Flight Unlimited 3 and Fly II...

[Guest christianholmes]

For some reason last night I decided to install both these classics. Even 8 years or so after release they are both still very good! I notice that the pitch stability in both seems is much more realistic than FS9 or FSX. What is it with MS? Why is it harder to fly an FS plane than it is to fly that plane in real life. Anyway...I never played Fly II much when it was new- I don't think I bought it until about a year after it's release. I noticed last night that the "Sahara" is a Saratoga! Cool! And a pretty good one at that. I put in some weather and bounced around the same air I do in real life. The scenery is... sparse... but the sound and the feel of flight were great. The plane really got nose heavy before stall and had some real weight to it. The ATC is limited, and not necessarily realistic. But I love the instrument panel- really nice! The guages are smooth and work better than the default MS aircraft.Flight Unlimited III is still amazing. I flew around the old San Francisco scenery and really enjoyed it. Again, the flight model has some weight to it- not like the pitch-unstable MS fleet. And it has UNICOM! I almost did a double take when I heard the FBO talking to a plane. The graphics, while not stellar, are still pretty good- the satellite images are as good as all but the latest for FS. That game has attitude- I love how the controllers yell at you if you screw up like in real life. And the wake turbulence- makes you really aware of your taxi position. Last but not least, if you are willing to play with the .cfg file, FU3 fully supports my CH yoke and pedals- toes brakes, prop, mixture and all.If any of you are looking a change, you can definately still have some fun with either of these classics.

[Guest Staggerwing]

Stop by the Flight Unlimited forum here at Avsim.. and there are lots of add-ons in the library also.

[Guest wyoming]

I don't agreee with you with the FSX airfiles, which I find the best, perhaps only, significant improvement over previous versions. I think the Fly! series forced MS on a different track (e.g. communication, round-earth). I also feel that the clouds effects obtained with the then add-on Sky! were and still are outstanding.

[greggerm 312]

I'm with you on that one, Christian - The Fly!II "feeling" of flight has yet to be matched in a sim that I've flown, which includes the entire Microsoft line as well as XPlane and the earlier Fly! & ProPilot series. Unfortunately, Fly!II was hobbled by a publisher that SHOVED the product out the door before testing and programming was complete. Had they wrapped it up, I think Fly!II would have been a significant competitor on the sim landscape, and due to that, FSX might have looked different. Yes, FSX is a vast improvement over earlier versions, but unfortunately the Fly!II model has a certain feeling of actually being in the air that is unmatched. Off to try my hand at photoscenery development...-Greg

[LAdamson 240]

>Yes, FSX is a vast improvement over earlier versions,>but unfortunately the Fly!II model has a certain feeling of>actually being in the air that is unmatched. >I still prefer my FSX RealAir SF260, as probably the best single engine "do it all", including aerobatics, air file in existence! The "feel" of this simulated aircraft in FSX is the one that I would call unmatched!Now going back history wise, it was Rob Young (RealAir Simulations) that designed all the improved flight models for Fly. They were initially known as the V88's, and then incorporated into later versions of Fly. The last version of FLY, contained some incomplete modeling, as it was forced out the door too quickly, due to several circumstances. Now, I'd agree that some of those FLY models were really good, but the latest offerings by the "same" designer can just do more! Personally, I think the "feel" of FSX is as good as it's ever been.L.Adamson

[greggerm 312]

>I still prefer my FSX RealAir SF260...it was Rob Young that designed all the improved flight models for Fly....Aah - true, true. That is also one aircraft (SF260) that I do not have - for either FS9 or FSX. But I hear nothing but good things about it, so I'll take your word that it is a significant contender.I don't mean to take anything away from FSX, because I do really enjoy it, but my memories of Fly2 (keyword: memories) have me looking back fondly on the decidedly not-flying-on-rails feeling it gave, with its atmospheric light turbulence feeling... Happy flying!-GregChristian - guess what I'll be doing Saturday afternoon? (Keep good weather in your thoughts!)