RealFlight G4.5 myths debunked

[SteveM732]

There has been a rash of posts over the past few months by a few disgruntled people regarding RealFlight G4.5 and its controller. I've become sick of seeing these attacks popping up in every thread related to RealFlight in a shameless effort to deface a quality product.

My experience with the controller:
The case is cast from the same mold as my 6EX except for obvious modifications to the battery hatch, charge jack, power switch, and LCD screen. It feels just as solid and the controls feel just like my 6EX. All I could ever ask for is a wireless option so I have one less cord to trip over.
http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/controller_fronts.jpg
http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/controller_backs.jpg

These pictures alone do not address the gimbal myth as seen below in the 4th post. This myth claims that the Interlink is a low quality product with inferior gimbals. The key to cracking this myth is proving that the gimbals are the same as those used in the 6EX. Because if they are the same then any complaints of quality should be directed at Futaba and not RealFlight. Click on any of the next three pictures to see a high resolution version.

http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/Interlink_and_6EX_internals_scaled.jpg (http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/Interlink_and_6EX_internals.jpg)

Above is a picture of the Interlink (on the left) and the 6EX (on the right). From this distance it is difficult to see if the gimbals are the same or not, but they do look similar.

http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/Interlink_gimbal_scaled.jpg (http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/Interlink_gimbal.jpg)

Above is the Interlink's left gimbal.

http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/6EX_gimbal_scaled.jpg (http://swm1.com/flying/G4_5/6EX_gimbal.jpg)

Above is the 6EX left gimbal.

Now, it could be just me, but I would say that these gimbal parts were cast from the same molds. The only difference I could spot is that the Interlink uses steel pivot pins for those spring arm deals that return the stick to center. The 6EX uses plastic pins that are molded as part of the case. If I had to choose between the two I'd pick the Interlink's gimbals, myth busted.

My experience with the software:
My main computer is about 4 years old and while it is no slouch, it is not a powerful machine either. With the graphics set to high and highest I get 50-70 FPS at the Evergreen airport and I've never had a bit of trouble whatsoever. My system specs are as follows:

*******************************
C:\Users\swm\AppData\Local\Temp\launcherbasic.txt
*******************************
System: Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit (6.1, Build 7000) (7000.winmain_win7beta.081212-1400)
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2500+, ~1.8GHz
Memory: 2046MB RAM
DX Version: DirectX 11
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 6600 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.0)
MFR: NVIDIA
Version: 7.15.0011.7923 (English)
Date: 11/20/2008 21:25:00, 6004736 bytes
CD-ROM (?:\) SONY DVD-ROM DDU1613 ATA Device (?)
CD-ROM (?:\) SONY DVD-ROM DDU1613 ATA Device (?)
Installed in: C:\Program Files\RealFlightG4
Free Disk Space (C:\): 11458 mb free

*******************************
C:\Users\swm\AppData\Local\Temp\dxdiag.txt
*******************************
------------------
System Information
------------------
Time of this report: 2/6/2009, 10:16:36
Machine name: WIN7_BETA
Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit (6.1, Build 7000) (7000.winmain_win7beta.081212-1400)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: NVIDIA
System Model: AWRDACPI
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2500+, ~1.8GHz
Memory: 2046MB RAM
Page File: 676MB used, 3717MB available
Windows Dir: C:\Windows
DirectX Version: DirectX 11
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
User DPI Setting: Using System DPI
System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)
DWM DPI Scaling: Disabled
DxDiag Version: 6.01.7000.0000 32bit Unicode

