Trains versus Planes

A somewhat off-topic bit of news here, but when you look at it, it is quite relevant to MSTS.As I enjoyed MSTS so much, I decided to buy MS Flight Simulator 2002 Professional Edition. And I couldn't believe how disappointed I was.There is nothing wrong with the game, it's just that I wasn't as hooked as I thought I would be on it. Before playing either product, if you had asked me which I thought would have been more exciting, driving a train on a PC or flying a plane on a PC, I would have said flying a plane. All I can say is that I was glad I bought MSTS first. I'm sure many people would also think flying planes is more exciting than driving trains, but there is only so much you can do once you are up in the air and the views though scenic, are very samey and from afar, whereas in the train cab you can look out and always be delighted by the view or you wonder what's around the next bend. Seeing other trains go by is fantastic too, as is stopping at stations.Here's one case where the train people have outdone the plane people!Luckily the guys at the shop were kind enough to let me swap the MS Flight Simulator 2002 Professional Edition which I bought for other PC games and joypads. It's not a bad game, just that you really would want to be a fan of flight simulators before you got it. Strangely I was, not anymore though!Kind Regards,
Jay

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: Trains versus Planes, IcyFire, Apr-23-03, 07:32 PM, (1) RE: Trains versus Planes, rgh69, Apr-23-03, 07:47 PM, (2) RE: Trains versus Planes, DTA, Apr-23-03, 08:49 PM, (3) RE: Trains versus Planes, Hovertrain, Apr-23-03, 10:07 PM, (4) RE: Trains versus Planes, Swissie on the Road, Apr-24-03, 05:19 PM, (9) RE: Trains versus Planes, al1218, Apr-24-03, 06:59 PM, (13) RE: Trains versus Planes, felix959, Apr-24-03, 11:44 PM, (14) RE: Trains versus Planes, Swissie on the Road, Apr-25-03, 04:55 PM, (19) RE: Trains versus Planes, Hovertrain, Apr-25-03, 04:35 PM, (18) RE: Trains versus Planes, smp11512, Apr-24-03, 03:05 AM, (5) RE: Trains versus Planes, MasterChief, Apr-24-03, 02:18 PM, (6) RE: Trains versus Planes, BlakeTyner, Apr-24-03, 03:33 PM, (7) RE: Trains versus Planes, CGW409, Apr-24-03, 06:02 PM, (10) RE: Trains versus Planes, JonN, Apr-25-03, 00:10 AM, (15) RE: Trains versus Planes, CGW409, Apr-25-03, 05:44 PM, (20) RE: Trains versus Planes, JonN, Apr-26-03, 06:51 PM, (22) RE: Trains versus Planes, calr, Apr-24-03, 04:40 PM, (8) RE: Trains versus Planes, patm41, Apr-25-03, 07:07 AM, (16) RE: Trains versus Planes, Nels_Anderson, Apr-24-03, 06:21 PM, (11) RE: Trains versus Planes, boyho1, Apr-24-03, 06:49 PM, (12) RE: Trains versus Planes, niknak, Apr-25-03, 12:28 PM, (17) RE: Trains versus Planes, Matt Vince, Apr-26-03, 07:13 PM, (23) RE: Trains versus Planes, dadbill, Apr-25-03, 08:26 PM, (21)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

i own both, but obviously I'm more railfan then airfan, i don't know the difference from a aileron from a rudder, but stick me in a ac4400 and i'll being that load of grain down the hill with perfection to the end

Shawn Kenselaar, Screen Shot Forum Mod, Repainter for YLW & TKW
ShawnSSK@yahoo.com

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Apr-23-03 AT 07:48 PM (EDT)

It's a good thing that at least you can choose what you want to do, although yes, FS2002 is kinda pricey. Did you know that nowadays you can even step out of the plane and walk around it? Or just walk over the airport? Just toss in a add-in and that's it, I wish MSTS could do that!BTW that's an Airocommander AC560A(HC) by Milton Shupe, Scott Thomas, and Andre Folkers and Team Commander (screenshot as well)

Best regards,
Richard.

