ClearView Flight Sim Wishlist (Ongoing)

[supac]

-More Realistic spool up
-Fix the trex xl model - too twitchy
-better crashes

[skirtz]

In default heli setup the governor is on. That means, when the RPM reaches 40% from the governor target RPM, the governor takes control. Once the governor has the control, the head speed remains at the governbor RPM, unless you activate throttle hold for autorotation.

If you want to control the head speed, go and turn the govenrnor to 0 in advanced setup. Then, the head speed is controlled by the throttle curve in advanced setup.

When you ask for better crashes, what exactly do you mean:

- visually more convincing chicken dance in a crash
- or damage estimation
- or more control over what results is crash - fine tuning how sturdy the heli is and when will it crash - for example, how hard the landing must be before the sim triggers the crash

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[supac]

third one

[mmormota]

It has now many useful features, impressive graphics, network connection etc.

Time to improve physics to the highest possible level. To do that, you probably have to collect as many test reports as possible, in order to filter the inherently subjective opinions. I think you are very close to the big guys in heli simulation quality.

My (very subjective) opinion: the helis are somehow sliding, as if momentum has too much effect. It is not just the lack of friction, as forward speed is not too high.

[skirtz]

It has now many useful features, impressive graphics, network connection etc.

Time to improve physics to the highest possible level. To do that, you probably have to collect as many test reports as possible, in order to filter the inherently subjective opinions. I think you are very close to the big guys in heli simulation quality.

My (very subjective) opinion: the helis are somehow sliding, as if momentum has too much effect. It is not just the lack of friction, as forward speed is not too high.

It is more finding the best settings that fit the prevailing expectations. The physics simulation is quite complete and flexible. I need experienced fliers that are willing to work with me to provide iterative feedback for few key models - for example, Raptor 60, TRex 450 XL and Edge 25% (or 33%). The key is expert fliers helping fine tune the parameters. If needed, I will change or expand the physics to accomodate reasonable requests.

Example for constructive feedback is this:

- I have helicopter model xxxx with yyy engine, zzz blades etc. etc. It is set for mild 3d. I am progressing to holding the heli inverted low to the ground and can do tumbles and stationary rolls. I use ClearView model zzzz with the original settings. I think that this , this and this manuevers are quite different
on the sim than on my real heli. My real heli does this and the sim heli does that. Can you improve the sim heli so it's more like mine?

Once I know the pilot capabilities and what he flies, we can go back and fort exchanging the setup file for the model in question. At the end, I can provide improved params.txt file so the CV model flies more like the real model. Over time, all this changes will tricle down in the new releases.


Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[mmormota]

First, the sim is pretty good as is, and helps me a lot. I fly with a Raptor and a TRex. I learnt loops, rolls using the sim, and after succes in the sim, it was succes on the real one as well. I had only a single crash with my Raptor, because of a technical problem (tail gone). A lot of crashes with the Trex, as I am not so careful with it.
Now I learn inverted flight. This time only in the sim, my skill is not reliable enough to try it on the real one.

The key is expert fliers helping fine tune the parameters.

I am way below expert. 8's, loops, rolls. I can't fly inverted stable enough, nor tail first or any wilder 3d. Working on it... ;)

Example for constructive feedback is this:

- I have helicopter model xxxx with yyy engine, zzz blades etc. etc. It is set for mild 3d. I am progressing to holding the heli inverted low to the ground and can do tumbles and stationary rolls. I use ClearView model zzzz with the original settings.

One of my favorite helis is a Raptor 50, pretty stock but converted to electric. 62,5 cm CF blades, Neu 1912 motor, 10s Lipo, headspeed is 1900.

The most similar stock model in the sim is the Raptor 60. I lowered the cyclics to 25, tail to 30 to fit sensitivity to my real one.

Differences:

1. hovering
The real one is more stable, I easily keep it steady within a few centimeters, not much correction and concetration is necessary.
The sim model needs much more concentration, hard to keep steady within tens of centimeters.

2. full pitch, pedal to metal
The real one jumps faster upwards. In forward flight, acceleration and speed is more similar.

3. Sliding. Its not easy to describe, but it is the most important difference.
Flying ff, in turns, if the roll and yaw angle is not precise, the heli slides out of the intended line, builds altitude. This effect is much stronger with the sim then with the real one. I mean, the sim model slides more, builds more altitude. The real one is more "on rails".

[skirtz]

Thanks for detailed feedback. Try the new version 4.60 (http://rcflightsim.com/download.html). This version address 1, 2 and may be 3 from your post. I have changed some parameters for Blade CP, TRex and Raptors helis. Now they are not that twitchy and the drag coef is closer to what should be.
The plane flight model is changed as well to improve on the flat spins. Now both edges (25% and 33%) do real flat spins quite nicelly.

Another change is switching the camera between the models using keyboard key "c" - now if you do net multyplay, you can switch the camera to follow the other model. The same if you have many models flying using the "Play flight path" feature. You can switch the camera to any model by repeatedly pressing "c".


Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[mmormota]

Thanks.

The 4.60 is not accessible for download.

[skirtz]

Try now, I fixed the link. Thanks.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[mmormota]

Thanks, it's working now.

[mmormota]

Now, with the 4.60:

The general feeling is better then my previous 4.58 version.

I feel comfortable with the Raptor 60 (again, I have an eRaptor 50, that's my real heli reference, not a 60). Default tail and cyclic are similar to my real heli's settings for normal forward flight. (just lowered torkRotCoef as my heli has a very calm tail, Futaba GY401 and digital servo).
Maybe forward speed is a little bit low. The general feeling is pretty good.

The T-Rex is ok in hovering, but the forward speed and acceleration is too low. And there is a strange behavior: if I pull the elevator, it rapidly accelerates, it feels much faster in entering the loop, then in the previous forward flight.

(It's just my subjective opinion, maybe my mistake etc.)

I am curios what are the other pilots opinions.

---------

I tried to modify the color scheme of the helis. I downloaded AC3d, but not familiar with it at all. I was able to modify the color of the skids etc. but not the cockpit transparent glass. What is the trick?
My primary target was a high-contrast, luminous front side, anything but black, to improve visibility for better, easier orientation.

[skirtz]

Now, with the 4.60:

I feel comfortable with the Raptor 60 (again, I have an eRaptor 50, that's my real heli reference, not a 60). Default tail and cyclic are similar to my real heli's settings for normal forward flight. (just lowered torkRotCoef as my heli has a very calm tail, Futaba GY401 and digital servo).
Maybe forward speed is a little bit low. The general feeling is pretty good.