---------------
Display Devices
---------------
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 6600 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.0)
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Chip type: GeForce 6600
DAC type: Integrated RAMDAC
Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F2&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_A2
Display Memory: 615 MB
Dedicated Memory: 248 MB
Shared Memory: 367 MB
Current Mode: 1920 x 1080 (32 bit) (60Hz)
Monitor: Generic PnP Monitor
Native Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60.000Hz)
Driver Name: nvd3dum.dll,nvwgf2um.dll
Driver Version: 7.15.0011.7923 (English)
DDI Version: 9Ex
Driver Model: WDDM 1.0
Driver Attributes: Final Retail
Driver Date/Size: 11/20/2008 21:25:00, 6004736 bytes
Some of the most numerous and most venomous attacks were based around a claim that G4.5 does not work with an ATI Radeon 9250 and that the minimum system specifications were not accurate. In order to fully debunk this myth I spent $24 of my own cash to purchase such a video card. I then stripped my system down to 512MB and dropped the FSB to 200 MHz which results in a 1.1 GHz CPU speed. These specifications are very close to the minimum requirements to run G4.5. With graphics set to medium I got a good 30-50 FPS at the Evergreen airport. Also notice I was running 1920x1080 which is enough to bring any system to its knees.

*******************************
C:\DOCUME~1\swm\LOCALS~1\Temp\launcherbasic.txt
*******************************
System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 3 (2600.xpsp_sp3_gdr.080814-1236)
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) , MMX, 3DNow, ~1.1GHz
Memory: 512MB RAM
DX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
Video Card: RADEON 9250
MFR: ATI Technologies Inc.
Version: 6.14.0010.6614 (English)
Date: 5/3/2006 08:51:00, 258048 bytes
CD-ROM (?:\) SONY DVD-ROM DDU1613 (?)
CD-ROM (?:\) SONY DVD-ROM DDU1613 (?)
CD-ROM (?:\) SONY DVD-ROM DDU1613 (?)
Installed in: C:\Program Files\RealFlightG4
Free Disk Space (C:\): 2372 mb free

*******************************
C:\DOCUME~1\swm\LOCALS~1\Temp\dxdiag.txt
*******************************
------------------
System Information
------------------
Time of this report: 2/20/2009, 22:08:55
Machine name: GUENHWYVAR
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 3 (2600.xpsp_sp3_gdr.080814-1236)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: NVIDIA
System Model: AWRDACPI
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) , MMX, 3DNow, ~1.1GHz
Memory: 512MB RAM
Page File: 417MB used, 1599MB available
Windows Dir: C:\WINDOWS
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 5.03.2600.5512 32bit Unicode

---------------
Display Devices
---------------
Card name: RADEON 9250
Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.
Chip type: RADEON 9250 AGP (0x5960)
DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)
Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_5960&SUBSYS_004C1043&REV_01
Display Memory: 128.0 MB
Current Mode: 1920 x 1080 (16 bit) (60Hz)
Monitor: Plug and Play Monitor
Monitor Max Res: 1600,1200
Driver Name: ati2dvag.dll
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6614 (English)
DDI Version: 9 (or higher)
Driver Attributes: Final Retail
Driver Date/Size: 5/3/2006 08:51:00, 258048 bytes


My success in running G4.5 on this computer should be indicative of the average user experience on similar machines. I realize that some people do not understand that software instability can be caused by hardware problems and that opinions vary on what constitutes a quality product. You will notice that I have provided some evidence to back up my claims. No product is perfect, but before you heed the postings of "G4.5 sucks!" consider their evidence and the nature of the source. Have they done due diligence by calling support? Have the accepted or rejected offers by the general manager to help them?

[willhaney]

It's good to see someone is happy with it.

[dusty IV]

I've had my G4.5 for a couple of weeks and have zero complaints . Beautiful graphics. But maybe I'm just weird. I got a Futaba Fasst system also and it seems all you hear about is Spectrum//

Jim Bourke is something else. Whats his background? Must be a real smart guy with a lot of energy.

[Johndou]

I think it's great that you would spend the time and money to "debunk" the myths. But, just what myths have you debunked?