Attachments

http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/User_files/3ea725b86ff10924.jpg

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Flight sims are not my thing, but I have seen loads more additions to MSFS than there has been for trains, as it has been going much longer. I just hope the additions for train sim are as numerous, but I have plenty as it is, so I am content.David

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

For any of you colorful characters who've seen the movie "Con Air", I wanna fly that twin-prop. My father is a private pilot so I know a little about small planes like Cessnas and such

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Hi Hovertrain> For any of you colorful characters who've seen the movie "Con Air", I wanna fly that twin-prop. That would then be the Fairchild C-119 "Flying Boxcar". Matching name given this post is in the MSTS forum Happy Landings! Btw: www.flyingboxcar.com is about the very few surviving Flying Boxcars way up in Alaska!Swissie

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I've made two flights on C-119's in the late 60's and both flights had inflight emergencies! Like the bumble bee, a C-119 wasn't supposed to fly, they both defy the laws of aerodynamics.I started with FS95 and moved up to FS2000. To me, it seems like the "on ground" handling seems to get less realistic with each new version. I wonder what the next version of MSTS will bring...hopefully a realistic Marias Pass route.

al1218

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Swissie, you're close, but four off.The airplane in the film "Con Air" was built by Fairchild, but it is a slightly more modern model: The C-123 "Provider." It was used as a cargo transport in the Vietnam War, and had jet engines mounted in pods under the wings to enable it to take off from shorter, forward airstrips. The airplane was also heavily featured in the Mel Gibson/Robert Downey Jr. film "Air America," about the secret CIA-funded organization operating in Laos.I'm not sure if there are any C-123 models available for FS2002 or its predecessors (I think there are). I know there is at least one C-119 model.Regards,felix959

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Apr-25-03 AT 04:59 PM (EDT)

Felix,thanks for the correction - Must have been my memory playing tricks on me, I thought I remembered it being a C-119, but its a long time since I saw the movie, actually. There are some more Providers around than Boxcars, to my knowledge. Several ex USAF units have spilled into the warbird and/or occasional local freight market in the Southwest, where I remember having seen about half a dozen of these birds in the last three, four years.Actually, some of the C-119 also feature this additional jet engine, albeit mounted atop the fuselage in their case, and even the ancestor of the C-119, the C-82 Packet, could optionally be fitted with them. As some of the train simmers are also somewhat interested in the aerial competitors, I risk to post the respective silhouettes from my archives, off-topic:
Fairchild C-82 Packet N9701F, Northern Pacific Tranport, Anchorage AK 1990
Fairchild C-119 Flying Boxcar N13743 "Tanker 81", Hemet Valley Flying Svc., Pima Air Museum, Davis Monthan AZ, 1997
Fairchild C-123 Provider N524S, Skymaster Aviation, Kingman AZ, 1997All three are examples for untis with additional turbojet engines (straight, no modern turbofans as todays jetliners). Any more questions 'bout these roaring beasts?Swissie

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>That would then be the Fairchild C-119 "Flying Boxcar". The only time I see a flying boxcar is when my frieght train goes off the edge of a cliff. lol

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>i own both, but obviously I'm more railfan then airfan, i
>don't know the difference from a aileron from a rudder, but
>stick me in a ac4400 and i'll being that load of grain down
>the hill with perfection to the end I just got fs and I agree with you to the fullestFormerly Smp1151 & pathankful1

Because Everytime I tried to log in it said incorrect username

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Howdy Jay,You might give flying your computer around a second chance with MS Combat Flight Simulator 2 or 3. You're not just flying from point A to point B, you're trying to keep your tail from being shot off by a bunch of Japanese or German pilots. You also have to learn to take off and land on an aircraft carrier. These games come with single missions, full campaigns, training, quick combat, editors, the whole shee-bang. And, there are lots of downloads available for them, just as with MSTS.MC

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Being a private pilot as well as locomotive engineer (wonder how often that happens lol) I really get a kick out of both sims. However, if you need an incentive to fly in FS2002...just remember you can fly this bad boy:Blake Harris
Engineer/fireman, Jefferson and Cypress Bayou Railroad

Vice Dean, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies

Attachments

http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/User_files/3ea83beb6e0e46a1.jpg

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Blake
The "Lady" is all fine and good but I love my MIG 31 Firefox,5.5 mach and unlike they told Clint in the flick you don't have to "Think in Russian,Think in Russian"Gary S

"Some say this country's just out for a fight. After 9/11 man I'd have to say thats right"
"Have You Forgotten"
Darryl Worley

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Apr-25-03 AT 00:10 AM (EDT)

