Simulators

[Foamiesrfun]

Okay I am wanting to buy myself a new computor for christmas but i want my new computor to be able to load one of these hot new flight similators so I can get some good pratice in.I am a advace pilot who has taught himself 3D in a short period of time who would still like to learn how to 3D even better.I want to learn to do rolling circles,waterfalls,slow knife edge while rolling and going inverted,etc. It would be nice to be able to set up a plane like my foamy edge 540 I am flying,When I bring it up into a hover I would like it to feel real.I have FMS now and everytime I get it up in a hover the plane falls over one way or the other (does not have the rudder it needs) and I feel the screen is pushing it over as well.I know how to Hover.I can hover any eletric plane that will hover and I can do it as long as I want. So I know how,Just need a real feeling sim.
It would be nice to set up a realistic feeling trainer type for my GF and other friends to learn how to fly with it.I have read storys of people flying on a sim and going out to fly with out any trouble.i would love a sim that does this good of a job.

Also I would like to be able to fly Helis on it as I hope one day to be able to afford one.And would like a sim that i could maybe set up like a real one and learn 3D with it also.But this is not as inportant as the planes I am looking for.

I know the top ones seem to be

Real Flight G3
Areaflyer(whatever its called by ikurus)
Aero flyer


I see this_____________________________________________

Realflight Generation 3 System Requirements
Minimum

Allows minimal simulator functionality.

Windows XP*, 2000*, ME, 98
* Local administration access required
Intel® Pentium® 1.0 GHz or equivalent
DirectX 9 (or above) feature-compatible video and sound card
3D accelerated video card with 32MB (or more) RAM (e.g., Nvidia GeForce 5200, ATI Radeon 9600)
Recommended video cards (http://12.156.2.54/forums/showthread.php?t=9216)
256 MB RAM
1.3 GB hard drive space
OptimumEnables complete simulator functionality.

Windows XP*
* Local administration access required
Intel Pentium 3.0 GHz or equivalent
3D accelerated video card with 128MB (or more) RAM (e.g., Nvidia GeForce 6800, ATI Radeon 9800)
Recommended video cards (http://12.156.2.54/forums/showthread.php?t=9216)
1 GB RAMMultiplayer


Internet connection 56.6 Kbps modem or betterInterLink Plus Controller


USB Port
Compatible FM or FM-selectable transmitter (if using the interface mode)Note: The connectors on the InterLink Plus cord and included adapters make the InterLink Plus compatible with the trainer jacks on most Futaba® and all JR®, Hitec®, and Tower Hobbies® systems. Special adapters for use with most Airtronics®/Sanwa® systems are available separately.

__________________________________________________ __________
I would like to hear from real people who have used these rather then what it says,I dont want my system to go slow and or lock up,this is why I am buying a new PC so it wont lock up.My PC is kinda old now.


Any help would be great thanks for any input.

Chris

[Foamiesrfun]

This is one of the computors I am looking at.just started looking though.

Compaq Presario Desktop PC (SR1520NX)


CPQ SR1520NX • AMD Sempron™ 3100+
• 160GB 7200 RPM hard drive
• Dual-layer DVD±R/RW
• 512MB DDR SDRAM
• 7 USB 2.0/2 FireWire ports
• 9-in-1 memory card reader

[Slent thndr]

You dont even want to know my PC specs. Lets just say they clear the complete requirements listed. I get all my stuff through reseller connections so I wouldnt know exactly where to reccomend you buying one as a consuimer. Dell or HP I guess. IBM but they are probably more expensive. But I would try and stick with intel boards and none of that AMD stuff. And that pc you talked about diddn't say anything about its graphics ability, which is the main thing that will matter with gaming. I would go for the 9800SE vidio card as they are good but are getting really inexpensive now (around $100). You will have to install it yourself though, and make sure your mother board has the same kind of AGP. I dont know if thats a problem.

Or just go for one of the hps and get a gig of memory on it (some kind of DDR) and a good vidio card. I think that the best value of prosessor for u would be in the P4 2.8-3.2 Ghz range. Beyond that the prices are high still. And I highly doubt u need firewire.

