I HAVE TO SAY FIRST THAT I HAVE NNOOTTHHIINNGG against the AFP and the newest Relfex simulator. But I just have been on the AeroFly Pro's website and they say that their's is the best, because they have "real physics" to where the plane will act just, well almost like the real thing. Well, you have this great scenery, but you need to fly the plane right. I have been torque rolling the Cap 232 in G2, but you don't have large enough control surfaces to where you can't really control the roll rate. You just kinda hold it upright, and everything...and it torques around. Now, I dont' know about with the add-ons and stuff with the Extra 300 and stuff, but with AFP, then you have that Extra that Matt Roland (I believe) flew that comes with it............and I have seen the GREAT and INCREDIBLE video of that Extra flying and you have alot of control.................and also you can have a harrier just strait down like the REAL thing strait into a torque roll.......but on G2, then you can't do the harriers or anything, no matter how much deflection because you tipstall or whatever you call it, and you have no control.....


So, if AFP and Reflex really close to the real thing. I have seen the post that roarkr had up about the panoramic scenery like that and the video that is on the page when you open it up, and when he lands, it bounces and all......So, how "TRUE" to real flying is Reflex and AFP I have to ask.....??

In brief experience with AFP, it simply seems too easy to 3D with. The planes in AFP act like a plane that is setup absoluetely perfect with a wing loading of about 5 oz/sq ft. They are almost impossible to tip stall, and are rock solid in about every 3D maneuver. Its good to get your fingers going through the right motions, but if you were to go to your field expecting your plane to be as forgiving as in AFP, you would be coming home empty handed. Most of the planes in AFP are huge, and I think the reason why they didn't include smaller ones is because the physics engine would make them behave too much like a giant scale plane and not a .40 plane. That being said, I am having a crapload of fun with AFP, and I do believe it will make me much better at 3D and aerobatics in general.

Well, for right now, I am having fun with my G2, but I'm just not sure that I am getting all the REAL physical traits that a real plane would have flying around. But, I guess that not simulator can get THAT close to the real thing.

I agree with ptarp that AFP seemed to make it too eqasy to 3D... perhaps that is a good thing and perhaps not...


I have Reflex XTR and am very impressed... the same things that happen to me in real life when 3Ding happen in Reflex...

Hovering and the rudder get's away from you and you're fighting it to get back vertical... The landings feel as real as it gets, and overall the sim has been very helpful...

I think they are both good... but for me Reflex ahs the edge.... the new "3d scenery" for AFP will drop many people's systems to a crawl, but the Reflex scenerey is awesome and doesn't require near the CPU/video card power...

I've downloaded several planes from sites that are rally cool like the Funtana...

I put a little "fan-site" together a while back with some screenshots...

it's [link=http://renderwurx.com/rc/reflexxtr/]HERE[/link]

To everyone that says that AFP is too easy to 3d: In flight go to file - general settings (might be something similar) and move the simulation speed to around 200%.

I think the AFP is very close to realistic maybe a little floaty feeling but you can add weight to help that. Go download a smaller size plane if the 40% stuff flies to easily. The U cando an the Magic come to mind. Ground handling is not good but I believe thats something Ipacs knows about. Yea it would be nice to have great ground handling but the FLYING is what im interested in and the flying part is great. If you think its to easy go modify it till its harder. You get the best of both worlds with AFP a good 3D landscape OR if photorealism is your thing you can add that! Photo realism makes for some great screen shots but isnt that great for flying in my opinion. Oh and I guess I should add.......
I AM NOT ASSOCIATED WITH OMP OR IPACS IN ANY WAY.

Again, theres no need to add weight or anything. Just move the simulation speed up to around 200% and you will see that nothing is floaty and the planes snap easily.

I agree..just turn up the sim speed..I also however added weight to the planes and that helps alot

Well, those are some great looking planes. I like that Funtana 90 that you have there......I wish that I had one in "real life" and see how it acts to the REAL thing........

iflynething...

you do realize that those pics are not real planes but actual scr3enshots from Reflex XTR right? Just checking...

Also, you got me fired up again to record a video...

It's on the same page now...

http://renderwurx.com/rc/reflexxtr/

Doubling the simulation speed throws everything off, and it doesn't feel real at all. That is the kind of stuff I had to do in G2 to get it to "3D". I dont' want to have to tweak the program to get it to behave correctly. I can't believe this is the first I've heard of these problems with AFP. From what I heard before buying it, it was simply amazing with no flaws to speak of.

I just added weight to the the stock Cap which had 26 oz/sq ft wing loading and almost doubled the weight to give it 43oz/sq ft. Now, in real life, this plane wouldn't 3D for crap and would snap at even the slightest addition of elev. Not if AFP, it executes all maneuvers with rock solid stability. The only major difference is the increase in inertia the plane has, and the decreased pullout of maneuvers. The general feel when landing a plane if off, and the ground handling is rediculous.

Its pretty obvious the programmers didn't make a physics engine that was so versatile that 3D flight just happens naturally. It was "hard-wired" into the simulation, which restricts its realism envelope.

At this point, I actually think G2 is better at simulating general flight, except during stalled wing maneuvers(3D). I guess everyone was so captivated that they could actually do an elevator, wall, harrier, etc. in AFP, they overlooked everything else.

Even though I will have fun with AFP, I'm very disapointed in the so-called "great physics engine". If reflex didn't force me to use my $400 transmitter all the time, I might consider it.