It's a known fact that RealFlight has had issues with their controllers in the past, the posts on the KnifeEdge site alone attest to the fact that a number of people have been disappointed with the quality. Unless you work for RealFlight or Futaba you can't know if the gimbles in the 6EX are the same ones that they put in the RealFlight Elite ... personally I doubt that they are. Why would Futaba or RealFlight place high quality gimbles in a game controller? And, of course the "fact" that thay have had a great many complaints and returns of their controller indicates that same. That's not to say that the RealFlight Elite Controller isn't one of the best available for R/C sims. But, I don't think that "debunks" the "myth" that they still have issues with their controller.

As far as the software goes, your experience, even with all of the work and money you put into it doesn't eliminate the fact that a lot of people have issues with the software and have complained about it.

I don't understand why you feel the need to come to the defense of RealFlight and KnifeEdge Software. You know Jim Bourke - although it's not clear just how "friendly" the two of you are. And to come to the aid of a friend is admirable. But to come to the aid of a product that you own when someone is complainig about it...?

The game/simulator is what it is. You're not going to please everyone and you're going to get some people complaining. It's unfortunate that RealFlight or KnifeEdge doen't have a presence on these forums or any of the other sites where complaints have been posted. But, that's their issue, if they choose not to respond to the complaints. I find it "interestsing" that Jim Bourke, the president of KnifeEdge (RCG, Flying Giants, etc.), has taken the time to respond to some of those complaints. It's unfortunate if these complaints are effecting his bottom line, but ... "you get what you give". The policy - in the past - has been to not respond to the complaints and to refer them to Tech Support for any technical issues. Maybe a little "friendlier" response might have been in order and the complaints might not have been so loud.

[SteveM732]

I don't understand why you feel the need to come to the defense of RealFlight and KnifeEdge Software. You know Jim Bourke - although it's not clear just how "friendly" the two of you are. And to come to the aid of a friend is admirable. But to come to the aid of a product that you own when someone is complainig about it...?
It is not my intent to address replies with negative views towards RealFlight unless they are substantiated. Some people have an opinion differing from mine and I have no problem with that, all I asked is that people having a complaint exercise due diligence before ranting on the forums. Do you have pictures or other proof showing that the internals of the Interlink and the 6EX are vastly different? If not then maybe you just provided another myth that I can debunk.

I would, however, like to address your comment regarding my motives. As you can see by looking to the left, my current location is in Corvallis, the home of Knife Edge. I assure you that I have never worked for Jim Bourke and am not friends with him. He wouldn't even be able to pick me out of a line up of two people. Now why am I defending a product? Let's say someone was posting all over the internet that the 1957 Chevy Bel Air "is crap" and GM should admit to it. Would you question my motives if I posted a thread demonstrating why I disagree?

[Johndou]

It is not my intent to address replies with negative views towards RealFlight unless they are substantiated. Some people have an opinion differing from mine and I have no problem with that, all I asked is that people having a complaint exercise due diligence before ranting on the forums. Do you have pictures or other proof showing that the internals of the Interlink and the 6EX are vastly different? If not then maybe you just provided another myth that I can debunk.

I would, however, like to address your comment regarding my motives. As you can see by looking to the left, my current location is in Corvallis, the home of Knife Edge. I assure you that I have never worked for Jim Bourke and am not friends with him. He wouldn't even be able to pick me out of a line up of two people. Now why am I defending a product? Let's say someone was posting all over the internet that the 1957 Chevy Bel Air "is crap" and GM should admit to it. Would you question my motives if I posted a thread demonstrating why I disagree?

I never accused you of "working" for Jim. You've admitted yourself in previous posts to being involved in the same "flying club/field" as Jim. Even to the point of commenting that you "missed" his one wing landing at the field not long ago because you were previously occupied. I don't know how large your flying club/field is, but with a small town like Corvallis I can't imagine it's exactly huge. Are you actually claiming to be involved with a flying club/field with Jim, living in a rather small community, and never having met the man? I find that a bit hard to believe.

It's my conclusion that you know Jim ... you don't like the idea that his integrity is being challenged. And you're coming to his defense. That's fine, just be honest about it.

