G4 - water vs. ground

[redherring]

So far I'm happy with G4...the float flying is really cool. The water physics is quite realistic in my opinion. However, I still don't understand why the aircraft interaction on water is so realistic, yet on the ground it's is pretty much the same it was in G3/3.5.

Here's a float flying video: G4 Float Flying (http://www.wabashradioflyers.com/g4/g4_floatflying.zip)

Note the aircraft interaction on the water - pretty cool. Now, if we can get them to react as realistic on the ground that will be grand.

Cheers, RH../

[josh0987]

Ground handling was IMPROVED.

[redherring]

No it was not. Springy landing gear was added, and works only with certain aircraft. Ground interaction is still the same as in G3.5.

Cheers, RH../

[Blade Scraper]

Thanks for the video,from my novice float flying experience it seems that the plane slows down too quickly for the water being smooth.
Can you give us a video of ground handling?

I think it really sucks that the sounds are exactly the same and the water has no sound at all.
Nice flying BTW! :)

[josh0987]

No it was not. Springy landing gear was added, and works only with certain aircraft. Ground interaction is still the same as in G3.5.

Cheers, RH../Ah, here it is.- More realistic ground handling, including springy landing gear.

[redherring]

Can you give us a video of ground handling?

Blade Scraper,

Here's the vid: G4 ground handling (http://www.wabashradioflyers.com/g4/g4_ground.zip) - for the most part no discernable difference in how the aircraft reacts on the ground when one compares G3.5 and G4.

Josh,

Just to point out - "more realistic" does not mean that it is in fact realistic. The aircraft are still way too static on the ground, and do not react the same as a real aircraft would.

Look at the video - if I landed my Super Sportster like that last landing, I can assure it would look quite different. Same goes for taxiing through the gravel on the side of the road.

Cheers, RH../

[josh0987]

Most likely your install was defect. Because ground handling for me on G4 is a lot better.

[redherring]

Nope - fresh install on a new WinXP install (this is my G4 machine). It did exactly the same on the other PC (where I installed G4 until I had this one ready to go).

If you insist that ground handling is realistic, please post a video.

Lastly - I actually like G4...a lot. I am by no means criticizing, just asking for improvement in an are where it is lacking realism in my opinion.

RH../

[Blade Scraper]

This should happen on G4 because the extra drag of the gear throws it off balence.
http://rcuvideos.com/item/S703JT41PXHG6Q85

[josh0987]

This should happen on G4 because the extra drag of the gear throws it off balence.
http://rcuvideos.com/item/S703JT41PXHG6Q85
That happens in G4, too.

[redherring]

Yes it does...if you're flying the Cub and you don't flare properly whilst the airspeed is a tad high, she'll nose over very quickly ;)

To the guys at KE:

Let's say I have a runway object (or a gravel object etc. - I'm just using this as an example for now); please give us the ability to assign a type of surface to that object, and then check what type of object the aircraft is on, and what surface type the object has assigned...then make it react accordingly.

I know the above is a very simplistic explanation, but I figured it's worth asking. I have a good understanding of OOP, and I know it is doable.

I guess I just want a great sim to be better - and I believe it can be.

Best, RH../

[phrank]

I'm with redherring on this one.
G4 gives you visual upgrades, water, Springy Landing gears, and a few new models.
Other than stall characteristics, Physics appear the same as 3.5

If by groundhandling you mean the Yak or Extra bounce up if you come in too hot, then yes I suppose so, but veer off the runway, and it's no difference if you're in the grass, sand, or runway.

"Bumpy" surfaces in Airport Editor would be a welcome addition.
I tried to resize several rocks to 1-2% to try to achieve bumpy surfaces, but after several hundred of these pebbles I just couldn't go any further.
With that method I was able to make a more realistic field, but what a PITA!

Please give us some bumpy surfaces.
Frank....

[josh0987]

On the EverGreen airport I taxied the P-51 Mustang around and it did bounce around.

[redherring]

Josh,

Yes, it does bounce - but compare that to how a real RC model bounces and shudders/vibrates when taxiing over a rough surface, and you'll immediately notice the difference.

And that is the crux here - the models are not interacting with the ground realistically. No, the occasional unrealistic bounce does not count.

For anyone who has experience with real RC aircraft, it will be immediately apparent that the aircraft ground interaction is not right. Stop arguing just for the sake of it. It is not I and I alone who is saying this.

Cheers, RH../

[Blade Scraper]

I'm going to agree with RH ground handling should be like this (http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Various_Aircraft-Airline_Untitled_Aviation_Video-9540.html)
in G4 tail draggers are steered to easily.
Also G4's float planes slow down too quickly look at this video. Float plane (http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Aviat_A1_Husky-Airline_Untitled_Aviation_Video-8957.html)

[BladeCP02]

I'm going to agree with RH ground handling should be like this (http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Various_Aircraft-Airline_Untitled_Aviation_Video-9540.html)
in G4 tail draggers are steered to easily.
Also G4's float planes slow down too quickly look at this video. Float plane (http://www.flightlevel350.com/Aircraft_Aviat_A1_Husky-Airline_Untitled_Aviation_Video-8957.html)
Are you seriously comparing real life, full size aircraft to aircraft in G4?

