Which Flight Sim?
04-18-2005, 09:07 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Generic City,
TX
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I have FMS, and I'm very good at it. But will that do me any good with a new .40 sized glow trainer?
Does FMS accuratly show how a plane will behave? Has anyone flown something on FMS and seen the real model behave the same way? I know FMS has no wind effects, and that can play a big part on how a plane responds.
Does FMS accuratly show how a plane will behave? Has anyone flown something on FMS and seen the real model behave the same way? I know FMS has no wind effects, and that can play a big part on how a plane responds.
04-20-2005, 02:03 PM
#4
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bloomington,
IN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I highly recommend FMS, and I use it. I have tried all the rest, and FMS is the best. In fact, it's better than best due to being free!
I'm not sure what you mean by no wind effects. You can dial in winds and gust (in meters/second). For a beginner, you can set both parmeters to zero, so you can get started. After you gain some experience with routine procedures, you can begin to dial in some wind and gusts. Also note you can set the wind's direction. For the plane's initial position, the wind direction should be 270 Degrees (runway 90). If you wish to change the runway to 270, set the wind to 90.
The only problem with FMS is getting a controller. Some people use a cable sold by stores like Tom's RC. I don't recommend them. You can read my two posts under Joystick-Interface for two cheap solutions.
What is especially noteworthy about FMS is the international membership. Also the creators of FMS keep improving upon the program. If you want to design your own model, there are tools to do so.
I like the Ultra Stick 40 which flys identically to the real model. One problem is you'll have to round up the models and load them into the model file (part of the download). Once you find a model, you'll have to download it and unzip the files into the model file. Don't expect perfection with all the models. Some are very hard to trim out, and each has its own idiosyncracies.
Anyway, I highly recommend a flight simulator as the best preparation for the novice before he gets to the flight line!
Ciao,
Eagle Al
I'm not sure what you mean by no wind effects. You can dial in winds and gust (in meters/second). For a beginner, you can set both parmeters to zero, so you can get started. After you gain some experience with routine procedures, you can begin to dial in some wind and gusts. Also note you can set the wind's direction. For the plane's initial position, the wind direction should be 270 Degrees (runway 90). If you wish to change the runway to 270, set the wind to 90.
The only problem with FMS is getting a controller. Some people use a cable sold by stores like Tom's RC. I don't recommend them. You can read my two posts under Joystick-Interface for two cheap solutions.
What is especially noteworthy about FMS is the international membership. Also the creators of FMS keep improving upon the program. If you want to design your own model, there are tools to do so.
I like the Ultra Stick 40 which flys identically to the real model. One problem is you'll have to round up the models and load them into the model file (part of the download). Once you find a model, you'll have to download it and unzip the files into the model file. Don't expect perfection with all the models. Some are very hard to trim out, and each has its own idiosyncracies.
Anyway, I highly recommend a flight simulator as the best preparation for the novice before he gets to the flight line!
Ciao,
Eagle Al
04-20-2005, 03:47 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Generic City,
TX
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I didn't know about the wind settings, I thought it was just thermal settings for glider pilots. What version FMS do you use? I have the 2.0 Beta 7 version.
I just ordered a Serial PIC cable from MileHighWings.com. Cost me $20 with shipping. It will let me use the transmitter I already have. I saw the plans for building a Serial PIC cable. While I'm confident I could build one, I wouldn't save a lot of money. I usually prefer to build it myself, but this time, it was easier to part with the $20.
I just ordered a Serial PIC cable from MileHighWings.com. Cost me $20 with shipping. It will let me use the transmitter I already have. I saw the plans for building a Serial PIC cable. While I'm confident I could build one, I wouldn't save a lot of money. I usually prefer to build it myself, but this time, it was easier to part with the $20.
04-20-2005, 07:39 PM
#6
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bloomington,
IN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I'm using the latest version 2.0 Alpha 8.5, and it's a very reliable program. Check out the options on the horizontal menu for wind settings. You'll want to fly eventually with some 5-10 mph winds, since this seems to be the case for most flying sites.
I do have some bad news for you. I too ordered a serial PIC interface from Mile High Wings (for a VG400), and it didn't work. On top of that, they refused to support it and cheerlessly refunded my money leaving me out the postage.
After some research, I decided against Tx interfaces. I have come up with two reliable solutions. See my posts on FMS.
Ciao,
Eagle Al
I do have some bad news for you. I too ordered a serial PIC interface from Mile High Wings (for a VG400), and it didn't work. On top of that, they refused to support it and cheerlessly refunded my money leaving me out the postage.
