We race the two sims through the Rockies-which wins?

Microsoft’s version had a realistic small-airport control tower and a few hangars. Pine trees peppered the landscape and mountains loomed in the distance. X-Plane had more generic-looking structures, and no apparent trees, but the view was clearer, crisper, and more three-dimensional. Additionally, the tire skid marks on the X-Plane runway were more realistic-looking—they were streaky, not blotchy like Flight Simulator’s rendition. The mountains in the distance were identical to those in Flight Simulator—likely a sign that both programs have their geographic modeling spot-on. Microsoft’s Cessna 172 cockpit was slightly different than X-Plane’s—a few more gauges, a slightly crisper image.



We took off from Aspen and banked off to the East, heading straight for a mountain range. As we both pulled back on the elevator controls to keep the airplanes heading up, we started losing speed, quickly closing in on dangerous stalls. I barely cleared the ridge. The airplane didn’t want to climb, and I knew that the next incline, just ahead, would be trouble.



Mone was having a harder time—he never made it over the top. Instead, he snaked along the side of the ridge for a while before giving up and pulling a hard right to head back into the valley below.



Realizing my poor judgment in devising this particular scenario, I decided to cut our losses. I put my Cessna down in the trees, ejected Mone out of his flight, and arranged for us both to move up to some military hot rods. Mone got into a Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and I climbed into its counterpart, Northrop Grumman’s YF-23, the aircraft that was in competition with the F-22 in the military’s selection process nearly a decade ago. We took off and shot over the ridge like a couple of cannonballs.



We had great fun cruising over the Rockies, enjoying the scenery, and trying to find our destination airport. After about 15 miles, I spotted the lake that sits near Leadville—both programs rendered it exactly where real-world maps said it would be. I cut my power, dropped into the valley, and headed for the little airstrip. Again, this was poor planning—I realized that the little strip would be far to short for the kinds of rollouts we both would need. Without enough time to divert to Denver International, we decided to take a crack at it.



Mone, however, was becoming overwhelmed by the squirrely controls of the F-22. It’s a sensitive aircraft, and as he tried to line up on the runway, disaster struck—he lost control and went down near the lake—luckily he’s a good swimmer. I was only marginally more successful in Flight Simulator. I throttled too far back, came in under-powered, and crashed into the trees about a quarter-mile short of the runway, which I would have rolled right off of anyway, had I made it.



Both simulators did a fantastic job, with the edge for overall visual quality going to X-Plane, but the detail and scenery realism award going to Flight Simulator. As for the flight models, both were accurate enough to convince us not to give up our day jobs.

Page 2 of 2 « first‹ previous12

0 Comments



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg