RealFlight 3.5: HORRIBLE physics.. am I missing something?

[melcrose]

Admittedly, I don't have hundreds of hours of real stick time, but 3.5 is suppose to be cutting edge?

As I roll on the ground, I may as well be on a gym floor. No bouncing airplane, no transition as I go from grass to landing strip. Horrible.

As I take off, (any plane) .. there is no wind difference.. no physics on the plane.. I just raise up into the air. I may as well be driving up a ramp. On a "real" RC plane, the wing tips bounce a bit, the tail gets thrown around some. This? Horrible. The stall seems somewhat accurate, but that's it.

Please help.. am I missing a setting? I've been through all that I know of..
BIG thanks to any who can help ! ! !

(I have physics on "highest", btw)

[melcrose]

I did find a setting that allows me to set "turbulence" .. but you have to specify a "layer" (I chose 15 feet) .. and the plane just bounces the EXACT same way as you pass through it.
I also read that some of the photo sites have "grass patches" to bounce your airplane, but after driving around all of them, I can't find them.

Can anyone help?

[RickDelten]

If your looking for realistic ground handling effects try FS One or AFPD. G3.5 has always had the worst ground handling.

[bluesky123]

If your looking for realistic ground handling effects try FS One or AFPD. G3.5 has always had the worst ground handling.
Isn't what's happening on the ground not as important as what's happening in the air?
FS One is a great sim for fixed wing planes, I liked it more that RF G3.5. But I like RF too, IMO it has more realistic flight model than AFPD.

Boris

[melcrose]

My main "fun" is in the take-off and landing phase, so when it seems you're flying off a gym floor it sort of ruins it for me. I'm really surprised Knife Edge hasn't lived up to the other simulators in that respect. I can't imagine "bumpy ground" is the most difficult thing to program as compared to the rest. :)

[Harry D]

There were a lot of complaints about the flight physics in general (especially for things like snaps and spins) when G3.5 first came out, a long time ago now. In many people's opinion (mine included) G3 was better. I particularly dislike the way some models now just bounce off the ground in a crash, no matter how severe.

RealFlight said at the time that they were going to fix all these problems but it seems that not much (if anything) has been done. Sad to say, they do seem to be falling behind the rest of the pack in many ways. :(

[brokenspar]

Isn't what's happening on the ground not as important as what's happening in the air?
FS One is a great sim for fixed wing planes, I liked it more that RF G3.5. But I like RF too, IMO it has more realistic flight model than AFPD.

Boris

Bluesky, you've missed the point. Takeoff and landing characteristics and general ground handling are very important. I think a guy could become a reasonably competent RC pilot by using an early version RF, but V3.5 would teach a guy some real bad habits. In V3.5, you can land with a high sink rate, in a bad sideslip and still get a decent landing out of it. Try that with the real model, and you'll demolish it. What makes V3.5 so disappointing is the degree of hype surrounding it's release (I had real high hopes), plus putting down 200 bucks for what amounts to an arcade game.

[raptor22]

I've never liked realflight as much as AFPD...I think that the ikarus simulators have been ahead of the great planes ones for years when it comes to airplane physics.

However, its not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. For normal flying its pretty realistic.

--Alex

[Unterhausen]

I think the flying on RealFlight is pretty good. the ground part of the program could be improved, and some planes probably float too much in the ground effect. It still has very good physics

I like the fact that planes can be set up to bounce. My son was flying a trainer that experienced some landings that obviously would have resulted in a balsa cloud in real life, but where's the fun in that with a 10 y.o. kid? The other thing I find amusing is breaking parts off the planes, particularly landing gear.

[brokenspar]

"My son was flying a trainer that experienced some landings that obviously would have resulted in a balsa cloud in real life, but where's the fun in that with a 10 y.o. kid?"

That pretty much sums it up... :(