Concorde-X Vs SSTSIM

[JamieFDalton]

Hi everyone, I've just got back in to flight simming and have been enjoying loading up my SSTSIM Concorde in FS2004. I started out with the Concorde model in FS2000 when it came bundled with a PC but I didn't do anything else besides taking off, crashing and then closing the program. I then got the Altitude Software version for FS2002 and started to try to learn more about the systems. A few years later when I had FS2004 I discovered the SSTSIM version and compared to everything else it's outstanding. To this day it's one of the best purchases I've ever made and worth every penny. What has always stuck with me ever since I first used it is how accurate the fuel use and displays are compared to the Altitude Software model and I've spent a lot of time mastering the fuel transfer. I've made about 50 perfect rated flights on FSPassengers and I've not once used the VFE but after such a long absence I've forgotten a lot. It's slowly coming back to me but there are questions I have which would usually be answered on the SSTSIM.com support forums but it looks like they have not been available for the last few years. I posted on there under the name ConcordeOne.

I'm going to upgrade my PC and then get FSX and Concorde-X but what aspects of it stand out the most over the SSTSIM version? I've seen a few familiar names here that were part of the develompent team with the SSTSIM model so I'm just a tad exited to think there is an enchanced Concorde out there.

 

[Martin Richards]

I would personally reccomend that rather than FSX you look towards potentially getting Prepar3D. The Concorde X has versions available for v3 and a v4 version is in development AFAIK (v3 is 32 bit and has more legacy support, v4 is 64 bit and allows for greater performance). Support for FSX has dried up over the years and it's a lot of effort on a modern machine compared to P3D, which uses the same source code but upgraded to support more modern systems. With regards to realism P3D also allows for more accurate modelling of some systems compared to FSX.

I never used the SSTSIM model myself, but the Concorde X is certainly modelled to a similar (if not greater) level of detail, and I believe has been developed with information from the real aircraft.

Regardless, I hope you have fun coming back to simming!

[Mike Ionas]

I will second Martin's suggestion and recommend going to P3D, since you plan to update your system, preferably v4 which is a 64-bit platform and allows developers the introduction of features that were not feasible in older 32-bit platforms like FSX and P3Dv3. Currently the Concorde X for P3Dv4 is in development though.

[JamieFDalton]

Thanks for the advice and I have to admit that until a few weeks ago I had never heard of Prepar3D. That's how out of touch I was with flight simming but am now going to get a 64bit sysyem and Prepar3D. I'm still only on one monitor so it's about time I upgraded and the prospect of a Concorde simulator better than SSTSIM is the ultimate motivation.