You've claimed to be debunking myths yet at the same time you're unable to show any proof to your allegations. Instead you'd like me to prove you wrong ... there's nothing to prove wrong if you haven't shown it to be right first ... and you haven't. I don't think there's anyone saying that the case for the Realflight controller is not same as one of their other products. But, it's fairly obvious, by the list of complaints, that the internals are drastically inferior.

As far as you comparison with a '57 Chevy ... just about anyone owning a '57 Chevy would come to the forefront if someone were bashing the car... GM wouldn't need to comment!

I don't see the same thing happening here with regards to RealFlight. In fact I see the opposite happening here. The owner of the company is virtually (with a couple of exceptions) the only one defending his product - what does that say to the masses?

[dbcisco]

The control is fine if you like Futaba (I do) and G4 is great. I still say G4.5 is .... I can't say it or I'll get banned again.


BTW SteveM732, I am the one who thinks you are plant. You seemed to have access to information about me that only knife edge should know. You also "appeared" from nowhere to bash me on another forum outside JBoukre's control. You live in the same town, fly at the same field as Jim etc....

I think you are a "plant".

[SteveM732]

I will assume that the two of you have resorted to ad hominem arguments out of an inability to present evidence to contradict my claims. As such I have no need to comment on those last two posts or any like them.

However, it does seem that opening the cases of the controllers may be enlightening so I will try to find some time tonight to do so and will post my findings.

[SteveM732]

OK, I opened up the Interlink and the 6EX and posted my findings in the first post.

Not surprisingly, the gimbal myth of post #4 got busted.

[outback_2007]

They may have had some people saying reporting they have had problems, but how many people?

Out of 1,000's, or 10,000's, of happy people like me. I love my Real Flight G4 controller.

And if my controller fails, I'm sure I can send it back, and more than likely get it fixed for free.

[Double D]

I haven't opened up my elite controller but I've a couple dozen hours on my trusty old super 7 and those are quality gimbals, so are these, they feel the same to me. I do need to get in there and lighten up the springs.
The software is simply awesome as far as venues and planes/helis and adjustability. I have all the discs(Add ons and expansions) and I am simply overjoyed at the options I get to play with.


A person can get by with much less for real simulator work, but I get much enjoyment out of this package.

I am in no way associated with KE or GP*, I paid retail. :p







*I am a plant, a rare hibiscus.

[Murocflyer]

Steve,

Where did you go to get such descritptive info about your PC? I'm trying to figure out if my 2007 year model laptop is good enough to run RFG4.5 or if I should stick with the $80 cheaper version RFG3.5. My OS is Vista.

I checked out the requirements and the only thing I am unsure on is the video card min. levels.

Here is what I found.

Thanks,

Frank

[willhaney]

Try System Information:

[SteveM732]

Where did you go to get such descritptive info about your PC? I'm trying to figure out if my 2007 year model laptop is good enough to run RFG4.5 or if I should stick with the $80 cheaper version RFG3.5. My OS is Vista.
The info shown was obtained through through RealFlight, but you don't need all that info to figure out if RF 4.5 will run. My laptop will be 3 years old in about a month and runs it fine.

Minimum Specs (http://www.realflight.com/requirements/g45_system.html) :
* Windows* XP or Windows* Vista®
* Intel® Pentium® 1.0GHz or equivalent
* 512 MB RAM
* 4 GB Hard Drive Space
* DVD Drive
* 3D Accelerated Video with:
- 32 MB Dedicated Video Memory
- Full Windows DirectX® 9 compliant (Pixel Shader 1.4 support)

I'm guessing your CPU, memory, hard drive, and DVD drive all meet these specs so all you are need worry about is the video card.

The Intel video cards are not meant for 3D performance, but they can do ok. I don't know how much of your system's memory is dedicated to the video card, but I'm guessing well over 32 MB and based on the following links your video card supports Pixel Shader 2.0.
http://www.intel.com/Products/Notebook/Chipsets/945GM/945GM-overview.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/gma950/index.htm

Your laptop is not designed for 3D performance, but I think it would do fine.