[qban_flyer]

You dont even want to know my PC specs. Lets just say they clear the complete requirements listed. I get all my stuff through reseller connections so I wouldnt know exactly where to reccomend you buying one as a consuimer. Dell or HP I guess. IBM but they are probably more expensive. But I would try and stick with intel boards and none of that AMD stuff. And that pc you talked about diddn't say anything about its graphics ability, which is the main thing that will matter with gaming. I would go for the 9800SE vidio card as they are good but are getting really inexpensive now (around $100). You will have to install it yourself though, and make sure your mother board has the same kind of AGP. I dont know if thats a problem.

Or just go for one of the hps and get a gig of memory on it (some kind of DDR) and a good vidio card. I think that the best value of prosessor for u would be in the P4 2.8-3.2 Ghz range. Beyond that the prices are high still. And I highly doubt u need firewire.
You are absolutely correct. Avoid AMD at all costs. A friend of mine has G-3 on his 'custom built' AMD "ATHLON" based PC, the thing is 'messy' at best when it comes to 'handling' G-3 features, even though he has an excellent 128MB video card and 1GB of RAM.

I bought G-3 based on their given minimum specs. for the computer, and those of my older PC (2003 Gateway). Processor speed on my G/W exceeded the minimum as did the RAM. Where it failed miserably was in the graphics area. It had a built in shared memory 64MB Intel 'graphics display'. Worked fine with G-2, no go with G-3!

According to what Chris states on his post regarding the Compaq he is considering, it probably comes with M/B built in graphics. That's why they can sell them so cheap although he won't be able to use G-3 to his satisfaction with that particular model. HP, GW, COMPAQ, DELL & IBM all have inexpensive PCs with built in 'graphics display' that are fine for home/office work and net surfing, but totally useless for 3D gaming, which is what G-3 more or less is.

I had a choice, either stay with G-2 and get rid of G-3 or else get me a new PC. I wish I would have gotten rid of G-3 back then, instead I went for a DELL at their site.

Got there and after browsing for a while I wound up going for broke. Bought me an 'almost' fully loaded XPS that set me back BIG BUCKS (without monitor) in February.

G-3 works like a charm on the XPS. Smooth as silk performance, no hick-ups, lock-ups, freeze overs, herky-jerky motion, etc. Was it worth the cost? It's debatable at best. G-3 is loaded with features that make it a joy to use, but the PC expenditure is rather hard to justify.

Anyone thinking of getting G-3 had better get ready to dump their old PC and start thinking of a powerful one with a 256MB video card, @ least 1GB of RAM (I have 2GB 533MHz DDR2 SDRAM) and no less than 3GHz of CPU crunching power (mine's 3.4). Anything less and they'll have to begin disabling the very features most would be buying G-3 for, especially model editing and 3D flight reaction time.

The Ikarus Simulator is just as demanding as G-3!

L8R

[qban_flyer]

This is one of the computors I am looking at.just started looking though.

Compaq Presario Desktop PC (SR1520NX)


CPQ SR1520NX • AMD Sempron™ 3100+
• 160GB 7200 RPM hard drive
• Dual-layer DVD±R/RW
• 512MB DDR SDRAM
• 7 USB 2.0/2 FireWire ports
• 9-in-1 memory card reader
Chris, the Compaq you are considering has a built in Motherboard graphics display (SiS Mirage 2 shared memory video). G-3 won't work properly with it unless you disable many of the G-3 features you need for 3D flight simulation.

[qban_flyer]

This is one of the computors I am looking at.just started looking though.

Compaq Presario Desktop PC (SR1520NX)


CPQ SR1520NX • AMD Sempron™ 3100+
• 160GB 7200 RPM hard drive
• Dual-layer DVD±R/RW
• 512MB DDR SDRAM
• 7 USB 2.0/2 FireWire ports
• 9-in-1 memory card reader
Post # 11 on the thread found on the link below is an eye opener when it comes to G-3 and the demand it places on the graphics resources of the PC, see for yourself. Matter of fact, the whole thread is quite informative.