In retrospect, "Firefox" is one of the most laughable movies in terms of its central concept. I mean, as if the Russians could ever really build a plane like that...
I guess that movie was made during the scare about the MiG-25 'Foxbat', a Russian fighter that could do Mach 3. Because of this speed, it was percieved by many western experts to be a superfighter. But then a Russian pilot defected with his Foxbat, and the experts learned that aside from it's speed, the MiG-25 was a piece of crap, incapible of holding its own in a dogfight with most Western fighters, since it was designed to intercept bombers. In this regard, it was obsolete even as it was built (just like the Avro Arrow, whose capibilities have been grossly exaggerated through various myths), in an age of ICBMs.
In terms of weapons technolegy, the Russians usually lagged a whole generation behind the West.
Example: Look how easily the M1A1 Abrams tanks mowed through the Iraqi (Russian made) T-72M tanks during Gulf War I. Not one US tank was lost to enemy fire during that conflict. I seriously doubt the M1A1 would have that much more trouble against the newer T-80 and T-80U tanks, since they have the same 125mm 2A46 gun as the T-72, and their armor is still too weak to withstand a sabot round from the M1's 120mm gun at most ranges, meanwhile Russian's guns can only penetrate the Abram's frontal armor at point blank range! Thats just for the M1A1. The newer M1A2 has even more armor. So much in fact that its frontal armor is immune to virtually all Russian made helicopter of ground launched anti-tank projectile. Final word: I am totally amazed that the Soviet Union ever became a superpower at all! Jonathan Nikiforovs.
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Repainter for Yonder Locomotive Works.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Apr-25-03 AT 05:45 PM (EDT)

Jonathan
Agreed but I did pick up the flick on DVD and generaly chapter select to the "good" parts(from when Gant gets the bird off the ground)but also remember this flick was from the early 80's that also gave us Red Dawn(another just turn off the brain and enjoy flicks)
(edited cause I just notice I've reatched post # 700)Gary S

"Some say this country's just out for a fight. After 9/11 man I'd have to say thats right"
"Have You Forgotten"
Darryl Worley

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Yeah, Red Dawn was even dumber by far. "Turn off the brain and enjoy" flicks (which is generally synonomous with action movie) are not my favorite type of movie, but I do watch them occasionally. Another dumb '80s action movie is Rambo (and its sequel) Just watch and you'll know what I mean.Jonathan Nikiforovs.
Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.

Repainter for Yonder Locomotive Works.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Well, I've been "flying" the computer for about 20 years, now, ever since the very first version of FS was released. Prior to that, I was a pilot with about 300 hours in my logbook.I currently have both MSTS and FS2002 installed on my computer. I don't fly that much as most of my time is spent working on my route. Occasionally, I take a break and take the Cessna 172 for an hour or two. The last time I did it, I took off from Idaho Falls, ID, flew over to Jackson Hole, Wy and then north to Yellowstone park where I proceded to get lost! I think I landed in Yellowstone Lake...splash!Cal Rasmussen
Beaverton, OR
cal.rasmussen@verizon.netColumbia Gorge Route (Phase 1 track completed, 60% scenery, learning 3D Canvas)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

remind me not to go flying with you

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I own and love both types of sims so I'm not biased either way. But I think you didn't give flying enough of a chance. The problem with sims is that they are so open ended. Unlike games where the designer sort of guides what you have to do to be successful, in a sim it's up to you to decide what to do and consequently you may miss the "good stuff".There's some pretty amazing scenery to see even in the default FS2002 areas. Flying is also plenty challenging. Sure, anyone can point the plane where they want to go when in the air, but try making good landings--with a crosswind, at night, in the rain, with low clouds, etc. There are plenty of ways to challenge yourself.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Hi guysI reckon those of us that like sim type games will tend to have both MSTS & MSFS on board (as well as probably Flight Unlimited 2 & 3 and perhaps even Fly II {or perhaps not the latter!!!}). They all have their strengths and weaknesses and I find that I go through periods when I exclusively fly and vice versa. I reckon that MSTS will have to take a back seat when MSFS 2K4 comes along this summer!Leads me to ponder what other sims we might like to have as well - how about a few suggestions.....Baywatch????All the greensFrank

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Frank - I reckon I'd have to upgrade my graphics card yet again in order to cope with Pamela's attributes!!Cheers, Nick (UK)

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

As a Flight Unltd II nut, here's my tuppence.Yes, I love trainsims, but sometimes the hardware fails to keep up with the software, or in other words, my other computer, which I use while away, cannot run MSTS, and struggles with BVE. However, Flight II works like a dream, and there's nothing better than going for a spin over the Bay in a DHC Beaver to take away a horrible day.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Apr-25-03 AT 08:29 PM (EDT)

I dunno, I kinda like flight simulator! It's AlMOST as challenging as tr5uing to hi9tt trhese keys! )
I 'll have to reload iyt back up somedaY!
Yeah, right!
I'm Just Kidding!!
And you know what?
Nels, HE DA MAN!!!

db
Ceeanoh Shops

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.