I use my 9C on Reflex...

You pop the transmitter module out so it doesn't heat anything up...

I use an older 1650 pack for simulating and keep my 2100 for the transmitter...

What I like is the ability to use the mixes and enjoy the feel of my radio... the same on I fly with...

Not to start a pissing match but I have to disagree, I flew AFP this morning then went an flew this afternoon with a Spa3d and a heli. Flying 3D with the spad was no harder then AFP. Different characterists ....YES.....harder? NO!!! The Hawk 4 heli is also much more stable. I cant do any 3d heli so I cant comment on that. Does the ground handling suck on AFP .....? YES But the flight physics are the BEST of anything I have used.....which incudes RealFlight, AFP, Dave Brown and FMS. The Reflex is the only one I havent used.

Dan

No pissing match here, I'd love to love AFP, I just laid down $190 for it. I have flown a ucd .40 and a Funtana, and they both 3D(espescially elevator and harrier) WAY easier in AFP than on a real plane. I'm starting to sound like I don't like AFP, but I seriously do. I was just a bit disapointed after hearing so much amazing stuff about its flawless flight model.

Having ample time on G2 and owning Aerofly I will say Aerofly is hands down better for 3D, no question.

As for 3D being to "easy" with aerofly, I like to think aerofly takes a plane and removes all the bad habits you see when trying to 3D. If I were to take a plane and have it fly ideal, that would be what you get. There is no snapping, no wing rock in a harrier, nothing underpowered, and balanced perfect. If you realize this you can still have alot of fun and get alot of good practice at the same time. Regardless of people's opinions about it, it is the way I learned to Torque roll and harrier roll. If a sim can pull that off, then the flight model to me is close enough to the real thing.

In my Extra330s, I had to use spoilerons to reduce wing rocking during harriers, and flaps to smoothen the landings. I find afp useful in experimenting with the effects of spoilerons, flaps and other mixes to get a good feel of what to expect in the field with my 3D planes.

Yes, I did know that they were screenshots, but I just couldn't believe that they were. (I mean I know they were).......My mom didn't even believe when I showed her. She thought that they are from the real thing. I think the best (not to say that the otherone's aren't good) one is the one I believe at the bottom of that purple and white plane that looks like a Somethin' Extra (like my plane!!)....That really could go for the real thing anyday.





Also, I need to find out something. On AFP and Reflex, you have to turn ON YOUR TX. I hate that (not to say that I still dont' like them).....But, on G2 (I know I'm saying alot about G2, like i still like it the best, but I love AFP and Reflex) you don't have to turn it on. It gets the power from the computer, or through the interface or something.



I think that this is seemign to be a pretty interesting thread.........Well to me anyways.....

God madibud can you be anymore biased. Aeroflypro In my experince of owning profiles is the BEST BEST SIM OUT THERE. Yes REFLEX IS EYE CANDY BUT ITS PYsics are HORRIBLE!!!. And on aeroflypro the 3d planes are not to easy to fly there are realistic to the models specifications. YOur not taking into account building erros THERE 100% perfect and sim should make em that way. Its is not to easy to 3d in it thats exacly what some of those profiles do. Ive had the chance to fly the OMP 80' Edge and it FLYS EXACLY LIKE IT. All of the tendancys. I am not completly biased towards REflex. I can say that it does have alittle better grapics BUT FOR REALISM Aeroflypro today cannot be beat I WANT TO SEE A VIDEO OF REFLEX not stalling every time it try's 3d and flipping over and some harriers etc... The only time i see em in the video is for 2 seconds and then they come outta of it like every time they stall.

No pissing match here, I'd love to love AFP, I just laid down $190 for it. I have flown a ucd .40 and a Funtana, and they both 3D(espescially elevator and harrier) WAY easier in AFP than on a real plane. I'm starting to sound like I don't like AFP, but I seriously do. I was just a bit disapointed after hearing so much amazing stuff about its flawless flight model.



I personally dont think that the ucd.46 or the funtana fly anything like the real thing. Rembember these are NOT models that ipacs included an have been tweaked to fly differently.....example : the funtana is around a 40% scale with the .40 size colouring scheme. So if it flys easier on AFP then your small model does in real life theres a reason. Hope you enjoy your AFP

Your just as pathetic in this thread fp....

I shared my opinion because the post asked for open comments.

I gave them, I even put my money where my mouth is and made MY own videos...

I think they show that Reflex is an excellent sim and offers both realistic flight physics and a graphics level that is far advanced to any other sim.

I AM biased based on the fact that I have flown G2, AFP and Reflex, and (once again READ THIS SENTENCE) FOR ME was the best of the 3 BY FAR!

If you don't like it, I couldn't care less. Plain and simple.

Yeah but again you said your EXPERINCE IS LIMITED YOU ARE BIASED TOWARDS ONE SIMULATOR. DONT TRY TO PRESS YOUR OPINIONS ON OTHER POEPLE. The best sim out there is without a douby Aeroflypro Nothing matches its realism and effects. Reflex is the worste peace of crap that ive bought in my life and is not worth the pricetag sure it has nice eye candy but it PYSICS ARE HORRIBLE AND BEYOND BELIEF. this is my last post

I can feel the love

two words... anger management...

Four words.............I'll close this thread

dont delete my last reply
The big disadvantage of REflex IS AFTER 300 FEET IT RESTARTS YOU in Aeroflypro you can go as far as your want. And what about axial rolls what happens then in REFLEX eh?