Ok, I think most of us here would like to have Flight Simulator parallel as close as possible to real life. Well, did any of us ever think what IF it became as good as real life? I have to tell you, I am at that same question with my aerofly r/c simulator! I can fly indoors or outdoors with electric or gas and pick from just about any kind of aircraft. After spending quite a bit of money over the 25 years with additions/repairs/fuel/replacements, I now wonder why I would want to go back out to the flying field when I have the same sensations at home! 1. I usually go to the club flying field later in the day and almost no one is there a lot in which there is no human interaction to miss. 2. I don't have to be out in the sun which eliminates squinting & sunburns. 3. I don't have to charge all my batteries and make sure I have enough fuel/props (still have to charge the R/C controller though for the sim). 4. If I crash, I don't have to wait a pay period to get back in the air after repairs IF it can be repaired. 5. No down time with driving and fuel costs. It may sound strange to most of you but I am here to tell you I wouldn't have thought this before I got the simulator myself. I guess I pose the question again, what am I missing here to real life since it is that good?Some of my own flying:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/125042.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/125043.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/125044.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/125045.jpgHovering the Harrier!http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/125049.jpgCarmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

Those are screenshots from a simulator???

>Those are screenshots from a simulator???YES!! It IS THAT AMAZING and I can't get enough! www.aerofly.comCarmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

Now you've done it :-) . I have get into the basement and find my old Futaba controller so I can try that. Unbelievable.Doug

And if you are flying copters ( which I did for a couple of years including aerobatics in 45-60size) , you don't have to worry about the $1500+ crash because a servo locked up or a quick link failed.

Isn't that sim just Quicktime-VR style graphics though, rather than a complete 3D landscape?Don't think FS will ever look photo-real down to that kind of detail because of the big coverage area. You simply can't model the entire world with that kind of detail without using terrabytes upon terrabytes of storage space.Even if FS looked identical to a photo, it wouldn't be the same. With RC planes, you're still standing on the ground - when flying for real, you're up there and that feeling can't be captured with just sounds and graphics.

Yes, you're only standing in 1 spot so this works completely for R/C using a 360 panorama photo. There are even defined boundaries within the panorama, like you can crash into buildings/walls/fence etc as well as the roughness of surfaces. But my main question and predicament is still how I can seem to figure out why I would want to use any of my real life r/c planes and helicopter now! :-(Edit: You can use either the photoreal 360 or computer generated 3D landscape as well. For me I prefer to feel like I'm at a real location but in computer generated mode you can follow the plane in cockpit as well as from behind.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

Here is a good example video of the interaction with photoreal 360 panorama:http://www.flybuder.com/aeroflyvids/ompbipe.wmv (MAY HAVE TO SAVE TARGET AS)Here is a REALLY good video showing how the aircraft reacts to pavement and grass defined in the real photo background:http://www.flybuder.com/aeroflyvids/groundhandle.wmv (MAY HAVE TO SAVE TARGET AS)EXCELLENT TORQUE ROLLING VIDEO in Real Life and with Aerofly - This kid Maarten is incredible:http://www.flybuder.com/aeroflyvids/circletorkbig.WMV (MAY HAVE TO SAVE TARGET AS)a whole bunch more here: http://www.aeroflypro.comBy the way, frame rates are as smooth as real life because the sim only has to concentrate on the physics of 1 aircraft and it also uses OpenGL instead of DirectX.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

$40 for the software and maybe $20 for the cable...I'm all over it!$200 plus????????huh, just say I'll be happy with the screenshots from others.

$200+ is less than the cost of a good RC airplane. If you're into RC (or even FS9), that's cheap, err... inexpensive.Thomas

I have a Concept 30 R/C heli that has been parked on a shelf in the garage for the last 4-5 years since the moving company lost the transmitter. I haven't bought a new one simply because sim flying has indeed supplanted R/C flying.I enjoyed the R/C flying back then, but to do it required hundreds of hours of building, balancing, tweaking...only to take her out to the field and fly for a few hours before smacking a rotor into the ground or tail boom, or having a snap link depart the fix, leaving you with a 4-lb flying chainsaw with a mind of its own. Every Sunday afternoon, the R/C heli gang would make the trek from the flying field to the local hobby shop and slap down $100 bills for parts so they could go back and repeat the cycle again in a week or two.Simming captures most of what R/C flying did for me and a lot more...except maybe I miss that smell of burning castor oil every now and then. There was that element of accomplshment having a machine you built take to the air...but that gets old-hat fairly quickly. And a PC-based sim won't send you to the emergency room with a partially-severed digit like my heli did to me...In reality, I can buy nearly every decent FS add-on that comes out every month for far less than what I would spend to hit the R/C field once or twice in that same month. And I can play with it any time I want, regardless of the weather, time, etc. The aerofly sim does look intriguing, though, even at $200.CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC

The simulator looks fantastic! As some of you have mentioned, the R/C environment is much smaller than the FS environment, and it requires less resources.I never got into R/C flying, as I was put off by the potential costs. R/C enthusiasts have no problem with spending $100 a week on spares .... one crash and I'd give up :-lol!

>The simulator looks fantastic! As some of you have>mentioned, the R/C environment is much smaller than the FS>environment, and it requires less resources.>>I never got into R/C flying, as I was put off by the potential>costs. R/C enthusiasts have no problem with spending $100 a>week on spares .... one crash and I'd give up :-lol! It sure can add up quick with R/C and I've spent more than I care to think about but that's why truthfully if I could have spent $200 ONCE on this simulator, I would have been more than happy. The price is only a question & concern until you actually sit down (ADDED: OR STAND UP LIKE AT THE FIELD) and use it and stare in disbelief day after day! If I were offered a choice between all of my Flight Simulator stuff and addons I purchased over the years up to current day or for an aerofly simulation setup with a controller I would choose aerofly setup in a heart beat! I made a trip to the flying field today and was talking to some if the guys about it and the only thing that one guy brought up was the adrenaline factor of knowing I could crash $1500 plane like with my 30%. As I thought about it, I NEVER fly scared like that with that concern to begin with maybe when I first started many moons ago. The only time the $1500 concern comes up is AFTER it's in pieces. :-( So now I'm back home and I still don't have a good reason to get my real ones out in the air.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

I put a quick video together that unfortunately doesn't do justice for the high frame rate usually of the sim since video is at 29.97 FPS and I used Fraps to capture. Normally I get 60+ frames at 1600 X 1200 with 2X antialiasing. Anyway, have a look (It's 25 megs): http://abs.gprime.net/aeroflydemo.wmvCarmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif