I fly a Funtana .40 w/ a OS 70 FS and I'm ok at basic aerobatics, but I'd like to begin learning 3D. I have some money saved (approx. $150) and am wondering if I'd be better off purchasing a sim (Reflex XTR) or a GP Flatout to begin working on learning 3D flight manuvers.

Give me your thoughts/experiences. Thanks!!

Sim foamy profile

www.3dhobbyshop.com or www.e-foamies.com , grab a R3D trainer and go at it! It isn't a typical trainer in the "flat bottom high winger" sense, but rather it has the capabilities of any 3d plane, and it is VERY hard to break, it is made with high expansion epp foam, with a full fuse and airfoiled wing, that all flex, kinda like the great planes "flight-flex" stuff... If you watch the vid in my sig, there are a few crashes in slo-mo where you can see the whole thing flex, and nothing breaks... If you would be satistfied sitting on the computer, go for realflight G3, but if you want something alot more fun, with the same durability, R3D all the way...

hmm... my host went down pics on the way

the pic is from a good speed knife edge into the ground, walked over, picked it up, threw it back in the air... probably would have totalled a depron flat plate foamy

There is no question that you will get more bang for the buck with the sim. Thats if you already have the right computer and vid card. I say this because you can get a good 3D capable sim for $100.00 (AFP) ,but you will spend $250 to $350 to put together a good foamy that will require maintenance when you crash it. AFP is good for wiring your brain for 3D and you can make it as easy or as difficult as you want it to be.

That being said, my hart does not thump when I am flying on the sim, but it can pick up speed anytime I have a model in the air.

Dollar for dollar, though, sim is cheaper.

I would agree with the sim. Didn't learn to tork roll until many hours on the sim. Remember you can't "reset" an actual plane. Foamies are nice and normally a crash doesn't end in destruction. The Funtana won't take much in the way of hard contact with the ground.

EXCAP232

Thanks for the tips!! I'm checking into Sims & downloading demos to see how they run on my computer. I know from experience the Funtana can't handle much in the way of tuff landings. In my first couple days of flying, I'd throttle down too soon on approach, and stall it about 4 ft up. BAMB!! It pancaked, and broke the bottom of the fuse were the gear mounts. I've since rebuilt & re-enforced that part & oh yea, I've learned to come in under power and cut throttle just before touchdown. Much better now.

Thanks again for the ideas, keep 'em coming.

BTW, Reflex XTR or AFP Deluxe? And why?

Which one has the best Funtana .40?

G3. I'm learning new 3D everytime I fly it. I'm also keeping up with maneuvers that I haven't flown for a while(no plane that should fly them). Right now I'm practicing my snapping circles with it.

stay away from AFP and AFPD, not worth the money IMO... if you get a sim, get G3...

BUT, I disagree with these people above... unless you purposefully try to kill one of those R3D's, or repeatedly dork it HARD, it is just about impossible to break it to the point of repairs... The first one I saw fly crashed 52 times in the first day, someone learning to 3d indoors..., and the only "repairs" were putting the prop o-ring back on, and throwing it in the air... The only times it needed real repair with glue, was after a few encounters with the propeller from another plane... this is NOT your typical depron brittle foam flyer, it is flexible and doesnt "snap" when you crash... plus you use flexible silicone glue, so even the repaired spots still flex...

the sim is a valuable tool, but if you want the same training, plus some real fun, r3d it...

I have AFPD and it is AWESOME, worth every penny if you ask me and ALOT of other people, there are over 600+ free downloadable airplanes along all over the web. I would personally stay a few miles away from G3, there is a several page thread in the Rc sim section about ALOT of people saying that they wish they had never bought it. I have read some stuff too that said that some LHS's are selling all there G3's back because they were to way to horrible to sell. I think if you ask any good 3D pilot that flys sims he will say AFPD.

I've played both side by side for hours, and imo, G3 > AFPD .... to each his own, to me G3

Have you ever flown G3? You can get it from Tower for $170. It is well worth it. Oh aren't the downloadable planes in AFPD just new bodies on old planes? YOu can create the same planes with G3 and name them whatever you want.

AFPD has new downloadable planes,, I have not played G3 but AFPD is hard to beat,,,

The "best sim" question was asked to Kyle W (a darn good straight hucker) a while back and he said that his friends swear by AFPD, but he thinks that G2 (not G3, G2) is the best.--yes for 3D. I had G2 and sold it for AFPD because I did not like the way the planes 3D'd in G2.

Almost any Sim will wire your brain so you don't have to think about the sticks. I mentioned AFP because if you are looking for the best $( price sensitive ), that platform is only $100 and it is easier on your computer than AFPD or G3. If what you want to do is learn 3D and you want to do it as affordable as possible and already have the puter for it AFP is a very good way to go. Start with the sim speed down and a very stable plane. As you start to improve, turn up the sim speed, use a more unstable plane and add weight to it. I am not saying that the sim is realistic....most of my sim flying is done with the speed cranked so that it helps build my reaction time.

I do think though that the foamy is the next step after a sim. Especially if you would find yourself flying much more often if you had a foamy. I am doing good if I get out 1 time a week with my glow planes. Without the sim and the foamy my flying would have not improved very fast. The sim and the foamy make it much more fun when I do get to the field that 1 time a week.

One thing I like about the sim is that I find it to be a good stress reducer that I can use whenever I want to, for just 5 min at a time if I like. If I want to fly the foamy the weather has to be OK, and I need to invest 1/2 hour of time. If I want to fly my glow, again the weather, time of day, and I need to have at least 2 hours of free time.

G2 can 3d good, but you have to modify most of the planes to get it right, tedious, but it does do it... the only real flaw is the physics in G2 don't recognize prop wash over the ailerons...

it recognizes it in G3.

I have heard the same thing that a lot of 3-d guys prefer the G2 over the G3. But I still think the AFPD is the best as far as realism for 3D. But I have also tweaked a lot of the planes to get them to fly the right way. Most have the CG too far fwd. I found the G3s Yak would tip stall way too easily and rather unrealisticly even with serious tweaking. However when it comes to helis I would say the G3 or G2 is way better. AFPD does it well but I feel it's just not up to par. And you cannot change the servo speed in AFPD either which sucks. It's all a compromise and there is no perfect sim... yet.

Man I cant imagine how you can see G3 being anywhere close to AFPD in realism. I can fly pretty doggone solid 3D and I just could not get a realistic sense from Real Flight anything for hovering harriers or any of that, even playing with the physics I couldnt find a realistic feel. I must have missed something but having tried both brands I just absolutely cannot see it. In less than 6 months with AFPD I went from a novice 3D hole burnertry to learn 3D and not crash to a guy that can hang with any above average 3D RC pilot out there. Thats an honestly true statement.
Proof of what AFPD has done for me since December..

http://videos.pitsbros.com/MikesFlightVid7-23-05.wmv

I dont know Kyle Woyshnis personally, but Im really honestly shocked that he would have said he prefers G2 considering what an awesome pilot he is. Hmmm,,,, however, that being said I think he could precisely 3D my computer monitor if I strapped a DA50 to it.

If you strapped a DA 150 on it, He would have good verticles.