The T-Rex is ok in hovering, but the forward speed and acceleration is much too low. And there is a strange behavior: if I pull the elevator, it rapidly accelerates, it feels much faster in the loop, then in the previous forward flight.

(It's just my subjective opinion, maybe my mistake etc.)

I am curios what are the other pilots opinions.

---------

I tried to modify the color scheme of the helis. I downloaded AC3d, but not familiar with it at all. I was able to modify the color of the skids etc. but not the cockpit transparent glass. What is the trick?
My primary target was a high-contrast, luminous front side, anything but black, to improve visibility for better, easier orientation.

Go to advanced settings and modify this parameter:
dragCoef xxx

Lower value results in less drag and higher top speed. Let me know what are your values for Raptor 60 and for TRex 450.

Feeling faster in the loop - this is because the top speed was probably restricted by to high drag coeficient. Let me know if lowering the drag makes in loop feel better.

Did you notice less twitchy hover (more controllable) and more prononced pitch control?

Regarding changing models with ac3d:

Since all model parts are texture mapped, the color of the part depends on the base part color and the color from the texture map. If you add a small collored square to the model texture and texture map the windshield to that square, you will be able to change the screen color.


Thanks,
Stefan

http://rcflightsim.com


PS: I think the best part of ClearView is the ability to load models created in ac3d. If you open another thread for creating CV models, I will be more than happy to assist with any help there.

[rumadaaerowings]

Great Job Stefan! The edge's are really flying great now. One thing I have noticed is that I can enter the flat spin with left rudder which is fine for right side up spins and for inverted it needs to be entered with the right rudder and with right rudder the plane just slides across the screen. Any suggestions?

-Russell

[mmormota]

Go to advanced settings and modify this parameter:
dragCoef xxx

Lower value results in less drag and higher top speed. Let me know what are your values for Raptor 60 and for TRex 450.

Feeling faster in the loop - this is because the top speed was probably restricted by to high drag coeficient. Let me know if lowering the drag makes in loop feel better.

Did you notice less twitchy hover (more controllable) and more prononced pitch control?


What is the practical range of the drag coefficient?

Both the Raptor and the T-Rex is less twitchy now. The T-Rex is probably too calm.

The upward acceleration on high pitch is better now.

What exacltly Idle up is doing, I can't see any diferrence if it is on or off (Raptor60).


If you add a small collored square to the model texture and texture map the windshield to that square, you will be able to change the screen color.


Thanks.

[skirtz]

Great Job Stefan! The edge's are really flying great now. One thing I have noticed is that I can enter the flat spin with left rudder which is fine for right side up spins and for inverted it needs to be entered with the right rudder and with right rudder the plane just slides across the screen. Any suggestions?

-Russell
Thanks, I think they (the Edges) are pretty good right now.

Make sure you don't have forward speed. The flat spin needs almost zero forward speed and the plane must start falling while being in flat position.

To enter a flat spin, you must get the plane low on forward speed, in flat angle and falling down. The best way at least for me is to start with normal spin (left rudder, left on ailerons, throttle off) and then pump a throttle a bit, up elevator to bring up the nose and easy on ailerons to get the plane spin flatten. Another way to enter flat spin is from high alpha, balance with the throttle,add some rudder and control with the ailerons.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[skirtz]

>What is the practical range of the drag coefficient?
From 0 (no drag) to 0.4 I would say, when it feels like it is restrained by too much resistance. This is purelly matter of perception, so pick the value you feel represents your model behavior the best. Lower value makes flying bit more challenging, higher value helps a lot while learning because the heli will not accelerate that quick.

>Both the Raptor and the T-Rex is less twitchy now. The T-Rex is probably too calm.
It replesents mild setup, I may look at it again.

>The upward acceleration on high pitch is better now.
I agree, others also like it like that now, so it will become default value.

>What exacltly Idle up is doing, I can't see any diferrence if it is on or off (Raptor60).
You can't see the difference because the governor is on and the pitch curves for idle on and off are set the same. If you turn the governor off, the throttle in idle off will be controled by the throttle curve and the model will not be able to fly inverted.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[rumadaaerowings]

I got the right side up spin perfect now (left rudder, left aileron, and up elevator), but I think there is a glitch when inverted. With either left or right rudder (full) and full down elevator with no throttle at almost zero forward speed, the plane will act up.

Thanks,
Russell

[skirtz]

I got the right side up spin perfect now (left rudder, left aileron, and up elevator), but I think there is a glitch when inverted. With either left or right rudder (full) and full down elevator with no throttle at almost zero forward speed, the plane will act up.

Thanks,
Russell

Can you please make short recording and e-mail it to me at 123support@rcflightsim.com (remove 123).

Also, try it with Edge 25% and with Edge 33% and tell me if there is a difference. The flight models for these planes are slightly different. I will keep them different until I decide which flight model is better. IMHO they both fly very well now and is a hard to pick one against the other.


Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[mmormota]

My dragCoeff choices:
T-Rex: 0.1
Raptor 60: 0.15

About the T-Rex: In any other aspects but forward speed I prefer 0.15, but for better forward speed my final choice is 0.1
Hovering is ok.
I feel, that in forward flight, when I pull the elevator stick and the heli enters into a loop, there is an acceleration, and this is different to the real heli behavior. Maybe because of the same reason, maybe not, but in the sim I can easily fly bigger loops then with the real heli. The real one looses speed faster when it climbs upwards in the loop, I can't draw such big, impressive loops.

Unfortunately the weather is cold. The test could be more interesting and more reliable, if I can take my notebook, and switch to the sim and back to the real in the flying field :D ...

I have an idea:
A data logger on the real heli with acceleration sensors, gyro turning sensors and pitot speed sensor, and it logs the channel values as well. Fly some clean actions, collect the data. This way the collected data is objective, without feelings, no more maybe, not sure, etc.
In the sim you probably handle similar data, therefore there is the possibility to check if the data set is similar, and to fine tune the parameters.
Ok, it is easy to say... ;)

[skirtz]

My dragCoeff choices:
....
....
I feel, that in forward flight, when I pull the elevator stick and the heli enters into a loop, there is an acceleration, and this is different to the real heli behavior. Maybe because of the same reason, maybe not, but in the sim I can easily fly bigger loops then with the real heli. The real one looses speed faster when it climbs upwards in the loop, I can't draw such big, impressive loops.
....
....


Lower this parameter:
translationalThrustCoef xxx

This will take care of the big loops. Please let me know the preffered value for you.