After some research, I decided against Tx interfaces. I have come up with two reliable solutions. See my posts on FMS.
Ciao,
Eagle Al
04-20-2005, 09:15 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Generic City,
TX
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
Sorry to hear that, I just got my serial PIC today, and it works like a charm. I've got the VG6000 computer radio however.
I used to think I was pretty good with FMS, now I've got to learn all over with my own transmitter. Or find a way to fly my RC plane with my computer joy stick.
I used to think I was pretty good with FMS, now I've got to learn all over with my own transmitter. Or find a way to fly my RC plane with my computer joy stick.
04-21-2005, 02:57 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fredericton, NB, CANADA
Posts: 2,587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I have tried all the rest, and FMS is the best. In fact, it's better than best due to being free!
04-21-2005, 01:08 PM
#10
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bloomington,
IN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
A pretty face doesn't determine the worth or value of a simulator. Some people think a good simulator should present as close a representation as possible to reality. As a matter of fact, to simulate the typical environment of an average flying site would require more computational power than most users have. You'll notice as new versions of simulators come on the market the processor and memory requirements increase dramatically.
If you like photographic images, then you have picked the right simulator, but if you want to learn the mechanics of flying your model with reasonable processor and memory requirements, FMS can't be beat. Also some users just don't have the bucks to fork over for the software and a powerful computer.
Here is another concept you probably won't understand. A simulator doesn't have to be exactly perfect to be a valuable tool for learning to fly. Even the interface to the program doesn't need to closely resemble your R/C Tx. The skill you're trying to acquire is to stay with the airplane as you guide it through its manuevers: TOs, turns while maintaining altitude, maintaining level flight and direction, and landings. Being able to guide, control, and react to various situations (like a gust or change in the direction of the wind or the positions of the controls in regard to the heading of the aircraft) are the skills that will transfer to the flying site. Learning to land is also problematic for many students as they try to control airspeed and sink rates with pitch and power respectively.
Also a pretty picture isn't necessary when you want to try some fun stuff like flying upside down where you'll quickly discover about how the roll axis works and its distinction or difference to the pitch and yaw axes.
With the video game generation, they view a flight simulator as entertainment rather than as a tool to learn. To really benefit from the simulator experience, one needs to set up a training regimen and carefully follow it by practicing until they reach a good level of proficiency and then moving on to the next step in the program. Those who seek entertainment probably don't have the dicipline to learn much more than to burn holes in the sky.
Ciao,
Eagle Al[
]
If you like photographic images, then you have picked the right simulator, but if you want to learn the mechanics of flying your model with reasonable processor and memory requirements, FMS can't be beat. Also some users just don't have the bucks to fork over for the software and a powerful computer.
Here is another concept you probably won't understand. A simulator doesn't have to be exactly perfect to be a valuable tool for learning to fly. Even the interface to the program doesn't need to closely resemble your R/C Tx. The skill you're trying to acquire is to stay with the airplane as you guide it through its manuevers: TOs, turns while maintaining altitude, maintaining level flight and direction, and landings. Being able to guide, control, and react to various situations (like a gust or change in the direction of the wind or the positions of the controls in regard to the heading of the aircraft) are the skills that will transfer to the flying site. Learning to land is also problematic for many students as they try to control airspeed and sink rates with pitch and power respectively.
Also a pretty picture isn't necessary when you want to try some fun stuff like flying upside down where you'll quickly discover about how the roll axis works and its distinction or difference to the pitch and yaw axes.
With the video game generation, they view a flight simulator as entertainment rather than as a tool to learn. To really benefit from the simulator experience, one needs to set up a training regimen and carefully follow it by practicing until they reach a good level of proficiency and then moving on to the next step in the program. Those who seek entertainment probably don't have the dicipline to learn much more than to burn holes in the sky.
Ciao,
Eagle Al[
]
04-21-2005, 02:51 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Generic City,
TX
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I'm not having a lot of luck with the wind settings in FMS. The plane always seems to yaw unrealisticly into the wind. I can't even get the plane to take off in a cross wind, the plane just turns like a wind sock into the wind. So I usually wind up 'hand' launching the model. I've got version 2.0.8.5 alpha installed.
Is reflex meant for helicopters, and close up 3d? Or does that kind of action just show off the graphics better?
Is reflex meant for helicopters, and close up 3d? Or does that kind of action just show off the graphics better?