Had I read that post back in December of 2004 I would have saved myself Big Bucks by sticking with G-2!

http://12.156.2.54/forums/showthread.php?t=9216

[Slent thndr]

I wouldn't justify buying a new PC just for the purpose of getting G3. I dont think G3 is worth it and I allready have an $1800 PC.

And yes, in this case no aspect of the PC setup is going to matter as much as the vidio card. Make sure the PC comes with a good one with at least 256MB or mabye 128MB onboard, none of that intigrated stuff. The integrated graphics systems are designed for buisness aplications and NOT gaming... and looking at the requirments G3 must be one of the most demanding games on the market.

[qban_flyer]

I wouldn't justify buying a new PC just for the purpose of getting G3. I dont think G3 is worth it and I allready have an $1800 PC.

And yes, in this case no aspect of the PC setup is going to matter as much as the vidio card. Make sure the PC comes with a good one with at least 256MB or mabye 128MB onboard, none of that intigrated stuff. The integrated graphics systems are designed for buisness aplications and NOT gaming... and looking at the requirments G3 must be one of the most demanding games on the market.

The minimum requirements as specified by G/P don't even allow the user to utilize 1/3 of G-3 features.

The 'optimun' set up recommends a 3GHz CPU (the norm with most PCs these days).
A video display card (nVidia 6800 PCI-e) that will set most PC users back over $400 on the card alone!
Also requires a minimum of 1GB of RAM.

My nephew has a very nice P4 3GHz HP with 1GB of 400MHz DDR SDRAM, 128MB of that memory is dedicated for the Intel 900 series integrated video display needs, and still G-3 can't be used fully with it.
He was very dissapointed when he compared the performance of his to mine, though he understood he paid less than half for his PC than what I spent on mine.

G/P claims that Intel's 845 chipset can handle G-3 with some of its features disabled. The 900 series integrated video display is a better version of the previous one, (the 845 allocates 64MB of RAM for video needs). Not a good sign as far as G/P, G-3 and Knife Edge's Technology is concerned. G-3 is too much of a PC resources hog.

I know quite a few guys in this area who went back to G-2 once they tried G-3 and saw the results. I also know a few who sold their G-2s in order to get G-3 (to save a few bucks) and wound up spending a lot more on a new PC they did not need at the time.

[Foamiesrfun]

Thanks everyone for your inputs,well maybe G2 then or one of the others. I need a new PC this one is runing ME and I do have a AMD now.I just know I have had to redo this one a few times and Im sick of it I really dont like Windows XP but I guess I will have to get used to it. I got used to 98 and I set up ME just like it with the menus and all.I just know I would like a good flight sim. Either areaflyer or whatever.just something I can 3 D with and all.

[Slent thndr]

Dude XP is so much better. The menu structire is differant, but suppirior to 98. In less than a year Microsoft will be releasing Windows Vista to replace XP. So even that will be out of date.

I built my PC with an intel D925XCV board, which was the best available as of a month ago when I was building it. And yes I was looking at the complete requirements when i said it was
one of the most demanding games on the market.

I would rather fly for real anyway, so why have it (G3)?

If your wanting to learn on the simulators before you fly for real (an exelent idea) then get FMS and a cable and that is enough to get the basics down.

[qban_flyer]

Thanks everyone for your inputs,well maybe G2 then or one of the others. I need a new PC this one is runing ME and I do have a AMD now.I just know I have had to redo this one a few times and Im sick of it I really dont like Windows XP but I guess I will have to get used to it. I got used to 98 and I set up ME just like it with the menus and all.I just know I would like a good flight sim. Either areaflyer or whatever.just something I can 3 D with and all.
Say Chris,

I use XP and XP Pro on my newer PCs. At first I didn't know how to get around, where 'things' were and how to set it up for my needs. Took me a bit of time but once I learned XP's quirks I can't live without it. The other two machines are sitting aside being used for P/T work and some web surfing.