Regarding the drag coef, I think you may be right, I may lower it some in the next release. The thing is, when I get flying and go back to the sim again, I may preffer another value. It is somewhat subjective, because depending to the adrenaline level when flying, our perception of time and model reaction is different from the perception we get sitting comfortable in front of the screen, where the model is not in any real danger.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[Spekter]

Hi Stefan,

Just wanted to thank you again for an outstanding product. I bought a new radio a couple months ago (RD6000 super) and used your instructions to build an interface cable for smartpropo. Works fantastic and version 4.59 is much better than the last one I played with. (I think 4.01 or so)

Keep up the good work,

Al

[Spekter]

Just installed 4.60 and noticed the following:
Blade CP flight physics are much better, much more stable now. Hard to explain but the distance and speed are correct now. With the last version, once I flew far out, it took much longer to get back to near. This is corrected now! Good work Stefan.

[Spekter]

Stefan,

I found that taming the "cyclic power" was the key to tuning the twitchiness of the heli's. Do you have a list of all the parameters and what they do? (Never mind...I found it on your website :)

Thanks,

Al

[othmanskn]

Stefan,

I found that taming the "cyclic power" was the key to tuning the twitchiness of the heli's. Do you have a list of all the parameters and what they do? (Never mind...I found it on your website :)

Thanks,

Al

Maybe it is also time to explain the PlaneParamModel.ac file is for.

I've finisned animating moveable surafaces for a scaled down Su-37 using Blender, using ShockFlier Edge parameter files including its PlaneParamModel.ac.

My next task is to scale this parameter.ac file in order to give a more correct feel for light planes. Most of the provided models are given masses of more than 3kg.

My planes and helis, are mostly less than 500g with lengths of less than 1m.

A few questions on this parameter graphic file:
1. What are these front elevator and rudder plates? Why do we need extras when we already have the rear elevator and rudder?

2. Why do we need the XYZGroups for main wing and body? Are they moveable as well?

Based on my earlier experiments, I cannot just delete these groups. It crashes Clearview.

[skirtz]

The answer to question #1 is, that the front elevator and rudder plates are used by the program as sensors to measure rotational speeds at these points and for finer tuning the CG in some planes. For q #2, XYZGroups for main wing and the body are used by the program to compute the spatial position of the body and the wings to the main model coordinate system. As general rule, PlaneParamModel.ac should not be changed in any way since it contains some very important model relations. There is no reason to document it's structure since it must not be modified.

Thanks,
Stefan
http://rcflightsim.cin

[TheWolfen]

I'm a pretty new Clearview flyer and a new heli pilot as well. I think one of the biggest features I'd like to see that some of the more expensive sims have is realistic damage models and crash effects. It is probably something that requires a ton of work for an event we want to avoid, ;) but it would add a lot to the sim, in my opinion.

More models is always good, too! I'm still trying to figure out which one is the closest to my heli (E-Sky Honey Bee FP2). I thought Ken's Dragonfly would be pretty close, but so far it doesn't feel quite right to me (but then I'm very much a rookie).

Anyway, keep up the good work! So far I've managed to avoid buying one of the really expensive sims, and I'd like to keep it that way (more money for my heli)! :D

David

[skirtz]

Some simulators, instead trying to improve their flight model (from being poor to at least acceptable) created all these fake game like features to create an image of improvement. I for one think that simulator is a tool that must be realistic above all. All there features are bloatware and belong to cheap video games and not to an RC simulator. Sorry for being blunt but that is not the direction I see ClearView going.

Stefan
http://rcflighsim.com

[matthew954]

The more realistic the better. I had just gotten Clearview not too long ago and find it to be more realistic than FMS. Just my opinion mind you. FMS is a good program, but Clearview is more expansive on what I can do. I like being able to select the types of servos I can use in my flights. I noticed right away there is a difference between analog and digital servos. Never knew that before. When I get my new Stearman sometime next winter I know that what I should get are digital servos and receiver. So far Clearview has taught me alot more than flying flying. It has taught me the most efficient types of radio gear to use in my real life models.

If I had to have a wishlist for Clearview, I would have to say have a few more Biplanes other than the ones on Ken's site. Namely a giant scale Stearman. Not too mention a nice old Piper Cub. But what would really be nicer more so than the gas planes would be some more Coaxial Helis, since now just about every company has atleast one Coax heli either in stores now or on their way for the holidays.

But either way Clearview as yet is the best tool I have bought for the hobby. Now i just need to get a faster pc, since some of the models stutter and loading times suck. But the flying fun is well worth the wait. Thanks to skirtz and everyone else who works on Clearview!

[ShuNut]

Hey Stefan :)

I'd like to give a little feed back on the heli side.

My experience is only about 6 months with a CP heli and a few months before that i had a cheepo FP heli and quite a few yrs before that i had a few flights of my freinds raptor 30, tail in hovering only.

So far with my T-Rex SE i can do all the normal upright stuff including backward flight-fig 8's, and i can now loop quite good and i'm getting much better at rolls & flips, i can hover inverted nose in and resently (past few days) tail in.

What i think Clearview need is more realistic handling when it comes to fliping and rolling.
The problem is its way too easy to flip and roll on the sim, main point is when you give the wrong pitch movements it will still flip and roll easy with any heli, where as in real like my heli will lose loads of hight and\or nearly crash because of it.

I dont know if its because the helis dont bog during manouvers of if the gravity code needs work. CV is a great sim and i love and use it everyday if i can, but if this pt of the sim could be improved it would make the world of difference. I have had over 700 flights on my Rex and i try to fly every day, so would be happy to give input to help getting this part improved.

I've been using CV for nearly 1 year now, and i used to use the T-Rex 95% of the time, but a few months ago i started mainly useing the Raptor 90, mostly just because you can see it much better and seems more eqiverlent on screen to my Rex 450 off screen if you get what i mean.

With V4.60 i like how the Raptor climbs better, but it seems too stable now and way too easy to do 3D to me, but i've never flown one so i cant really say, the T-Rex flys much better now, not so twitchy so i've been using that a lot lately as the Rappy seems to easy and i cant learn enough from it, i like my modles to be harder to fly than in real life.

Also i think CV need blades sounds when changing pitch, thats one of the many things i love about helis is that flapping sound.

So basicly i'm say the 2 areas that i think need most work is
1: The helis sounds, and
2: The helis need to be able to bog down and harder to flip if u give the wrong pitch.

I'm not really looking to get any CV models to fly exactly like mine, just more like real life.

And i must say agian that i love CV and am in no way complaining about it, those point are just my wish :rolleyes: list.

