Real Flight G3

-----------------
Thanks for the synopsis and update, Ed.
I tried to buy AFPD a while back, but was led around in circles by the website and never was able to purchase online. That has been a while now. The site looks different now, so I'll try again.
I don't like using one of my real transmitters for simulations for the reasons you named previously. So, being able to use the G2 Tx will work out fine.
Anyone want to swap something for a barely used copy of G3? You'll have to work out how to get it activated - IF you can get it activated. I'm through with it.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
Loading thread data ...
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 09:52:48 -0500, "Ed Cregger" wrote in :
Keep us posted on how the G2 works with AFPD. I may follow you down that road. I have G2 and have been happy enough with it, but I don't hear anything about G3 that makes me want to get into it. AFPD sounds like a better route.
$40?
I wouldn't want to spend more than that on the off-chance I can get it to work. :o(
Marty
Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ
Ed, I bought AFPD from Ohio Model planes @ $181.90 incl S/H. Now it's $179.95 + $4.95 S/H Check them out here
formatting link
Be advised that It works with the *G2 USB Interlink* controller I'm not sure about plain ol' G2. Check out the bottom of the link page and you will see the Chip Hyde video and many others. If you have any questions give me a shout. Good luck -
Reply to
Ed Forsythe
Thanks for the tip.
I hate to do this. I mean, well, you'll know what I mean.
PCPhil was right. I am having a video problem with my computer. Now to find a suitable replacement video card that does not cost an arm and a leg, but which is adequate for flying model sims. It has to be compatible with the VIA chipset this pig is running.
I still do not like the way they changed engine selection and model set up, but I have to be fair to Real Flight and apologize until I install another video card. Then, if it still does the same obnoxious things, like having the model fly to pieces before it hits anything, heh-heh (spoken as Louie LaPalma)....
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
One of the great defenders of G3, please explain to me what, "current mass of self" and "current mass of children" means.
I did a sloppy landing and hit the tail square on the ground with the nose high. The vertical stabilizer popped off. Say what?
Does anyone think that a new video card will cure these problems?
Tower, WTF were you thinking when you approved carrying this POS?
Please offer me a refund. I dare you.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
Ed, I think that's probably just the way they programmed collisions. It is possible that if your frame rate is too slow, you're hitting harder than you think and the screen hasn't shown it. A video card to truly keep up with G3 maxed out is pricey, 200+
I'd really try to find some local flyers with the other two sims to try before I'd go that route. It might be that you'll only end up hating it, but looking good while doing so....
PCPhill
Collision detection is iffier on the photo real landscapes than the true 3D landscapes, but the true 3D demands more of your video card.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Cregger" Newsgroups: rec.models.rc.air Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 4:40 PM Subject: Re: Real Flight G3
Reply to
PCPhill
Thanks, Phil. I'm going to hold off on doing anything, video card wise.
I'm entering a period of my life (old age) where my old paradigm of reason and logic appears to be fading into the past.
Things like G3 do not make sense to me. I don't understand why someone having G2 as a successful product, not that it is perfect, would come out with something like G3 and then tout it as though it was improved. To my line of reasoning, it is an abomination. Nothing has been "improved" except things that do not count toward making it a better simulator. It is as though the original idea of offering a simulator for flight training has turned into eye candy for morons. Is that the future? Are we seeing the dumbing down in action? Is this what the progeny of the drug generation deem entertainment?
Sorry for being so "negative". But I didn't start this - Real Flight did and Tower took my money, knowing full well what they were selling. Or did they?
This is my last post about G3, or any other Real Flight product.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
When I got G2 I went to my PC builder shop and tried one video after another till I got one that worked..condition of purchase was that it would run G2..
Fog doesn't work well, but who cares.
I normally fly with out 3D background as well. Speeds it up.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
Indeed. The problemn is, in a world populated by fools with (borpowed) money, total crap with chrome and tailfins sells better than reliable workhorses.
Reply to
The Natural Philosopher
Then, later:
Ed, don't you think it is likely that neither Real Flight nor Tower were aware that you were having a video problem?
Steve Kaluf, in his review of G3 on Tower's web site, wrote about his PC and said: "The machine had 512 MB of RAM shared with the video card. I was thrilled that a machine without a high end video card or dedicated video RAM was able to run such a graphics-intensive simulator! I had been prepared to have to buy a high end card to add to this machine, but it wasn't necessary."
Tom B
Reply to
Tom B
I was mellowing a bit, after seeing my neighbor's lovely daughter. She always improves my mood.
Then I ran across the parent/children thing...