[josh0987]

Are you seriously comparing real life, full size aircraft to aircraft in G4?Seems like he is.... :eek:

[0xdeadbeef]

Anyway, it's really time to add a polygon based depth buffer to photofields which would also add the chance to define friction, roughness etc. for each polygon.
This would be the right start for correct ground handling, also without this, creating custom water photofields is kinda pointless since you can't really define the shore.

For the 3D fields, in an ideal world, they would add a "sandbox" feature like e.g. in the FarCry and Crysis editor, where you can raise and lower terrain and paint terrain with certain (predefined) textures. In case of G3, textures would have to be combined with surface properties.

Then again, these are the things I hoped would be implemented in G4 out of the box. I still hope at least parts of this will be implemented in G4. At least this hope was the main reason for me to buy it.

[redherring]

Are you seriously comparing real life, full size aircraft to aircraft in G4?

Although probably not the most apt example, I think Blade Scraper was trying to illustrate that an aircraft does not remain perfectly still (static) around the roll and/or pitch axis whilst taxiing.

I hope we can continue to debate this topic in an objective manner.

Ox, some good points. Thanks for the input.

[r1derbike]

Anyway, it's really time to add a polygon based depth buffer to photofields which would also add the chance to define friction, roughness etc. for each polygon.Ox for President! You've got my vote, buddy!

Charles

[josh0987]

GROUND HANDLING IN G3.5.

Aircraft: Fly Baby.

[r1derbike]

While talking about water fields; do any of the water photofields have collision mapping/objects?

Charles

[josh0987]

While talking about water fields; do any of the water photofields have collision mapping/objects?

CharlesYeap...

[Trey00h]

Yeap...

Are there more then one "water photofield" for G4? From what I have seen there is only 1 (Lake Douglas)?

Trey

[dhk79]

Are there more then one "water photofield" for G4? From what I have seen there is only 1 (Lake Douglas)?

TreyThere is only the one water photo field that comes with G4, but I have another. Download Two Cow Cove, from the G4 Projects (http://www.knifeedge.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18537) thread.

[cfossa]

I've got both G3.5 and G4 and I personally do not see any difference in ground handling. It is not very realistic.

Anyone still got G2 laying around? When I upgraded from G2 to G3 I was very disappointed in the realism of landings. G2 IMO was much better. Planes would bounce on landing if you came in to hot, much like a real R/C plane. The tail draggers like the AT-6 and P-51 were a bear to land w/o bouncing. In G3.5 and G4 the planes almost "stick" to the runway when you come in to land. You can get them to bounce, but landings that would not be pretty on a real model "stick" on the sim.

Carl

[opjose]

You really need to turn up the co-efficients on the airports and the wheels of the plane.

This improves things a lot.

I've made up a G4 model variant of my Giles 202, which bounces along the runway very much like my real plane.

[Law]

You really need to turn up the co-efficients on the airports and the wheels of the plane.

This improves things a lot.

I've made up a G4 model variant of my Giles 202, which bounces along the runway very much like my real plane.

For those of us who thought that we bought a simulator that was already to run on our computers and are computer users and not programers - how do you turn up the co-efficients on the airports and the wheels of the planes and what does it do? Is it something that needs to be done on all airports and planes?

[jeffpn]

For those of us who thought that we bought a simulator that was already to run on our computers and are computer users and not programers - how do you turn up the co-efficients on the airports and the wheels of the planes and what does it do? Is it something that needs to be done on all airports and planes?
No, it's not necessary. I don't do it to any airports or planes.

[opjose]

Right, you don't HAVE to do it.

However for those who lament how the default ground handling works, turning it up does wonders.


Try the Pplace's G4 GeeBee on the 3D airport I posted recently and you'll see.

The GeeBee will not slide around like it's on ice... the wings will tilt if you apply too much rudder on the ground, the plane will nose over if it runs into the grass, ground loops have to be reckoned with, etc.

Both the plane and the airport have been adjusted.

You can do this in the airport editor and by adjusting the co-efficients of any plane's wheels in the physics editor.

[Bulletman]

In my opinion it is a tool to learn to fly real rc planes. If they made it so realistic it would be like being at the field, 1. It would probably cost more 2. It would take more resource which would up the min requirements for our computers 3. Why leave your computer for the real thing.

Keep in mind its a training simulator.
I was flying own my own doing loops and rolls and landing by my second flight.
G4 is a great Sim.

Just my thoughts.

[cfossa]

I agree about the training aspect of G4. That's why I think the landings need to be more realistic!

I learned to fly on G2 and when I went to fly my real trainer the landings were close to the sim landings. If anything, the real plane was a bit less forgiving than the sim.

The landings on G3 (and now G4) are a lot easier than G2 or real planes. The sim planes tend to "stick" even if you come in way to hard.

Doesn't bother me much because I know how to fly and land now. But, if I were a new guy learning to land on the sim I'd be a bit surprised on my first "real" landing.