Thx

Peace

[othmanskn]

The answer to question #1 is, that the front elevator and rudder plates are used by the program as sensors to measure rotational speeds at these points and for finer tuning the CG in some planes.

Thanks. I'll experiment.



For q #2, XYZGroups for main wing and the body are used by the program to compute the spatial position of the body and the wings to the main model coordinate system. As general rule, PlaneParamModel.ac should not be changed in any way since it contains some very important model relations. There is no reason to document it's structure since it must not be modified.

Thanks,
Stefan
http://rcflightsim.cin
If users have some ideas what they're for, they can at least choose which ones to use for their own models.

My interests are:
1. ducted fans, 500g elevon controlled.
I notice that only the turbine powered F15 uses elevons, ala Nelson's Su-27 foam planes, 24in wing span
(under construction )

I'd like to use Clearview to estimate its flight performance, given physical dimensions and mass distribution, as well as given thrust and orientation.

2. 2-ch V-tail pusher ala Firebird series, 500g, I've 3 at home

3. 2-ch 2-engine vectored thrust 250g
I've 3 hanging on my ceiling .

4. 2-ch 2-engine 20g, X-twin or Aeroace.
Got one, and the only model that I managed to fly reasonably well.

My intention is not just for me, but to train my children and nephews, younger than 10 to fly these planes rather than destroying them.

Creating 3D models is no longer a problem. All are available for FMS exect X-twin, which I'm still constructing while improving my Blender skills.

You'd help me a lot if you could provide me with correct param.ac files for classes of these planes, where I can use correct masses, without major tweaks in the coefficients.

I notice that most Clearview models use masses of more than 3kg, (which is too heavy for me), even electric planes.

FMS allows me to specify physical dimensions. Similarly for all flight simulators that I had known.
I may start with FMS but I'd prefer to use Clearview with its better graphics.

For more realistic flying, sound effects are important. Phoenix shows the way.

Helis need it more than planes.

[TerryE]

I would like dual rates implimented. I am trying to learn 3D, and having the ability to use dual rates would be great!

Terry

PS: I am still looking for a P-47 model...

[othmanskn]

I would like dual rates implimented. I am trying to learn 3D, and having the ability to use dual rates would be great!

Terry

PS: I am still looking for a P-47 model...

I've searched throught the internet and my collection of FMS models. I can't seem to find out. Initially I thought rare bear is a P-47, but P-47 is even bigger in real life of course. It looks similar to rare bear F8F.

I'd like to model this plane after I'd successfully completed my X-twin micro RC plane. If you give me specifications or source, of your P-47, I'd like to model it for you, as part of my exercise.

[TerryE]

oth;

Thanks a lot - I would really appreciate it!

Here is a link to the P-47:

http://www.raidentech.com/pthrareconig.html

Thanks again!

Terry

[othmanskn]

oth;

Thanks a lot - I would really appreciate it!

Here is a link to the P-47:

http://www.raidentech.com/pthrareconig.html

Thanks again!

Terry
Actually I've finished a P47c scaled down to 1:10 with moving prop.

But I it is transparent and its flying parameters is based on Clearview's edge 33%. It is so easy to fly. I wonder if this is real plane.

If you've a any of clearview's models or those from Ken that you think is closer to your model, I can easily use it as a base.

If you like, I can email to you this unfinished model while we develop it further. I am still trying to get solid colours into my Clearview models using blender.

However FMS model, no problem at all. However I don't like it as much as Clearview.

[othmanskn]

The attachment is a view of the P47c which uses the colour of P47D RC plane from the maker of your plane.


My wish list that I hope will be incorporated into the next versions are:

1. make the unpause key,not just any key, but any unprintable key such as "ESC", failing which, just the P key.

I need it to pause in order to take pictures.

2. Document all the keys on the menu itself, using the help. I had to try many times from f12 to f9 before I find the key to take pictures.

3. What the next projects for Clearview will be so that we can look forward to it, and do not need to waste our energy reasking for them.

We can also give feedback on what he is trying to do.

4. Clearview or any RC supplier must give an indication of the accuracy of their model and its flying characteristics, as well as the original manufacturer of these models and their equipments.

For example, Edge 540 33%/25%. It may be the most finely tuned and I notice that it is good and I would like to buy this machine if it were able to fly this way.

I doubt that all Edge 540 from different suppliers, made from different materials and equipped with different engines and radio and control equipment can behave exactly as this Clearview's RC models.

Having information, such as this, is most helpful and it should not cost much.

It helps to fire our dreams of flying like Pros.

[TerryE]

Oth;

Thanks a lot - PM the plane :)

Thanks
Terry

[skirtz]

All keys are docimented in the ClearView documentation - just go to the Help menu and click on the flight manual.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[othmanskn]

Oth;

Thanks a lot - PM the plane :)

Thanks
Terry
I've 2 models already.

One,the large one at 1:1 scale, although I mentioned earlier that it was 1:10.

The smaller one is exported to .cob and edited with mqle21a just to add textures using pictures from your supplier's website. It appears smaller although I didn't do any scaling on it in mqle21a or blender.

It is directly imported to Clearview with its jpeg files. I don't think it will work with FMS. I don't even have an FMS par file for it but it can be exported to Clearview.


The large one uses Edge 33%, and the smaller one uses Edge25%( I believe). The flying behaviour is different from Clearview stock Edge 33% which means that Clearview can extract physical dimensions directly from its graphic files.


The next phase is to draw proper texture maps for all surfaces, using 2D drawing tools.

I shall PM to you both.

[othmanskn]

All keys are docimented in the ClearView documentation - just go to the Help menu and click on the flight manual.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

I know that.That was the reason why I knew there was a key for taking pictures but in order to make Clearview even better, nothing wrong in publicising it on the program itself. After all, there is already a meny for it. Just add a few characters will do.

Trying a few keys is certainly much fastern than reading the flight manual, which literally what it is all about. I tried rereading it but gave up in favour of trial and error.

More wishlists before I forgot again:
1. Flight data information should be available, like FMS, such as
a)coordinates, which are already inherent.
b)calculated data which may be important for simulation itself so is already available: air speed, vertical speed, max acceleration(G)
In fact the more the better: rotation speed in all axies.

c) Physical data such as angle of attack, the deflection angles of all control surfaces.

All these should be made optional and need not be put on the menu system. You can even document them in the flight manual only. It is not for everyday use but important when fine tuning aircraft parameters.

You don't even need to display on screen. A file dump similar to flight record will do.