I went into my G-2 and cloned one of the models on G-2 Add-Ons Volume 1 to edit it. Enlarged the fuselage and moving surfaces, tripled the throws, moved the CG aft and put a bigger motor on it.

Been 3D-ing since early this morning (I'm retired). Hovers like there's no tomorrow. Not bad for G-2 and it is fun. I have re-cloned the same model, given them different names and changed all their features and settings, it's wild! When I get tired of one all I have to do is delete it and still keep the original.

Word of caution, the Ikarus Similator is as demanding on the PC as G-3, so if you are going to go for that one, you'd better get a monster PC and be willing to spend at least $1200 - $1300 to be able to use the Ikarus F/S.

Good luck and have fun!

PS: The Compaq you have your eyes on will do great with G-2

[Robert Schneider]

Does anyone know of a simulator for a Macintosh computer?

[Foamiesrfun]

Dude XP is so much better. The menu structire is differant, but suppirior to 98. In less than a year Microsoft will be releasing Windows Vista to replace XP. So even that will be out of date.

I built my PC with an intel D925XCV board, which was the best available as of a month ago when I was building it. And yes I was looking at the complete requirements when i said it was
one of the most demanding games on the market.

I would rather fly for real anyway, so why have it (G3)?

If your wanting to learn on the simulators before you fly for real (an exelent idea) then get FMS and a cable and that is enough to get the basics down.

Maybe xp is better but it liked making folders and hidden crap for you ,I dont like that.I like having all my stuff the way I want it.

As far as flying. I have been flying for 16 years and know how to fly just want to pratice more 3D stuff. i live in GA its cold here(for me) for a few months I dont get much flying then summer is hot as hades and well I would like to practice inside.
thanks for the advice everyone.I guess I will just fly my Crapy FMS only say it crappy cause I know how to fly if someone doesnt then it is great and I will pratice on my real rc planes.

[aeropal]

Does anyone know of a simulator for a Macintosh computer?
CRRC Sim (http://sourceforge.net/projects/crrcsim/) - RC Helicopter Sim (http://www.alphamacsoftware.com/index.php) - X-Plane Sim (http://www.x-plane.com/) (full scale) - Interface (http://www.milehighwings.com/faq.htm#4)

[John Seidelman]

http://www.preflightsim.com/preflight001.htm
You could go and try this Sim for free It's a 15 Meg download for Windows.
Looks as it is a little more friendly on the computer.

[FoamAir]

You do know that even though your motherboard has built-in graphics, it is possible to buy another graphics card with what you need on it and stick it in the vidoe slot, either AGP or PCI. I've upgraded my graphics cards many many times.

jim

[pval3]

hey all,

I am new to the sim arena but old to the rc thing...

using fms to help me learn 3d stuff and "try it before I rekit it" scenarios.

a few have suggested folks go back to g2 for the system resource issues. . . I have a 3g processor and 1.5 G of ram with a 128 nvidea card

in so far as flight physics for 3d flying, is g2 as good as g3 or is it all ----old girl, new pretty dress??

Thanks

Phil

[watt_the?!]

as a long time pc gamer, i went through the entire gaming nerd/geek phase and what is true is that no other single component impacts on your gaming experience more than the graphics card.

make sure you have ample RAM and a good grpahics card and you'll be fine. simple as that.

anything 1800mhz+ with 256 mb radeon generation 9000 series or geforce generation 4 is even good enough, although you wont be able to use some of the direct x 9.0c features (you'd only notice them if you were hardcore anyway).

so, in summary, go for a mid range (not bottom end budget) 256mb card (not onboard) and 512 mb ram on your PC, win XP preferably (service pack 2 only) and 1800mhz +.

keep in mind that if you want it to look beautiful, many of these settings are on the card itself, not in the game, such as antialisaing, anisotropic filtering and mip mapping etc .

any card, no matter how good will bog down with everything on in the game and on the card itself.

Tim.

[watt_the?!]

