Sign in to follow this  
Christopher Low

FU3 screenshots

Recommended Posts

Guys,I think it's time to post some pictures on the Screenshots Forum. I've just been having a "debate" with several "pitiful creatures" :-lol on the GENERAL CHAT Forum who don't seem to be aware of just how good looking Flight Unlimited 3 actually is.I think that it is our duty to put the record straight. I will be posting some screenshots this weekend, and it would be nice if we could get a "screenshot armada" together. :-)Best Wishes,Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>I think it's time to post some pictures on the Screenshots >Forum. I've just been having a "debate" with several >"pitiful creatures" :-lol on the GENERAL CHAT Forum who >don't seem to be aware of just how good looking Flight >Unlimited 3 actually is. >>I think that it is our duty to put the record straight. I >will be posting some screenshots this weekend, and it would >be nice if we could get a "screenshot armada" together. :-) Here are some pics I've "recorded" from yet another sim, that may also not have a future. I too, believe that they show what the sim was capable of. From the screenshot forum:http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/DCForumID47/8875.htmlL.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,Those are very nice screenshots, but can you provide some from low altitude.........maybe 1000 feet ?Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Larry, >>Those are very nice screenshots, but can you provide some >from low altitude.........maybe 1000 feet ? >he,he------This is a case of where different sims have their own advantages. I think we all know that FLYII won't look as good at low altitudes as either FUIII or FS2002. But at the same time, you're going to be hard pressed to get high (but not too high) altitude shots from the "other" sims that look as good as those!In the meantime, I can use both sims for the certain advantages they afford. But speaking of FUII and III, I still have plenty of HD space on this CPU, as well as owning both programs. Does anyone know if I'll have loading/compatibility problems on this setup? They were previously installed on a PIII600/Viper770 Ultra.L.AdamsonAthlon 1900XPGeforce3Ti500512DDRram

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,I'm sure that FU3 will run just fine on your PC, but I would also advise the following:-1. Install the patch !2. Install Laurie Doering's weather upgrades.3. Activate 4xS anti aliasing.4. Install a few scenery and aircraft add-ons. I won't suggest any, otherwise I may be criticised for being biased !5. Download Jouko Huovinen's AI Enhancement package.Finally, just enjoy the BEST flight simulator on the PC ! ;)Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Finally, just enjoy the BEST flight simulator on the PC ! ;) >I'm sure it will be fantastic for my KSLC to KLAX flight with a stop off in Vegas!! :-lol L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FU3:+Great scenery detail and graphics from about 2000 ft. up to about 10 000 ft.+Planes "feel right" (though I've never flown one in real life :) )+Good ATC and AI, especially for VFR+Great weather simulation-IFR is a bit limited and buggy-Scenery gets a bit blurry when flying low-Game engine a bit outdated (only max 1024x76816bit and the models are low-poly)-Scenery area is a bit limitedFS2002:+MASSIVE scenery area. You can fly anywhere in the world and it looks OK+Great ATC for IFR flights+Huge selection of freeware and payware scenery, aircraft and misc tools+Virtual Cockpits with working gauges+Autogen-Flying on rails anyone (refering to the "stiff" response of the C182/172 and Baron)?-Scenery is just an impression of what the place might look like in real life. It gives you a general idea of what it might look like but entire cities could be missing-Very little VFR AI traffic. Airports like Half Moon Bay are completely empty in FS2002. I miss the Cessnas flying circuits around the airports.-bad weather effects. The clouds look nice but the weather systems are not dynamic like those in FU3.As for Fly, I bought Fly1 but I haven't played it much. The scenery was too blurry and by the time I got a PC that was able to handle the sim, the sim was already made obsolete by FS2000 and FU3.That's only my opinion :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>2. Install Laurie Doering's weather upgrades. >5. Download Jouko Huovinen's AI Enhancement package. Hi Chris, please remind me... where shall I get those two from and what are the filenames?Thanks in advance,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>-Flying on rails anyone (refering to the "stiff" response of >the C182/172 and Baron)? Flying on rails is a term that relates more to FS98 and before. You could basically leave the flight to make coffee, drink half a pot, and the plane will still be on course and altitude. With FS2K and FS2002, it has changed. But the FS2002 defaults ARE stiff in roll and pitch. Kind of like being in very soupy wet cement! Fortunately there are some much improved air. files for the 172 (Ron Freiumuth), 182 (Rob Young), and the Baron (Steve Small). I was surprised about the defaults, because Microsoft's CFS2 which was released six months before, had more lively flight modeling. But apparently the same team of programmers don't do all the work on both simulations.With the addition of 3rd party files for the defaults, and many new additions such as the Dreamfleet Archer, C-421, and FSD Cheyenne, the models seem quite life like in flying qualities. BTW----- I made numerous complaints about the graphics and general bluriness of FLYII. It was my opinion that the original FLY with the addition of TerraScene2 looked better. But I did know that FLYII was capable of producing improved resolution with TerraScene and satellite type images. It was the 3rd party So-Cal scenery that I made these pics from........... that caught my interest for FLYII. Until then, I was generally quite good at making "enemies" on the FLY forum! :) Now I'm just hoping the sim can and will be expanded by others, because flying over this type of scenery just seems quite authentic. Besides the panels are already on the realistic side. I used the FLYII Cessna panel for a refresher course before flying a 172SP a few days ago. It worked well!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,I would be interested to hear your thoughts about the flight models in FU3 when you get it installed. Since you stated that you have used FU3 in the past, then you will probably be familiar with the default planes. However, there are plenty of user designed aircraft that have been built since you've "been away". Maybe you could give us an idea of how good or bad they "feel".Best Wishes,Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,Remember that Tom will be back in a few days with a "cease and desist" order regarding anything to do with FS2002 on this forum !Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,For obvious reasons I can help you with the number 5:The file is ai_traffic_enhanced_100.zipin Avsim File Library.Regards,Jokke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Jim, >>Remember that Tom will be back in a few days with a "cease >and desist" order regarding anything to do with FS2002 on >this forum ! >That's why I put in a link to FLYII pics yesterday! :)L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel,I can provide you with Laurie Doering's weather upgrades if you want them. You simply have to copy and paste the text to the end of your flt3.cfg file.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Remember that Tom will be back in a few days with a "cease and desist" order regarding anything to do with FS2002 on this forum !"Not true, Chris. Intelligent discussion comparing flightsims is fine, but bickering about which is "better" is not. [table][tr][td valign=top]http://www.avsim.com/other/usaribbon.gif[/td][td valign=center]Bob "FlyBert" StilesAVSIM Moderator[/b][/td][/tr][/table]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I can provide you with Laurie Doering's weather upgrades if >you want them. You simply have to copy and paste the text to >the end of your flt3.cfg file. Please do.Thanks in advance,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respect your opinion. Almost all GA (general aviation) aircraft feel 'stiff'. They are slower to react then one would think.Tom Z