One attractive feature of any Flight sim is its realism but this realism needs tools in order to test and verify them. Subjective visual inspection is not sufficient.

Of course we may need to find ways to measure real planes characteristics but these are already available using radar gun and sound doppler effects. Sooner or later, in flight datga recording will be made available,which is already available for electrical data.

[othmanskn]

Here is the attachment of the smaller plane.

[wallaguest1]

is that sim better then PhoenixRC sim?

thankiu very much,

[TerryE]

I think so, and it is $120 cheaper :)

EDIT: I am basing this on MY expeience and including price as a consideration.

TE

[Airtronic]

I think so, and it is $120 cheaper :)

Terry - have you actually tried Phoenix? I only say this because I just simply cannot believe anyone would say that after trying both side by side!

[TerryE]

I have tried it. A buddy of mine owns it, and loves it.

In all honesty, I am much more familiar with CV, and its use. Phoenix is a great program, please do not get me wrong. For ME, and MY BUDGET I think CV is a better alternative.

If I had a BIG budget I would probably get Reflex... I don't and think that CV (for the money) is the best sim FOR ME.

... your mileage may vary :)

[skirtz]

Hi TerryE,

Can you please describe the flight model differences between ClearView and Phoenix ? I am interested in the flight simulation only.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[TerryE]

Stefan;

The flights in CV seemed "smoother" to me. It may have been the computer I was using for Phoenix (not mine, a buddy's) and I do not know his full setup. I am running CV on a P4 3.4 GHz with an NVidia Getforce Graphics card so it screams! I am very used to the model behavior in CV (especially the edge and Harvard which I fly the most) so I was using their behavior to compare with Phoenix. CV models seemed o respond "quicker", but that may be due to the parameter settings more than the physics engine.

IMHO

TE

[skirtz]

Thanks Terry. As part of my development process I compare the flight behavior as implemented in ClearView to G3, Reflex and AFPD Pro . I know for a fact there is none in the CV physics that is lacking compared to these sims. (When I find something lacking I allways implement it so it is lacking nomore) I was thinking if I have to spend $160 now to add the Phoenix as one of the benchmark sims I use to measure ClearView flight model or not. The same for FSOne. My current thinking is to wait a year for these sims to catch up with bugs and implement stable flight model.

Stefan
http://rcflighsim.com

[wallaguest1]

skirtz take a look to thoose videos, maybe that will hel you,

http://www.phoenix-sim-files.com/files/videos/phoenixrc_3d_heli_knight50_v1.mpg
http://www.phoenix-sim-files.com/files/videos/phoenixrc_3d_plane_pitts_v1.mpg

[wallaguest1]

Phoenix got a big dongle to use his sofware, and connot be used with a USB Transmitter, you must got a real one, then connect the interface.

USB <------------> jack 3,5mm -------------> Real Transmitter

http://www.phoenix-sim.com/images/packaging_001.jpg

im planning to buy a 40$ USB transmitter so i will not be able to use the sim if i buy the usb transmitter =P
unless some guy with electronical skillz make an adaptor to USB <--> Jack 3,5 mm to connect the dongle =´(

[skirtz]

skirtz take a look to thoose videos, maybe that will hel you,

http://www.phoenix-sim-files.com/files/videos/phoenixrc_3d_heli_knight50_v1.mpg
http://www.phoenix-sim-files.com/files/videos/phoenixrc_3d_plane_pitts_v1.mpg

The videos tells nothing, you can't judge the flight model by videos...
And to me the heli on the video does not looks like realistic flight physics, sorry.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[Drachen]

im planning to buy a 40$ USB transmitter so i will not be able to use the sim if i buy the usb transmitter =P
unless some guy with electronical skillz make an adaptor to USB <--> Jack 3,5 mm to connect the dongle =´(

If you want to fly r/c you will need a proper transmitter anyway, so why not use that? I prefer to use my real one on the sim and not a dummy, as you get used to the feel of your transmitter in the sim so it feels familiar when you fly the real thing. I find that the feel of the dummy transmitter sticks is too different from the real one.

I even use my Tx neckstrap, and stand in front of the screen to make it more real. It's way different to stand and fly compared to sitting down.

[TrexTuning]

I have recently reviewed Phoenix and I'm currently reviewing CV for Stefan.

I know we kind of butted heads on this before Stefan and I don't want to get into that again but please, if you are going to talk about Phoenix at least have the program or beg/borrow a copy and be able to talk about it from first hand experience, I know you made that clear in your post but it doesn't make sense to comment on a flight model you haven't seen or tried.

By the way the review is coming along nicely and I'm hoping to get it out sometime over Xmas.

I guess you wrote this bit in a hurry as the two statement directly contradict each other .....

The videos tells nothing, you can't judge the flight model by videos...
And to me the heli on the video does not looks like realistic flight physics, sorry.

oops
:D :D

[skirtz]

Hehehe.... Hi Ashely, how are you. As usuall your sharp sence for detail... Let me clarify:

>The videos tells nothing, you can't judge the flight model by videos...

Good pilot can make poor flight model looks ok by faking some movements by imputing unnatural controlls. Also, in the video editing, some non-realistic looking elements may be removed or not performed.

>And to me the heli on the video does not looks like realistic flight physics, sorry

Have seen real helis performing similar things like in the video, video does not evoke great level of similarity; To me, from the video, I think Px models are too easy to fly and do not model the model mass well (and this can be just my lying eyes)

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

PS: Can't waith for your review, hope is a good one for CV. Anyway, I can promise this: - Whatever problems you find, I will address them in 3 months or less ! :) :D :)

[TrexTuning]

hehe thanks for clarifying Stefan :)

You do have to try it to get a sense of how it flys, same with all sims. Similarly a good pilot can make an awful heli look great in real life.....so I know where you are coming from.

[wallaguest1]

something work bad on the CV,

test time expired but i can still move the model in any way but make it fly,

[skirtz]

When the trial time expire, the throttle is cut of, this preventing the models from flying. All other controls are left working. Please note, that when setting the controller, the trial time does not run (is kept on hold).

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[wallaguest1]

no way to use it at full screen? is not smart (for me) play with the windows bar at the bottom, the icons of desktop as background, and the toolbar in the top.

the java icon is not smart too xd
dont take it bad :P

[wallaguest1]

If you want to fly r/c you will need a proper transmitter anyway, so why not use that?


bcos its much more expensive.

[wallaguest1]

----------

[othmanskn]

Hi TerryE,

Can you please describe the flight model differences between ClearView and Phoenix ? I am interested in the flight simulation only.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

If I have money, I would love to have both Clearview and Phoenix and RFG3.5.

