alternative option, save your money and wait for PMDG. The flight model is an absolute joke lol
I have concord and i have no problems
It’s more a discussion of how it compares to its peers than “problems” 👍
I wish I could say I enjoy msfs but sadly xplane 12 has been my new sim the scenery has never bothered me I've always been a fan of the flight model and the SSG 747 knocks the standard one in msfs out the park
X-PLANE = 🤮 SCENERY.
From my experience, MSFS might have more add-on aircraft than XP, but the add-on aircraft for XP are more detailed and have a higher system depth. Quality vs. quantity.
@@simonwelser6973 From my experience MSFS is deep enough for me and for me it's the world satellite data. I like being able to go to anywhere on planet Earth and seeing the area as it really represents itself and you can't do that with X-Plane. The new SIM update 13 that just did all of Oceania and Hawaii is just incredible because now I have all the islands in South Polynesia visit. And photogrammetry is just breathtaking in some larger ares. Also we're 3 years into a 10 year project and every couple months there's a massive world update that just makes it so fun! I love being able to fly over my Hometown and seeing everything in Photogrammetry and actually see my house and street with photo satellite data. To me that makes it unbeatable.
I guess differences of opinions make horse races.
Yup, these are just my opinions :) I’m sure some other folks will feel differently, and that’s all part of the fun 😅
the recording used in the background of this video have atrocious framerate to the point that its annoying to watch.
What sort of frames are you getting, out of curiosity?
Are you a programmer?
Yes, building commercial software for ~13 years
@@TiJayFLY oosh, thats pretty cool
Yeah sorry I’ve done countless long haul flights in the 787 even on VATSIM and have had zero issues with the things you mention. Big freaking deal you have to adjust speed on decent. That’s hardly an excuse to “avoid” this one lol
That’s very much not what I said… 😉 but yes, you can avoid the issues if you fly it in a certain way (which I did mention)
@@TiJayFLY "Completely disregards altitude or speed restraints for SIDs and STARS making it useless for VATSIM" Yeah it kind of is what you said and its inaccurate.
@@Laxa30 it is accurate. The “VNAV” mode on default aircraft does not automatically adjust speed or altitude to match published SID/STAR limits - unless you manually adjust MCP alt to these limits at each stage, or of course if you’re flying in FLCH mode following ATC instructions.
In “VNAV” mode, default airplanes essentially fly “max climb/descend” to MCP altitude - which is incorrect.
The real airplane will respect published limitations during climb and descent, as long as the MCP altitude matches or is above the restriction on ascent, and matching or below on descent.
I think the modified Heavy Division 787 does respect these limits, as do payware airplanes like the PMDG and Fenix. I think the Longitude with WT Garmin G3000 does too.
If you can find a video of the default 787 levelling and continuing climb in accordance with a published SID, let me know…
All CaptainSim products should be avoided.
14 hour flight?...lol
UK- Japan etc
@@TiJayFLY fair enough..Nice to have the time for that
@@googleisshittoss you just set alarms and turn up at the start and the end 😂
@@TiJayFLY 🤣🤣....That'll work
The Boeing Max sucks, a lot.
It improved a lot over time though. The original release was *bad*
@@TiJayFLY so it is good?
@@aklnkl5369 yesn't
@@brodie.969 *exactly*
Don't forget the F-35 and Leonardo M346: truly god-awful aircraft when it comes to nav and autopilot. Both can barely manage to follow a heading in AP and devs should hang their heads in shame.
Indeed - I made a brief mention of fighter jets struggling to follow flight plans in the Concorde segment :)