Latest AccuRC sim flight video

[arby]

And yes, sycophantic hype puts me off slightly too ...

Spot on

[ChrisB]

Will be interested in feedback but IMHO XTR2 looks far better.

[muscleflex]

I had a go on this sim during Weston.. could be early days yet but my initial thought was... My Real Flight 6.5 is not in any danger!

[SaneAdam]

I think i am going to wait a bit to see what the reaction is like. Phoenix is working great for me at the moment.

The price is low enough to take a punt though which is good… But, if it won't run anywhere near smooth on my outdated PC then the price will significantly rise lol. So it would have to be very good to make it worth upgrading to a higher spec computer just to run it.

I think all the hype and talk made me desperately want to buy it. But the more actual flight vids i see…. the less i am interested funnily enough.

[jwatts007]

if they had just released it I would have got one there and then...but all this promoting garbage all talk no sim has put me off...

[Paulos]

I believe there was a problem running the "big screen" on the demo at Weston, as there was a noticeable delay on that setup which wasn't present when I tried it before.

[Made2Fade]

If im honest i think it looks graphically fantastic. Im definately not convinced at all that it flies anywhere near like the real thing like some have been blowing on about. In flight it looks very much like Phoenix also IMO. Hope to be proved wrong but i cant see the actual flying being much better than Phoenix no matter what code they got going on.

[RcRotaryMadness]

I had a play on it at weston and was really disappointed with it. Everything seemed slow and too easy to fly.

However I will reserve complete judgement till I try the finished product on my own computer and with a proper TX.

[jimmyhorns]

I'm using next as my sim at the moment.

It's graphics are not as fancy as either Rf or phoenix

There are only about a dozen models to choose from.

But guess what?... you click on the logo 600 3d and fly it and it feels very similar to how mine does in real life with next to no fiddling. It still has the same issues as every sim - which for me is about perspective and the lack of distance perception.

I'm quite happy to give this new one a try but I do wish there was a finished product out there, and I wish there was a review from a normal hobbiest. I have had feedback from those in the know that it's pretty good, but then they are very good pilots already.

Less hype more substance please, and there really should be some kind of demo available

[Peper]

Gave it a go in Zone,
tough the TX wasn't to my likings, ie, not enough expo and stick tension very low, I did like it,
I could feel the weight of the heli, very similar to RF and graphics were also good,
agree with the head design in flight isn't the best of the bunch and the crashes are very similar to phoenix (visually and sound)

would like to see a product in the shelves very soon, I think we are all getting a bit bored rather than excited with all the Hype and dektop wall papers...

[waveydavey]

I so want this to be good for the work and the dedication that the guys have put into it but it doesn't look right, the 600 doesn't fly like that at all nor the E5. Theres something wrong with the the timing on the sound too, my old Dell has nothing to worry about on that evidence I'm sorry to say

[pgkevet]

Just some comments:

Realism isn't everything. I have no doubt about the sophisication or the work gone into this but that vid actualy put me off a tad. I don;t think any of my helis smoke that much before takeoff and even if they do then I'd be focussing through it and concetrating more on another element. That is the basic difference between sim and reality - it's hard to get that depth variation on a 2D screen. I also found that scenery glaring and hiding the model. Now that may happen in reality but those of us with aged eyes and slower reflexes don't fly into the sun.

What I need for a sim is a realistic heli response but clarity of view and the ability to calm things down to learn that move. It's fine for a pro polishing a routine or flash gits showing off on-line but it's not quite the learning tool I need. Now I'm sure that functionaiity will be in there somewhere but for slow learners like myself I found the restrictions of the gym in phoenix and the hover practice section invaluable in those early days to highlight how much the model wandered and to help me get those basic muscle memories down.

Fiddlers may enjoy playing in the workshop but I donlt see any si where I land my model, feel the crankcase temp and then when sat on my chair doing a post-flight i accidentally lean on the exhaust and burn myself again - or where wear in ball-links and post-crash notchy bearinsg ec happen - because we don't need it...any more than I'd need the screen to turn to dropping blood if I hit the sim's camera man.

I can see the attraction and everyone is different..but in phoenix I rarely use more than the default flying field and rarely use more than one model..just as with a major word processor I arrely use more than one or two templates and almost always the same font.

£86? will be £90 posted and then concerns with how well it'd run on my 6/7yr old PC's..

[Boggy]

Pgk there are three settings for smoke high/ med/off.and I have found that putting a boiled kettle on my desk next to the mouse works a treat to make the workshop experience more realistic.I hear so often that people don't care about settings as long as the one heli they fly feels right, well every body differs in what they want it to feel like so its impossible to build a sim that evedybody thinks is perfect from the start without any tweeks surely?I've heard just as many say that it has to fly as their heli does.

some will not like the workshop some will.I think it will be invaluble to new starters to the hobby to help them understand what does what, and for those that do like to get things feeling just so, its far easier to understand what does what.