Hehe...I understand the ins and outs of beta testing. Besides, how can we know what needs fixing if we don't deliberately break it? I intend to break it and see if I can fix it as much as possible.

I want to see what can and can't be done with it at this larval stage. I know there will be some newer types who will try this "test" version and start screaming about problems.

Half the fun of beta testing is finding new and creative ways to crash the program

I tried the BETA today and heres my thoughts.

I actually fell at the 1st hurdel so i'm not sure if it was running correct or not.
- Go to clearview program folder and rename clearview.jat to clearview497.jar
Is this just for Vista ? as i had no clearview.jat anywhere.

Anyway, i fly helis so tried the Trex for about 20 mins and i dont like it.
Its very hard to control and seems like i'm constantly chasing the sticks correcting. Slow smooth flying was even harder and i just kept crashing over & over, i couldn't even fly slow circles very good where as with the other 450's its fine, twitchy but fine.

So you know where i'm coming from in real life i fly a Trex450-V2, HS65-MG's cyclic, Gy-401 & JR-ds3500G on the tail, 3K-HS .......... and a "Hot" Logo-600-3D on 12's, my flying style is currently mild to mid 3D.

Like i said above as i wasn't able to rename clearview.jat to clearview497.jar i'm not sure if its working correct but the Trex just feels wrong as it it now.

Anyway, i'm sure it'll be fine soon enough.

Peace

Originally Posted by ShuNut

I actually fell at the 1st hurdel so i'm not sure if it was running correct or not.
- Go to clearview program folder and rename clearview.jat to clearview497.jar
Is this just for Vista ? as i had no clearview.jat anywhere.

:facepalm:

Erm. Perhaps the instructions have a mis-spelling, and you're supposed to rename clearview.jar to clearview497.jar to back it up before you copy the new "clearview.jar" to the folder?


grnbrg.

Hi Stefan,

Difficult to judge.

First impression:

Feels floaty to me. Not so crisp compared to the old TRex 450 (also flown
with the new version .jar). Old version is more responsive - quicker to cyclic inputs.

"Long" term impression (after 15 min of flight):

Get used to it - no big difference between v4.97 and v4.98 - and my real life CopterX 450 feels/flys different compared to both versions.

Nonetheless - keep up your excellent work!

Thomas

--- Skill level: Sport flying - 144 consecutive minutes of real flight w/o crash ---

Thanks for the feedback so far. I made a version of the TRex with 3d setup that has stronger/crisper cyclics and strtoger faster tail. It is on the download page, let me know how it feels:
http://time2rc.com/cv498/

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

Originally Posted by skirtz

do not even try the "easy setup" because will destroy the new params file.

Stefan

You might have included that in a "readme" file

After using the easy setup, the model became unflyable / kept crashing on initialization until I re-installed the model file.

Is the "advanced params" editor safe to use? .. or does the params file need to be edited outside of the program?

As I haven't flown a real Trex, I can't comment on the realism, can only compare the "new" models to the old.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of difference ... which is good in one way, that is the new flight model works at least as well as the old

It *seems* that the new models are "smoother" than the old, but I'll have to fly them more to be sure.

Is there any problem with loading a new model, then an old or vice versa?

It seems that the old model format is still compatible .. which is a very good feature

Mike

The advanced params editor is safe to use. Now, about the differences:

- The "old" flight model is quite good and there can't be dramatic improvement. However, the "new" flight model is more fluid, smooth and true to life. It differs in subtle ways, but improvement feels significant if you fly the "new" model for some time and then go back to the "old" model. All old models are 100% supported and will fly as in the older versions.

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

Much better. The "3D" 'Rex is more like what I'm used too, except a bit too much.

The first one was soft and floaty; now this one's too crisp and agressive (for my tastes). This is a good thing. That means that it's simply a matter of params tweaking to get it "just right".

One thing:
As in previous versions (and really every sim I've tried), the heli maintains a hands-free hover too well. It will go off in a random direction, but unlike the real thing, the angle at which it goes off doesn't increase. It's like a drop of water sliding down a slightly angled pane of glass. The real ones tend to get worse as they go, like a drop of water sliding off the top of a beach ball.

Is there a way to mimic this behavior?

Just looked over the params file. Very nice. I like the modular set up. The tweakables seem to make more sense.

Building on the above comment about the "perfect hover" issue, can I suggest the following servo variable: servoSlopPct -- "Servo Slop Percentage"? This would allow the specification of how poorly the servo responds to a commanded value. The returned value for any servo would be the "perfect" value for that servo, plus or minus a random value that has a maxium of this variable. The random value should change fairly often -- not every sim "tick", but probably 0.5-3Hz or so.

Thoughts?


grnbrg.

How do I identify what version of Clearview I am running?
Thanks
Ron

Originally Posted by A Rdnek

How do I identify what version of Clearview I am running?
Thanks
Ron

In ClearView, select "Help" then "About".

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

No expo in the new models? And how can you tell if a governor is active? Am I getting ahead of things?

Dave

Originally Posted by hancockdw

No expo in the new models? And how can you tell if a governor is active? Am I getting ahead of things?

Dave

You are going a little ahead. The governor is not working in this version. There will be expo, Tx curves, mixes, many equipment indicators, user interface to edit the params file etc. etc. However, first I must complete the new flight model. Now I am at the stage of getting early feedback. Next stage is to implement whatever fixes are needed and set number of different models for the new flight physics. Only after these representative models are found to be good, I will freeze the flight model and implement many extra bells and wistles, like on screen speed and equipment indicators, wind inicator, user interface for easy and advances setup etc. Not to forget writing model creation and params settings manual. At the same time, the current models will gradually be moved to the new flight model. As you can see, there is a lot of work so please bear with me...

Stefan
http://rcflightsim.com

Originally Posted by skirtz

You are going a little ahead. The governor is not working in this version.

In CV 4.97 if the governorOn variable is set to 1.0, how does that affect the model?

I'm not sure how a real-life governor works, I guess it has some kind of interaction / effect on the pitch and throttle curves?

I'm particularly interested in the HBFP model, and how CV is simulating FP. With governorOn = 0.0, is the rpm being varied by the throttle directly, or does the throttle curve still have some effect?

Mike

Stefan,

I like what I'm hearing regarding tools for adjusting the params.txt file. It will surely help me create models for ClearView faster.

One request, for 3 channel A/E/T, please allow steering on the aileron channel or just mapping steering to either channel.

-- ggunners