Phoneix for its water effect simulation when I want to play with water vehicles.

RFG3.5 for its tutorial and trainings and crash effects.

Clearview for its ease of converting models into its environment.

Since I am a novice, I can't really differentiate between all these RC Sims because they all offer similar features in flying characteristics such as moving surfaces, photo sceneries,and shining textures.

For professionals, it may be a different case. I notice that they can tell that AFPD is good for 3D planes, Reflex is good for heli, Phoenix may not be good for both, FSOne good for planes. Those with money will go for all of them, some even going for RFG3 for its fun and multi-player facilities.

If Clearview can have water effects and tutorials/training modes, it can satisfly all the needs of the novices but no guarantee that they will choose it if they have lots of money,unless it can match or exceed the effects of its competitors.

REcommended course of action for Clearview:

Continue what it has been doing for supporting ease of import of models into Clearview and help in making the planes fly more realistically with help from users.

Users like myself are more than willing to contribute modelling models for others within our abilities. I'm surprised that my quick attempt at a P47d modelling using the P47c is still useable for some. I'm also surprised that no FMS model exist for this plane.

My most important task in importing and modelling for Clearview is the propeller simulation because it is the most obvious feature that can be easily seen.

My additiional wish-list for this is:

1. Clearview models the Propeller as moving at a slow speed even at full throttle. This is wrong and misleading because it should becomes transparent, at 3000 RPM, which is usally about half throttle only.

At idle, the propeller should spin slowly but it can be used to gauge its RPM speed.

The speed of rotation of the prop should be realistic and depends on engine and throttle position. At the moment, there is no parameter for engine type or RPM characteristics, but as an interim measure, the throttle can be used for estimating the RPM of the simulated Prop.

a) The disk should be completely invisible. In fact I delete the disk because it interferes with slow speed simulation. However at high speed, the slowly rotating prop is clearly visible.

b) At more than half throttle, the prop must be invisible,while the disk is visible.

2. Since I spend most of my time testing models, a reload model is vital. Please incorporate such key/menu for reloading models or sceneries.




In fact, if I don't develop / test models/sceneries, I get bored playing the RC Sim. So the more models I test, the more I play, and now, I'm pretty good at RC piloting, even for cars, i.e. during taxing.

That is why I don't mind volunteering for user's requests for new models that are challenging.

However the first moving item to model is the Prop and also the easiest and the most vital.

Also my style is to work for a few ours on modeling, and stop for a while to test it, and then record down what I had done, and ponder for new solutions or information.

I won't work for projects that need to be completed for more than a few hours. Working on moving rudders and ailerons, take too long, so I work on rudder first, once it had been tested, I shall work with ailerons.

But now I better work on new and exciting models in the FMS world once I know how to import them.

I shall convert as many as I can, keeping them intact first, without any moving parts. Just textures.

So the priorities are:
1. model
2. basic flight
3. textures
4. moving prop
5. moving rudder
6. moving airleron
7. advanced flight sim.




1. Give basic support for water effects. I notice that it is already there. My basic planes that I imported/exported to Clearview seem to be able to sink slightly into the ground and yet still move. The only thing missing is the ripple effects, which I believe is similar to the smoke effects, exect that its z-coordinates.

I shall try flying it on watery scenery. A special ground type for water would be nice that will model its friction nicely. The sinking can come in later.

2. crash effects.
Since the bodies are already made up of parts, these parts should be simulated separately and can be detached at will, while simulation continues with the remaining parts, while the detached part is also simulated as a separate body.

3. Sound effects for moving parts and other controls,when near. For fun, can add gun firing sound for those combats using sound devices.

4. All radio channels can be tied to any moving objects or sound. Ability to disable Clearview dual rates/ exponentials, and mixing, relying all on the Radio itself. This is a better option and even more flexible than simulating the mixing and exponential rates withing Clearview.

These are not difficult to implement. It is just that few people ever thought of them as viable or feasible but we learn while we use.

[wallaguest1]

You forget to ask about self-zoom, bocs when the model is 20 m far away,
its a little difficult to see the real position of the model,

maybe that option is no possible bcos it use static images,
Real Flight use graphical surfaces, but they are less realistic than high def pictures.

[mmormota]

I have recently reviewed Phoenix and I'm currently reviewing CV for Stefan.


Can't wait for the review.

I already have ClearView, and waiting the postman for my Phoenix too.

I like Clearview very much. It improved a lot in features and physics in the last several monthes. Now it is way better then my first copy was.

I think the heli physics of the latest version is very realistic, at least on the level I can fly (sport flying, loops, rolls, inverted hovering, but no serious 3d). My former complaints (twitchy hovering, too much sliding, too fast looping) are cured. That "sliding" effect was the biggest problem, but it just disappeared in the latest version.

With some small custom parameter modifications the Raptor 60 is pretty close to my eRaptor. The T-Rex is not so close, but decent too. (I have two T-Rex's, even the real ones are different each other... ;) )

I really interested in reviews of better pilots.

[wallaguest1]

something go wrong at clearview (as usual)

in the "easy model setup" menu, if i change the numbers for others more big,
the heli afeter crash, it crash another time, and another time, itself, without touching nothing, and you must w8 a littler until the heli stop, and then u can play one more time.

and another problem: the Heli can land in the middle air too xdd, after a crash, the heli drop in any site of the screen, doesent matter where!


thnks

[wallaguest1]

another problem is that i must put the Windows bar at single space,
to see clearly the simulator.
i always got the start bar at double space, and the program dont detect it to adjust the correct size to the seen.

[TheWolfen]

another problem is that i must put the Windows bar at single space, to see clearly the simulator. i always got the start bar at double space, and the program dont detect it to adjust the correct size to the seen.I've not had this problem, and I run with with a "2-row" start bar.

David

[wallaguest1]

well hehe, i don't lie, take a look,

http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/4373/ssxrv2.png

[skirtz]

From what I see, this is because you do not have ClearView window maximized - then it will take all decktop minus the Windows bar. You are showing a sized ClearView window and this is normal behavior for that case. Just maximize the window.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[cozzykim]

Hi,

how about showing an automatic replay of the last 5 seconds before a crash, showing the remote stick positions automatically, and in slow motion, maybe with a track showing the aircrafts position and orientation for that time.

Maybe if the program defaulted to this replay it would also discourage casual crashes, because you would have to wait and watch your disaster before the model resets?

You could also insert a screen with an estimate of the real life cost of repairs based on calculated impact energy ;)

Actually that would be a major benefit.