04-21-2005, 07:13 PM
#13
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bloomington,
IN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
The plane will turn into the wind, and that's how FMS is designed which is correct. You have to learn to crawl before you can walk. Go into the wind options on the simulation menu and set the wind's direction to 270 (the runway is 270/90) or 90 depending on which direction you want the plane to point down the runway. Also set the wind and gusts to both zero. Now the plane will line up with the runway and you won't have any trouble taking off, and you can practice.
You can also set the wind direction to 180 or 360 to practice crosswind landings; however, it takes a fair amount of skill to take off and land under these conditions. For landing, you want to turn into the wind with the ailerons while using opposite rudder to keep the plane lined up with the runway. For take offs, it's the same procedure, but there is a problem with some of the FMS models in this regard. On some models, the rudders don't work, so you can't counteract the aileron turn.
Another way to land in a crosswind is to do an aileron turn into the wind and then level the wings. You are then yawed into the wind and at the last moment before touch down, you straighten out the aircraft. Obviously this won't work on TOs.
My advice is to have the wind set for the direction of the runway (270 or 90). Just pretend you have multiple runways, and you're using the appropriate one to TO! Here's some useful reading:
http://stoenworks.com/Tutorials/Cros...0Landings.html
Ciao,
Eagle Al
You can also set the wind direction to 180 or 360 to practice crosswind landings; however, it takes a fair amount of skill to take off and land under these conditions. For landing, you want to turn into the wind with the ailerons while using opposite rudder to keep the plane lined up with the runway. For take offs, it's the same procedure, but there is a problem with some of the FMS models in this regard. On some models, the rudders don't work, so you can't counteract the aileron turn.
Another way to land in a crosswind is to do an aileron turn into the wind and then level the wings. You are then yawed into the wind and at the last moment before touch down, you straighten out the aircraft. Obviously this won't work on TOs.
My advice is to have the wind set for the direction of the runway (270 or 90). Just pretend you have multiple runways, and you're using the appropriate one to TO! Here's some useful reading:
http://stoenworks.com/Tutorials/Cros...0Landings.html
Ciao,
Eagle Al
04-22-2005, 09:35 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Finchingfield, Essex, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
ORIGINAL: Eagle Al
If you like photographic images, then you have picked the right simulator, but if you want to learn the mechanics of flying your model with reasonable processor and memory requirements, FMS can't be beat. Also some users just don't have the bucks to fork over for the software and a powerful computer.
If you like photographic images, then you have picked the right simulator, but if you want to learn the mechanics of flying your model with reasonable processor and memory requirements, FMS can't be beat. Also some users just don't have the bucks to fork over for the software and a powerful computer.
The one thing FMS has in its favour is the price. I guess the availability of third party models may also be an advantage but there's quite a lot of those for AFPD and XTR as well.
Cliff
04-22-2005, 03:53 PM
#15
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bloomington,
IN
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I know what the real thing looks like (and feels like in the case of full-scale aircraft), and FMS does a 1st class job in this regard. It's true that certain aspects of the flying environment aren't depicted well (or at all) in FMS, but FMS makes some sacrifices to reduce memory and processor requirements. Although I don't know, I don't believe FMS has a staff of programmers to keep it prettied up.
Again, since you don't have much experience with models or the real thing, you wouldn't know that flying is a rather sloppy affair unless you're blasting along at several hundred knots with rock hard control surfaces! All this computational accuracy won't make you a good pilot, but it will provide you with a wonderful video game experience!
And let's get into this matter of feeling. You can't feel anything about a model unless you could get inside of it and take control. Neither FMS or any other simulator has any hope of coming even close to the real flying environment. To do so, would take the computational power of IBM's big blue. And don't think for a minute some stunt you can do on your simulator will easily transfer out to the flying field.
Simulators have their limitations just like the pilots who fly them. Those who can't recognize that are probably video gamers looking for some fantasy to take them away from their everyday reality. I guess that's why the streets and playgrounds are empty of children nowadays!
Ciao,
Eagle Al
Again, since you don't have much experience with models or the real thing, you wouldn't know that flying is a rather sloppy affair unless you're blasting along at several hundred knots with rock hard control surfaces! All this computational accuracy won't make you a good pilot, but it will provide you with a wonderful video game experience!
And let's get into this matter of feeling. You can't feel anything about a model unless you could get inside of it and take control. Neither FMS or any other simulator has any hope of coming even close to the real flying environment. To do so, would take the computational power of IBM's big blue. And don't think for a minute some stunt you can do on your simulator will easily transfer out to the flying field.