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel,Send me an e-mail to the following address, and I will send you the weather text file.Christopher.Low@btinternet.comChris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I respect your opinion. Almost all GA (general aviation) >aircraft feel 'stiff'. They are slower to react then one >would think. >>Tom Z What you are referring to there is 'inherent stability',most G.A types are inherently stable, ie it takes a 'deliberate' action to make them change direction or attitude.Inherent stability is built in by the designers,( by use of wing dihedral angles, and tailplane incidence,) on purpose because it is expected that the aircraft will be flown by single pilots, often withlimited flight experience,indeed once trimmed out, many G.A aircraft wil happily fly 'hands-off'.High wing aircraft, such as the Cessna 172 (and on) are also more stable than their low-wing counterparts, because of the mass distribution, the main mass of the plane being below the centre of lift.:-wavePete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete,The problem with the default FS2002 aircraft is that they seem to take AGES to respond to a reduction in power. This might make them stable, but it also makes them incredibly difficult to "anticipate". When the nose does start to drop, it again takes a long time for the aircraft to respond to an INCREASE in power.Maybe this is just a consequence of the way that I control virtual GA aircraft during a final approach. I prefer to control the descent by adjusting the engine power. I do NOT like messing around with the trim controls after I have slowed down to approach speed, and I certainly do NOT like controlling the descent angle by pulling and pushing on the control stick.In short, FU3 allows me to control the aircraft in the way that I want to control it. I would like to think that any aircraft that I flew in reality (a very unlikely scenario) would respond in the same way.Any comments ?Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>The problem with the default FS2002 aircraft is that they >seem to take AGES to respond to a reduction in power. This >might make them stable, but it also makes them incredibly >difficult to "anticipate". When the nose does start to drop, >it again takes a long time for the aircraft to respond to an >INCREASE in power. >>Maybe this is just a consequence of the way that I control >virtual GA aircraft during a final approach. I prefer to >control the descent by adjusting the engine power. I do NOT >like messing around with the trim controls after I have >slowed down to approach speed, and I certainly do NOT like >controlling the descent angle by pulling and pushing on the >control stick. >>Any comments ? >Yes------When actually learning to fly, a few of the difficult items includes practice and practice to control pitch and speed during a climb. This may be at VX, VY, or perhaps a shallower climb to make it easier to scan for traffic. This is just something you learn by doing it over and over, and the idea is to get it smooth with climb rate and airspeed remaining constant. The same applies to landings and power reductions. Other wise, speed and climb is varying and the plane is porpousing.I have seen many complaints of sim pilots porpousing with FS2002. It's NOT the program, even with the defaults. I had no problems what so-ever with the defaults when it comes to either climb or landings through the use of power and pitch. My main complaint of the defaults is a stiffness in roll and pitch when releasing controls. I prefer more dampened actions, which the 3rd party files take care of.Still havn't re-loaded FUIII for current evaluations :) I can only remember the few "bad" items from years ago, so a lot of it must have worked right. The "bad" included an highly under-powered Baron in FUII (it was a Baron, wasn't it?), and the Lake Renegade resembling a glider with a high aspect ratio wing in FUIII. I could just go forever powerless with little sink rate!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,That's one aspect of FU3 that I have to concede. Sometimes the aircraft just glide forever ! This is a major problem if I am slightly high on final approach to a short runway, simply because I can throttle back to idle and the plane will STILL overshoot the runway. We all know that pushing forward on the stick in a situation like this is just asking for trouble.Even I know that. :-)Chris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Pete, >Any comments ? Yep,looks like you still need a bit more practice using trim controls:-lolThe problem with the default FS2002 aircraft is that they >seem to take AGES to respond to a reduction in power. This >might make them stable, but it also makes them incredibly >difficult to "anticipate". When the nose does start to drop, >it again takes a long time for the aircraft to respond to an >INCREASE in powerIf you're doing it correctly,you shouldn't get the nose dropping,at least, not until you apply flaps....>Maybe this is just a consequence of the way that I control >virtual GA aircraft during a final approach. I prefer to >control the descent by adjusting the engine power. I do NOT >like messing around with the trim controls after I have >slowed down to approach speed, and I certainly do NOT like >controlling the descent angle by pulling and pushing on the >control stick.In descent,engine power sets rate of descent,aircraft pitch angle setsairspeed,best applied by using trim!For something different try a few 'flapless' approaches in the jet/mooney , you'll soon get the hang of it :-):-wavePete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too late Pete, I've given up on FS2002. I can handle the FU3 planes no problem with my "reduce the operating lifetime of the engine method". :-lolChris Low,ENGLAND.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this