This could help us new pilots to correct our newbie stick errors and, as far as I can tell, uses facilities already built in to ClearView.


Regards

Kim

[Zaragon]

Kim, you can get some of the same effect by recording each flight either as a pattern or as a recording. Then if you play back the recording and turn down the training time you can get a slow motion replay. Turn on the transmitter display and you get to see the positions of the sticks throughout the flight.

If you use pattern rather than a recording you will need to press C ( I think it is ) to follow the pattern aircraft rather than your own. If you routinely record your flights or when you are trying new things you can then see what happened if it didn't go as planned.

[cozzykim]

Hi,

thanks, yes I figured out you could do that more or less, but I was suggesting that it could be configured (properly, by someone who knows what they're doing {Stefan}) and turned on by default.

One of the criticisms of sims is that they are tempting to use almost like PS2 games.
With no price to be paid if you crash, what's the encouragement to fly carefully and develop your skills, not to fly outrageous aerobatics which you can't do properly in the real world.

Kim

[wallaguest1]

what about a land in the floor and not freezed in the middle of the air after a crash?

[Tr0gTX]

what about a land in the floor and not freezed in the middle of the air after a crash?

Personally I don't use a sim to see realistic crashes - I use it to learn to FLY. The object is to AVOID crashes, not be entertained by them. I could care less if the model flies to pieces or comes to rest in mid-air after a crash - I hit reset before then anyway.

If you dislike Clearview so much (as your numerous posts on the topic indicate) why not buy G3, FSone, XTR, etc? Oh right, I forgot - you are the person who wanted to format their HD and re-install Windows to get another 40 minutes of free demo time from a $30 flight sim.

[wallaguest1]

there are a lot of ways (that i will not post) to get 40 min as many times as you want,
but you are wrong bcos that is not my intention Tr0gTX.

I removed and reinstalled the sim just to see if it keep any hidden key in the reg, and not to get 40 more minuts.

any way, i use aerofly right now and

i hope in next version skirtz solve that type of issues
(middle air landing, full screen option, and so on)

[skirtz]

I am just curious - why do you think full screen option is needed?

Regarding "mid air landing" - I have a counter that waits 2 sec after a crash and freese last frame for 0.5 sec so you kind of think why did you crash. I decided the program must reset fast and not make you wait. If I leave more time after a crash, my hand goes to spacebar to reset. May be the model bounce too much at the crash and I should wait the model to drop to the ground and not freese the program when in the air, is that what bothers you?

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[wallaguest1]

2 secs and it freeze, okey, i see.

but a model usually dont reboot, maybe could be more realistic if it just stop in the floor (like aerofly or fms) instead making a virtual reboot in the floor (like a chewing gum).
I mean that seems more realistic: or a full reboot until it stop, or never reboot.

bcos its very ugly see that heli stop in the middle of the air, it has no sense in the first impression. it seems like the sim is badly designed.

and about the full screen: full screen means more pixels, and more FPS, without anoying bars at the top and the bottom of the screen. its not possible with java that feature?

is like try to play hl2 or any other 3D game in a window. That's not fully inmersive, is just ugly.

sorry about my bad english.

[helo36]

Well it is very easy to almost get full screen..Put your Taskbar on auto hide...then simply maximize the Clearview and there is your full screen...not too hard to do. On the other hand..In the second picture is the taskbar locked and sized very big and I simply resized the Clearview window to fit the rest of the screen...I scaled these down to about 50% of origional size of snapshot by the way. Also just went to taskbar properties and selected keep taskbar on top of windows...if you do this and then select full screen...you will get the same results as in the 2nd picture w/o having to resize manually the window.

[wallaguest1]

yes i know, but that's not a solution, it's just a shoddy work.
slapdash.

that will not solve the FPS improvement bcos graphic card need to share power procesing with windows environment and the game.

[helo36]

Well...I guess you KNOW IT ALL...Since you know everything...why don't you just write your own sim and see what everyone thinks of your work!!...How dare you call someone else's work Shoddy. How insulting...I bet you don't have a clue what it takes to create a program like a sim. Sorry all for being blunt..But this guy needs to learn a few basic manners and as I said before..he needs to Take a happy pill and atleast be constructive. I told myself last November that I was not gonna get upset and post too much in the sim areas...but my god....The people who show these kinds of attitudes towards vendors and others trying to help ...no wonder the sim commmunity is tore to shreds!!! and by the way....I play alot of online games and I use other RC sims..and guess what..they share graphics with windows...it's called Multi-Tasking...LOL
When I looked at your picture a page back..It just occurred to me that maybe you did not know how to resize your window or how to fix the taskbar to stay on top of the windows.....So I was merely explaining to you how to accomplish this.....but it seems to me...that all you are interestred in is creating alot of nonsense and complaining about anything and everything....and calling other peoples work shoddy......creating hate and discontent....SHAME ON YOU!!

Ken

[wallaguest1]

read one more time what did i said: shoddy is ur solution, not the sim.

sorry if its an insult or swear word.
the translator told me shoddy as the word i was searching.

in spanish: solucion chapuzera.

[wallaguest1]

whyu get mad man? under my point of view im just trying to help improve the sims with my tips.

if i think that something is not smart, or well done, i say it, that's all.

[helo36]

here is the english meaning...from a dictionary of the word Shoddy which can be found on
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/shoddy

shod·dy (shd)
adj. shod·di·er, shod·di·est
1. Made of or containing inferior material.
2.
a. Of poor quality or craft.
b. Rundown; shabby.
3. Dishonest or reprehensible: shoddy business practices.
4. Conspicuously and cheaply imitative.
n. pl. shod·dies
1.
a. Woolen yarn made from scraps or used clothing, with some new wool added.
b. Cloth made from or containing such yarn.
2. Something of inferior quality; a cheap imitation.

ok then maybe you had a bad choice of words..but still...All I see in your posts here is complaining to vendors and their products as well as people who are trying to help.

Ken

[wallaguest1]

by the way....I play alot of online games and I use other RC sims..and guess what..they share graphics with windows...it's called Multi-Tasking...LOL



are u tryng to make me laught?
what kind of games you play? maybe 3D chess ?
doesent matter, the games are you talking about, probably can work with the most old graphic card.

you talk with no sense.

Try to play reflex xtr in window mode, maybe you get 10 fps.
try to play it at flull screen and you will see the diference.


in fact i run clearview at 72 fps, i dont need a full screen option to see it more smothly, but i think this option should be included.