Simulators have their limitations just like the pilots who fly them. Those who can't recognize that are probably video gamers looking for some fantasy to take them away from their everyday reality. I guess that's why the streets and playgrounds are empty of children nowadays!
Ciao,
Eagle Al
04-27-2005, 04:25 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I've tried G2 and G3, but not Reflex or AFPD. I didn't care for G2 or G3 at all. Didn't feel as real to me. I've been flying FMS for years and am still having a blast. It is great for practicing takeoffs and landings and basic aerobatics. What more do you want for free?. It can do some hovering and knife edge with the right planes, but is not thought to be as good a 3 D program as some others. When programing winsds, you have to remember it thinks in meters per second! So, programming in 8 for example is alot more than 8 mph of wind. Hundreds of planes available to check out. Many have a lot to teach a beginner. I was flying with one of my radios and an interface cord. Am now trying out a cheap PS2 dual stick controller to save wear and tear on my radios.
Scott
Scott
04-29-2005, 09:39 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Finchingfield, Essex, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
ORIGINAL: Eagle Al
Again, since you don't have much experience with models or the real thing, you wouldn't know that flying is a rather sloppy affair unless you're blasting along at several hundred knots with rock hard control surfaces! All this computational accuracy won't make you a good pilot, but it will provide you with a wonderful video game experience!
Again, since you don't have much experience with models or the real thing, you wouldn't know that flying is a rather sloppy affair unless you're blasting along at several hundred knots with rock hard control surfaces! All this computational accuracy won't make you a good pilot, but it will provide you with a wonderful video game experience!
And clearly models do not behave ANYTHING like full scale aircraft so trying to make analogies with that is pointless. When I talk about the "feel" of a model in an R/C sim compared to a "real" R/C model I'm talking about simulated versus physical reponses to stick inputs. In XTR the simulated models "feel" ("behave " if you like) very similkar to the r/c models but in FMS it's just a stick tutor and nothing more.
If it were otherwise why would folks spend $150-$250 for XTR/AFPD/G3 when they could get FMS for nothing??
Cliff
05-05-2005, 06:01 AM
#21
My Feedback: (14)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New York,
NY
Posts: 839
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
hey just a little beginners point of view. I currently can afford a simulator. Back when i was looking at my plane, not flying it, i used the FMS simulator with my keyboard, as i didnt know where to get the cables. Ta da, after 3 days on the flying field, already solo. Now i know simulators did that, but which one will get you the best results, i dont know, but at least you know that FMS, even when only using the keyboard is great because it lets you get a better orientation of the plane when its coming directly towards you. Im sure if i got a tx interface cable, i would have been able to solo much sooner, but hey, its all good. Right now, im currently looking for a sim that best simulates the Mig-15. I wanna go electric ducted fan since i started, im only going through the trainer stage. I wana simulator that can deliver the jet rush. WHich one is most realistic, and doesnt cost too much. I saw the F-86 sabre on G3, and it looks pretty good. All the professional programss cost the same and are twice a good, but like always twice as demanding for the system requirments. SO far these are mine:
Pentium 4, 2.8 Ghz
512 mb ram
50 gigs of availabe space
here is the bad part: 64 mb graphics card
Sorry for turning this into a "best sim," forum but hey, thats what the forum is about.
Pentium 4, 2.8 Ghz
512 mb ram
50 gigs of availabe space
here is the bad part: 64 mb graphics card
Sorry for turning this into a "best sim," forum but hey, thats what the forum is about.
05-05-2005, 08:12 AM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Generic City,
TX
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
I had a lot of success with FMS. But I wouldn't say it was free. It worked for me cause I had the cable to hook up my radio, the same radio I used to fly. My only goal in using FMS, was to be able to fly laps around the field. I wasn't trying to learn new aerobatics, or anything fancy. I can fly just about any of the models on FMS, and I know for a fact I wouldn't be able to fly like that in real life.
05-05-2005, 08:37 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Fresno,
CA
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Which Flight Sim?
Try AFP, its awsome!!! You can get it here http://aeroflypro.com/purchase/ its 109.95$ I paid 150$ from a guy. But it was first at 200$!!!! I use it and its great but I believe AFPD is even better.... To me it seems that the electrics are better in AFPD, thats the big difference, Ikarus could do an update for AFP for the electrics but they won't because they want you to get AFPD, thats what I'm assuming.
There's pics below.
Good luck,
Matthew
There's pics below.
Good luck,
Matthew