If you have a terrible tooth ache one day and while driving to the dentist your car malfunctions, forcing you to cancel the dental appointment and call a tow truck instead...
My video problem has nothing to do with the remainder of the faults of G3. The video problem is not the basis for most of my complaints.
It's only $200. I've shit canned that much money before without batting an eye. This certainly isn't worth the time that I have devoted to it.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
Ed,
Suggestion: get onto the website of the manufacturer of your video card and download its latest drivers. Your statement that the video card is not the basis for most of your complaints may not be really logical; IF you are having video problems (as you yourself has said) then you should resolve them before you criticize G3. Such problems could certainly affect the operation of G3.
Tom B
Reply to
Tom B
It will definitely run on a lesser machine with the eye candy turned off. I think the main problem is that the only real improvement to G3 seems to be the eye candy. As Ed said, the physics don't seem to be any better, some critics have said they've gotten worse. I've spent some time with the demo version today, and I'm now convinced I didn't make a mistake when I choose a different sim.
PCPhill
Reply to
PCPhill
No, you missed my point. My description must be lacking, though that would not be surprising.
There are enough issues with G3, issues that are not video related, that even if my computer/video system was absolutely perfect, the other issues would make it a poor simulator. I hope that was clear enough.
However, how could one plan on selling a lot of G3 copies that require the latest and greatest computers on which to run, knowing full well that the majority of R/C folks are not equipped with the latest and greatest in computers? That position alone makes me wonder where their heads are at.
G1 ran well on my AMD 333 MHz equipped computer some years ago. The flight model, though not perfect, was good enough for providing useful training for newbie pilots, or pilots that wanted to upgrade their skills by trying new maneuvers that they were afraid to try on their real model. G1 fulfilled its function for me. The 3D heli sims were good and usable by someone like me, mostly an airplane enthusiast.
G2, ran fine on my 1.5 GHz CPU equipped computer. Unfortunately, the presets for helis were a little hard to figure out for someone like me, who likes to fool around with helis, but doesn't really want to get into the nuts and bolts of programming the radio for 3D heli.
G3 is sluggish on my AMD 64 3200+ equipped computer. The presets for helis is better than G2, but there are many other issues that bother me.
I venture to say that the vast majority of R/C folks that would like to fly on a simulator do not have a 2 GHz or higher speed processor equipped computer. Much less a $200 video card. What was Real Flight thinking?
If you want to sell the maximum number of units, you design your ware to be used on what the majority of your potential customers own. Not what some kid with free reign of Mom and Dad's credit card will buy for gaming. Of course, this is part of the old paradigm thinking that I mentioned a while back. You know, where you have to make a profit in order to stay in business?
I update my drivers weekly. I have a membership with
formatting link
and a couple of others. I also go to the factory sites for my components to see if the above folks have missed something.
Instead of designing software for the very best computers available and then having to spend endless hours answering emails and phone calls asking why their program doesn't run on someone's two year old computer, wouldn't it have been smarter to target the type of computers that the target consumer would likely be using?
Most folks that I know who would be prospective customers for such a program do not perform their own maintenance on their computers. They take them to a shop and have those folks work on them. They don't replace video cards or add RAM as time goes on. When the computer is three or four years old, they buy a new one with what they hope will be all of the latest and greatest components that are available for "normal" computer usage. Making programs that only work on a computer geek's computer limits the satisfied number of G3 users dramatically.
This is America and one has the right to fail in business, just as they have the right to succeed. Someone else will come along, realize the niche that is begging to be filled and will be picked up by Tower Hobbies (assuming they survive the ownership transfer that just occurred). Real Flight will then become history, as so many other model gear manufacturers have done in the past.
I wish them (RF) luck, but they really are going to have to give up their computer priesthood status, remove their magic cloaks/pointy hats and begin addressing the fact that they must sell many, many units in order to make Tower Hobbies some money. When the word gets out that Real Flight caters only to other computer geeks, the normal R/C folks will cease buying their products.
And this truly is my last response on this subject.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger
I know you said you're done with this topic Ed, but I found out something kind of weird. I got the Nexstar edition of G2 with my plane last year. It's been a while since I've played with it, but I never uninstalled it even though I bought G3.
When I fly my Nexstar at myself on my G2 sim, it dives after passing through me just like the planes dip in G3. I would be surprised to learn that your version of G2 doesn't do this, even though it's one of the annoyances that you've mentioned with G3.
Reply to
Ed Paasch
I haven't used G2 for a year or two, so the memory isn't great. But, I do seem to recall that what you are saying is true.
Ed Cregger
Reply to
Ed Cregger

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.