[wallaguest1]

okey, so i thought shoddy was: "a bad solution that work but it's not the best solution"

i dont know wich is the word i try to find, but you got the idea right?.

[helo36]

Real Funny..I play both CV and Reflex in 1400 x 1050 screen resolution....and for Games..I play anarchy online,World of Warcraft and others in the same resolution and get fantastic FPS...In fact I play anarchy online and WoW sometimes as 2 instances running at the same time in window mode...I have 2 accounts on each game...so I can dual log both accts at same time on same computer. I am running a Geforce 4 6800 w/256 meg ram...my computer specs are:
AMD Athlon 64 3200
2.5 gig memory
120 gig Hard disk
ect. ect
and my machine is now 3 yrs old...Graphics card is 1 yr old

And I will tell you one more thing...I repair computers for a living...and have been since 1992. I have been playing online games...since the internet became popular....I was on AOL before it was AOL...it was Q-Link back in the day and you connected with a 300 baud modem.

[wallaguest1]

okeyyyyyyyyyyy you are a master.
fullscreen is not necessary.

discussion is end.

[helo36]

But you missed the main point...which is

The way you are posting in the forums.....Okay...I understand your english may not be that good....BUT...If I look at your post...it sounded like you needed help resizing your windows and with your toolbar....and it just seemed that all you were doing is badmouthing the sims.,..not just clearview....I read many of these forums every day...I use it for research to see how the different sims are coming along....More too often are there people in these forums..arguing, bickering, and complaining. From you earlier posts..It just seemed like you just wanted to point out how bad the sims are....if this is the case...then go buy you an airplane or heli and try to fly it for the first time w/o the advantage of having a sim to help your eye-hand coordination and watch your money end up in a pile of broken parts. I have been flying RC planes and heli's for over 15 yrs...when I started there was no such thing as an RC-Simulator. It was hard-earned cash down the toilet when I crashed. So please ....be considerate and constructive.

Ken

[cozzykim]

So - no chance of getting an auto crash replay then :rolleyes: ;)

Kim

[skirtz]

So - no chance of getting an auto crash replay then :rolleyes: ;)

Kim

I may implement it. Now, when I think more, I remember in Grand Turismo, after you finish a race, the sim starts replaying the race. CV can start replaying the last 5 sec's, showing the control sticks, and spacebar can reset at anytime.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[cozzykim]

Hi Stefan,
I remember in Grand Turismo, after you finish a race, the sim starts replaying the race

:( Yeah I know, everytime my ten year old daughter beats me around the Nurburgring in a Subaru WRX, I have to watch the mistakes I made :mad: and I have one outside in the driveway :eek:

CV can start replaying the last 5 sec's, showing the control sticks, and spacebar can reset at anytime.

That would be GREAT

If people wouldn't like it as a default, then how about a tutorial to explain how to set it up just for li'l ole me :D

Regards

Kim

[MartyWakat]

I would love to see a T-REX600 in the next version. If you know of a T-REX600 model that can be imported already...please let me know. Otherwise that would be my one request.

[copflyer]

Stefan, any luck with the ATI x1600 chipset video stutter problem? I have tried all suggestions and it still rears it's ugly head now and again. Thanks

[skirtz]

Please look at the last message at this thread:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=616480

I think the thread descrives similar problem for ATI drivers. Try the tip at the end of the thread.

Thanks,
Stefan

[othmanskn]

Hi Stefan,


:( Yeah I know, everytime my ten year old daughter beats me around the Nurburgring in a Subaru WRX, I have to watch the mistakes I made :mad: and I have one outside in the driveway :eek:



That would be GREAT

If people wouldn't like it as a default, then how about a tutorial to explain how to set it up just for li'l ole me :D

Regards

Kim

No. Once it is there better to make it a default. The current setup of defaulting to a restart is not helpful at all. Once there is a feature whereby Clearview always records its flights, and replays the last few seconds, better let it be the default.

The rule should be that the advanced features should be the default but can be turned off if required, i.e. when working with slower machines.

[Tr0gTX]

Stefan,

How about a night flying option as a future feature enhancement?

[skirtz]

I am not sure about that. What learning purpose will that serve?

[cozzykim]

It would teach us not to try flying at night ?? ;)

[skirtz]

hehehe...

[gregconquest]

I have a request. I'd like to see 2-channel models.

I have a beginner 2-channel plane here in Japan -- the Taiyo Twin Falcon:
http://www.taiyo-toy.co.jp/lineup/plane/twinfalcon/index.html
It was only US$50, incl. the controller. It survives crashes well.
There are no elevators, rudders, or aelirons. The throttle channel has 4 settings:
- off
- 1/3 power (click up once)
- 2/3 power (click up once again)
- full power (click and hold up)
Full power gets it to climb, but it will stall if you don't lower the throttle and level out at a higher altitude.
The turning channel:
- left-turn (holding the left arrow slows the left propeller down one speed)
- right-turn (holding the right arrow slows the right propeller down one speed)
both of these also create a banking due to the differential lift one the progressing wing. At glide, clicking "right" actually causes the left propeller to switch on at 1/3 speed.

It is fun to fly, and it goes slow enough to see clearly what is involved with various maneuvers.

I have gained good experience for that plane by using Clearview Flight Sim, but it seems that 2-channel model planes should be easy to produce -- and useful for beginners. I was able to do a hand-catch and a loop-launch on my third day out with the plane this last week. None of the other guys who had been flying even thought a loop was possible with these planes :-) I think I got that confidence in trying new things from Clearview.

Also, Clearview's homepage lists only one page of models:
http://rcflightsim.com/models.html
Is this all there is? There are no other collections of models? It makes for a difficult google search.

Finally, I still cannot get my Logitech RumblePad 2 to work with Clearview. YSFLIGHT2000 and MS Flight Simulator X both find the pad fine, and I have minimal USB devices connected. I wish there was a fix for this.

Thanks for reading.
Greg Conquest

[skirtz]

Here is Ken's site with number of models:
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/s/community.dll?ep=16&groupid=291233&ck=

Regarding Logitech RumblePad 2, check if you have Windows Infrared remote control and disconnect it. For some reason, it makes the gamepads invisible to ClearView.

Regarding that plane, I am sure it is a lot of fun. So far ClearView provides hobby type models. The plane shown is more to the toy planes category that is not currently covered. I hope you can learn on any ClearView model and easily transfer the skills learned to that plane. I may include this type of planes in the future.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

[IPFlyer]

The AIr Hogs AeroAce is available for FMS. That is a similar plane. Now if some bright guy could convert the AA FMS model to CV...