8KCABrett

My Feedback: (1)

I wasn't really convinced that I should get AFPD, but I decided to order form OMP and take them up on their 15 day trial. It just arrived yesterday, after a few hours on it here are my initial observations.

I had wondered how tough it would be getting my JR radios to work with the interface after hearing of people's troubles, but I had no trouble whatsoever in using my XF622, 9303, or old Airtonics VG6DR. The software came with the Futaba/Multiplex/Airtronics connecter but I had to purchased the $9 cable for the JR radios. I certainly enjoy flying AFPD and I think that says alot about it, it's much better than RealFlight G2 in many regards (rotorcraft not yet flown), and for 3D I it's clearly better in particular because of the aileron authority in hovers is maintained and propwash effects are done better. I have some third party planes for G2 that fly pretty good even in 3D (ailerons not withstanding), but they always were so tweaked for one sort of flying that that a little change caused them to fall on their face (like switching form upright to inverted harriers). For the most part I think that the sim is really very good, but to be truly useful in a basic training regard I think some things should be addressed.

Here are the ones I noticed right of the bat:
The flight model negatives that I notice are that there is very little snap character in the aircraft which makes them very forgiving even of poor technique, and the planes are a bit floaty even with power off, there is no yaw-roll couple, and no pull to the belly/canopy, so there isn't any coupling in KE at all, very little to no inertia in particular on the roll axis rewards even poor technique with crisp as can be point rolls, I see no gyroscopic effects from the prop at all, control in the harrier and torque-rolls is a bit easier than in the actual aircraft, and the tailslide in particular is much easier to fly than in actual aircraft. The tailslide actually seems to have an increase in stability as you start moving backwards, and there is a lot of controllability such that I can actually tailslide then land backwards while still in the tailslide! As seen here with the default Edge Shockflyer:

(copy and paste entire URL into browser, don't click on it)

ftp://69.56.198.2/Brett's%20RC%20Flying%20Videos/AFPD%20Videos/Shocky Goofy Tailslide.rm


The good news about this particular issue is that I tried some settings from other AFPD users and found that more realistic tailslide behaviors are possible. I have yet to do much modification for the aircraft, but I intended to see if I can't add some mass to the wings to give the planes some inertia at least on the roll axis, and will try to tweak things to see if some other improvements can be made. Tailslides are very complicated aerodynamically so this is probably asking alot, but KE coupling and stalls/snaps should be do-able at this point (Some planes in G2 have almsot the exact same couple that I find in my real planes). One thing that also helps a little in the tailslides and with respect to the floaty feel is setting some wind and turbulence, the behaviors of the aircraft are pretty good in this situation (the wind seems to have a more realistic effect than it did in G2), and the semi random behaviors we usually see in tailslides are simulated to a certain degree by the little wind gusts, giving you reason to keep on your toes. I also programmed in a KE mix to ADD coupling to the Knife Edge, seems a little silly, but I don't want the sim to make me lazy! This works for me, but I'd expect that this sort of thing be included in the flight physics in the first place.

I am not a big fan of the 3D landscapes (though the Gym is awesome!) as the photo based sites look much better IMHO. The lighting effects on some of the aircraft are a too glossy and liquid/metallic and gives the planes a "Quicksilver" sorta look that doesn't quite stack up to G3 or the screenies I have seen of Reflex XTR. . .but it still looks quite good in general. Good enough in fact that in some videos I made it's hard to tell the real video form the sim captures.

Am I gonna keep it? Well, probably, hopefully these issues will be looked at in the future patches, and at that point I will have a hard time faulting this sim at all. I am not sure that I would want to learn on this though as some of the things that bite you in the real world of RC aren't really issues here, like the stalls/snaps, the overly floaty planes, and what a rude awakening it would be to learn KE on the sim then try it with your model down low. . .

I used G3 only at the hobby shop, and I am pretty sure that their version hasn't been patched/updated yet, I am going ot call them and find out, and go try it once again.

matt3D

Thank you 8KCABrett for posting this, this well help me and many others decide on whether they want to buy AFPD or not. Right now I have AFP, and I think it’s awesome, so I am not sure if I should go spend more money, (75$) for the upgrade to AFPD. Nevertheless, it does look and sound like it is better then AFP. Therefore, that is a big plus.

Thanks,

Matt

Breakstuff5050

I do not own delux, nor have I tried it, but all the things you have listed are very obvious in vtoc videos i have seen, they are floaty, no coupling, and almost no inertia on roll axis. I know some people are gonna get worked up with what im about to say but i think g3 has a much more complex physics generater. There is roll coupling in every plane, the last thing the planes are is floaty (if they snap too much they can be easily fixed with less weight, more wing cord, or more expotential), it is hard to TR ( just a little bit easier then life), and the wind physics are great , you can adjust all wind aspects such as turbulence, micro turbulence etc.. But I do see a downside to G3. They could do away with the humongus amount of terrain they offer, and things like trees swaying. But I think that is all adjustable (except for terrain). But they still offer the g2 fields which takes far less computer to use. I have to say that reflex and afp has more realistic graphics, but that really doesnt change much. And one of the biggest downsides to g3 is if you want more planes then you have to buy a $30 add on with about 12 extra planes and helis. But Knife Edge Software is working with that issue right now, in the next couple months g3 users will beable to create their own airplanes using 3D max and Gmax, i think those are the programs. And yes, there has been about 4 or 5 updates already that have improved g3 temendously. I just wanted to tell yall a bit about g3.

Like I said before, i havent tried delux yet but from videos i have seen it doesnt look like the physics are as complex as g3, but i could be wrong.