Carl

[opjose]

There are a number of changes that I would like to see which will in turn be of great benefit for newbies... including changes to ground handling.

[Blade Scraper]

This isn't an aircraft,but i shows how things react under very calm water conditions. It almost glides,it gets annoying on g4 because it's constantly choppy.
http://rcuvideos.com/item/C3C7BSMT4KW6W5WR
http://rcuvideos.com/item/MH3K4TKRLVCZWWQP

[Law]

This isn't an aircraft,but i shows how things react under very calm water conditions. It almost glides,it gets annoying on g4 because it's constantly choppy.
http://rcuvideos.com/item/C3C7BSMT4KW6W5WR
http://rcuvideos.com/item/MH3K4TKRLVCZWWQP

Boats are "held" in the water by the prop. Not a very good comparison.

These might be a little better comparisons:
http://rcuvideos.com/item/LCZCT2GN8S3ZLXR9
http://rcuvideos.com/item/4T2HQ6LS21ZRGCG0
http://rcuvideos.com/item/Y04MSRPXQPMWCHNJ

You'll notice that the planes reacts to the top of the water.

[Savage]

LOL,

Water effects in RealFlight G4 are not realistic in relation to airflow from planes or helicopters!

Take a look at the "Phoenix" flight simulator demo.

Perhaps even Reflex XTR's most recent version has done it all better.

AFPD has decent ground handling effects.

Ground effects in RealFlight G4 are unrealistic as well, still, the ground surface does smoothly support aircraft and helicopters etc.

Sure, everyone knows that we use simulators to improve or develop our flight skills, that is the most important thing a flight simulator offers.

If merely developing ones flying skill is everyones only interest then the simulator developers have successfully done their job, so why bother to even think about getting another simulator?

It's for the bells and whistles and/or to remain compatible with some !@!~$$ new operating system that came with the latest computer purchasing frenzy we got into that motivates and/or inspires us to buy a newer simulator.

Are we merely getting a sugar coated improvement for our labor?

I don't know about you, but many have to work about 42 hours with no expenses taken into consideration in order to have the cash needed to make such a purchase.

So, is what we are being sold the best that could be done? No.

Why strive for perfection when failures are good for the economy?

Work, wage, purchase. . . . The cycle is spinning its web. :eek:

The intelligent question might be:

Are we making an intelligent choice by buying now and then feeling cheated in some way, rather than waiting with what we have now, until something becomes available that actually provides what I/we/most really seem to want?

[josh0987]

All those simulators you shown all are not better than G4 I know this 'cause some of them ONLY have photofields and the aircraft physics are not as good as G4's :rolleyes:

[opjose]

Unfortunately Savage's post is nothing but trolling....

Let's take each erroneous point...

"Water effects in RealFlight G4 are not realistic in relation to airflow from planes or helicopters! "

REALLY?

Mine are.

Check the videos posted here where this is demonstrated.

"Perhaps even Reflex XTR's most recent version has done it all better. "

Where are the 3D Airfields in Reflex? Ooops they don't exist.

Reflex has decent physics, but the physics are NOT better than G3/G4 nor as accessible to the end user.

"AFPD has decent ground handling effects."

No it doesn't.

A few photo fields have depth buffer objects that make them seem to cause the planes to bump along the runway, but the majority do not. For some reason people mistake the movement with "good ground handling". Not the same thing.

The planes slide around like they are on ice.

You can add depth buffer ground effects in G3/G4 if you want to get the same end result with the airfield bumpyness.

On 3D airfields things get MUCH better because you can assign surface co-efficients, collision, etc, to each surface, runway or object.

Turning up the co-efficients on the entire airport takes care of a lot too..

"Ground effects in RealFlight G4 are unrealistic as well, still, the ground surface does smoothly support aircraft and helicopters etc."

You haven't played with the settings then.

Try PPlace's GeeBee on my airport and you'll see a big difference.

"I don't know about you, but many have to work about 42 hours with no expenses taken into consideration in order to have the cash needed to make such a purchase."

Irrelevant, and a sim will save you many times it's cost if used properly.

G4 provided a nicely price upgrade path from G3... Which other sim has done the same?

"Work, wage, purchase. . . . "

Welcome to how the world works.

Did you just join us?

[Recty]

I don't know about you, but many have to work about 42 hours with no expenses taken into consideration in order to have the cash needed to make such a purchase.42 hours to buy RealFlight G4? It cost me $200... so if you're saying it takes 42 hours of work to buy RealFlight, that means you're making UNDER $5.00 an hour... you need to find a new job.

[opjose]

42 hours to buy RealFlight G4? It cost me $200... so if you're saying it takes 42 hours of work to buy RealFlight, that means you're making UNDER $5.00 an hour... you need to find a new job.

Realflight G4 from Tower: $192.00 w/free shipping.

Using promo code this came down to $165.00

If you purchased G3 recently you get $100.00 off this in the form of an equipment rebate.

If not you get $75.00 in the form of an equipment rebate.

Actual cost of G4 for me... $90.00 including shipping.

Not a bad deal for those upgrading...

While I kept G3, I'm sure I could have sold it for $90.00.