Thanks everyone for your inputs,well maybe G2 then or one of the others. I need a new PC this one is runing ME and I do have a AMD now.I just know I have had to redo this one a few times and Im sick of it I really dont like Windows XP but I guess I will have to get used to it. I got used to 98 and I set up ME just like it with the menus and all.I just know I would like a good flight sim. Either areaflyer or whatever.just something I can 3 D with and all.


XP has ''classic'' mode. Which is menu styles just like 98/ME.

right click on the bottom toolbar, goto properties, then start menu, then select classic.

voila'

[qban_flyer]

hey all,

a few have suggested folks go back to g2 for the system resource issues. . . I have a 3g processor and 1.5 G of ram with a 128 nvidea card

in so far as flight physics for 3d flying, is g2 as good as g3 or is it all ----old girl, new pretty dress??

Thanks

Phil

I agree that G-2 is a bit less demanding on the PC and can even be used with the later M/B built in graphics displays. G-2 is also easier to use. If one goes from G-2 to G-3 expecting to find the same menus and ease of use, one is in for a dissapointment. I was.

I have used G-3 with 128MB cards on three different PCs with different graphic cards and I had to disable many of the features of G-3 so as to keep it from jerking the plane and scennery while using it. Not so with G-2.
And no, G-3 is not the same "old" girl in a pretty dress. It's a bit more realistic and offers a lot more terrain to the user, several of the 3D effects are really stunning though it requires at least 1 GB of total system RAM, 256Mb graphics and according to G/P the recommended CPU speed should be 3 Gig.

I am using G-3 with a 3.4 Gig P4 and double the RAM (just upped it last week to 2GB 533MHz DDR) over what G/P "recommends". Have also updated the graphics card to a 256MB Nvidia PCI-e. Now the thing performs the way I want it to.

If I had to do it over again, I would have stuck with G-2 and saved myself a ton of money I could have used on planes. My "older" PC was purchased in March of 2002 and was doing just fine by me. I didn't need a new one, G-3 "forced" me to get it though.

[Slent thndr]

All this talk is perhaps going to persuade me to get G3.

My PC can certainly handle it. Short definition: Intel D925XCV motherboard, 3.4 GHz P4 processor, 1GB of DDR2, Radion X800 256 MB Video card, 200 GB SATA HD, lots of extras, a 500 Watt PSU to power it all, and 629 mm worth of fans to keep it all cool. :D

Is g3 really as realistic as you make it sound? I mean, I used FMS a lot back when I was just learning to fly, and it helped, but I certainly couldn't learn much with it now. It’s more of the thing where you can never stall and if you point the plane somewhere it goes there. But with G3 could I literally program it to be like my insanely overpowered 200W Formosa, and have it fly as realistically as the real thing? I don’t get much time at the flying field so something like that could help. I’m just wondering if it’s worth $200. For that price I could buy another plane. How long does it take to program in a plane, and what is it like, do I need to code a bunch of stuff and make all kinds of pictures of the plane or is it easyer than that?

My main question, are the physics in it really that realistic? Can I actually use it to learn how do proper rolling circles without risking breaking my plane?

[Foamiesrfun]

WOW this thread is still going, Looks like your talking with each other thats great, I dont think I will be able to get a new pc just yet and Im not worried about the flight sime as much now. I have done so much flying I really dont need a sim now. Thanks for the advice and maybe soon I will have a good enough system to run G3 or one of the others.

[Rugar]

Im running AFPD on a AMD 3800+ :D

[watt_the?!]

my final comment...turn everything off in the game as the flight dynamics are the most important thing, then you can crank it up on your video card and still get good framerates, as well as on a low end machine.

its the background and photoreal rendering and AA and anisotropic filtering that kills frame rates.

if you want just good flight modelling and dont care much about the eye candy, go for G2 or AFP.

if you have got the machine, go for Reflex, IMO it kills G3 and AFPD.

tim.

[RunnerDude96]

Does anyone know where to get extra models and scenery for crrc sim?