[Murocflyer]

Will,

I can't find that. Closest I can find is in the post above yours.

Steve,

Looks like I'll be OK -thanks.

Now I just gotta figure out if I should go with 3.5 or the 4.5. Any advice about that?

Thanks,

Frank

[willhaney]

I can't find that. Closest I can find is in the post above yours.Ooops, sorry. It's Msinfo32.exe.

[Murocflyer]

What do we know about this?

Frank

[SteveM732]

Steve,

Looks like I'll be OK -thanks.

Now I just gotta figure out if I should go with 3.5 or the 4.5. Any advice about that?

Thanks,

FrankI've never used RF 3.5 so I couldn't tell you, especially since what some see as an improvement others may see as no upgrade at all. Reading some reviews on RF 4/4.5 should help you decide.

The video card info shown in the post above tells us that the video card has 32MB of its own memory and can borrow up to 194 MB of your system's RAM (typical for a laptop). It should be plenty to run RF 4.5 at the lower graphics settings.

[Murocflyer]

Cool. Thanks for the info Steve. Glad to see I'm good.

Frank

[ifoguy]

The only difference I could spot is that the Interlink uses steel pivot pins for those spring arm deals that return the stick to center. The 6EX uses plastic pins that are molded as part of the case.
SteveM732:

Thanks for the informative thread.

I've had three RF G3.5 gymbals fail for me in a year. Each time the plastic pivot pin in the gymbal sheared off. It's good to know that this issue has been fixed in the G4.0 controllers! The plastic pin has been replaced by a steel pin! That's fantastic!

For G3.5 owners, I created a thread that describes how to replace the sheared off plastic pin with a steel pin:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=989085

[SteveM732]

That is really good to know, thanks for posting the information and link. This leads me to believe that the controller failures due to the plastic pivot pin are a not a problem with RF G4 and newer (I purchased G4 right before G4.5 hit the shelves).

Since my 6EX has the plastic pins I will likely need to reference your repair post sooner or later.

[RJD1234]

SteveM732 - You seem to know a lot Real Flight 4.5 which is a great help for all of us. However I would like to comment on Knifedge tech support, or lack thereof. I have sent emails to them concerning some issues after downloading aircraft from their website - no response. After a couple of weeks I decided to call and talk to a "real person". This guy was rude, unresponsive and basically read his answer from a book, no help. I finallly found the answer on my own. This lack of support really hurts such a fine product. Just thought I'd throw in my two cents.................

[keallen]

One thing to remember about support is that it's not a single entity.

When I puchased G4 I had nothing but problems with the upgrades - none of the addons or plane packs would install, patches failed in both manual and automatic modes, nothing. I'm a software engineer myself, so knew what I was doing, and nothing worked.

My call to tech support lasted less than 5 minutes total, and a few days later I had a G4.5 disc in the mail. Fresh install, and all was right with the world. The guy I spoke to was friendly and helpful, dropping a solid solution in my lap.

I didn't go running out to Knife Edge's forums to laud them - maybe I should have, but few people work that way. Always put forum complaints in proper perspective, and remember that the silent majority is most likely having too much fun flying in the sim to post on the forums.

[Ensign Jimmy]

I've never used RF 3.5 so I couldn't tell you, especially since what some see as an improvement others may see as no upgrade at all. Reading some reviews on RF 4/4.5 should help you decide.

The video card info shown in the post above tells us that the video card has 32MB of its own memory and can borrow up to 194 MB of your system's RAM (typical for a laptop). It should be plenty to run RF 4.5 at the lower graphics settings.
Eh, I'd be wary about recommending an Intel GMA 9xx video chipset for running anything more graphically intensive than Windows. Yes, it's essentially DX9 compliant, but its advertised specs are on the . . . how shall I put it . . . in direct opposition to reality side, compared with how it runs on actual video games (and other 3D graphics-intensive applications. *cough*)