Round 3 - Flight Model

As a computer simulation enthusiast, I am not a commercial pilot, nor do I even have a PPL (Private Pilots License). In order to evaluate the flight modeling design of each simulator, I relied on my pilot friend I mentioned earlier to give me a quick blurb on the flight modeling of each simulator. He noted that of all three simulators, Fly! was the most realistic with exact fuel burn rates and the most realistic flight performance. He did agree with me that Flight Simulator 2000 has an equally impressive physics flight modeling and performs well against Fly with aerodynamics and environmental effects.

Personally I found Flight Unlimited III to contain the simplest flight model of all three simulators, and Flight Simulator 2000 the most complex. Given our differences of opinions, it's obvious that both Flight Simulator 2000 and Fly! have done a good job of trying to emulate actual aircraft performance. One thing that did disappoint me was that Fly and Flight Unlimited III have a lack of large aircraft in the inventory. Flight Simulator contains a Boeing 737 and 777. Both are difficult to fly, and require many hours of training to be able to do something like land in IFR conditions. Smaller aircraft are easier to fly and navigate, and this makes it difficult to correctly assess the simulators true flight model.

Fly! has the best flight model of all three simulations. The fuel burn rates, climbing, stalls, and cruise speeds are very accurate according to my friend. Flight Simulator does a good job as well, but isn't quite as exact as Fly!, while Flight Unlimited III seems very arcadish.

Fig. 6. Beechjet Front Cockpit View in Flight Unlimited 3

Graphics in simulations have come a long way since Commodore computers. With amazing resolutions and the power of D3D, Glide, and OpenGL graphic cards, the entire gaming industry is buzzing with these three key words.

Click to continue

I am going to cut to the chase regarding graphics in these flight simulations since it is a very subjective topic. If eye candy is important to you, Flight Simulator 2000 will knock your socks off. We all got a taste of what was to come with Combat Flight Simulator last year. It looked stunning compared to the other Prop sims. Microsoft has not disappointed us graphics wise considering the resolution and settings available. All aircraft, landscape, and environmental graphics are stunning in FS2000. Flight Unlimited 3 and Fly! both are a step behind in video options and quality. Fly! falls sharply behind FS2000 and is just a step ahead of FU3, but not by much. I remember taking off and landing at JFK in New York on a rainy day in FS2000. As I flew in and out of clouds slight turbulence jolted the aircraft around. As I looked outside, the sun was setting giving the horizon a beautiful orange glow. I set up a similar situation in Fly!. It looked like a dark and dreary comic book setting with gothic overtones. Next I went into FU3, initially forgetting that you can't fly outside the Washington State area in the game. Instead I took off from Seattle with similar environmental settings. It looked better than Fly! but still looked a little cartoonish.

Fig. 7. Sky High in Fly!

It is obvious that Microsoft has paid a lot of attention to detail to the environment the same way Fly! paid attention to detail in the cockpit. Microsoft wins hands down for environment simulation especially with its Real Weather data option where you can download real-time weather for the airport you are flying out of. Coupled with moving ground traffic headlights, tons of buildings in all the popular cities, and sound effects that just tingle your toes, FS2000 is the king of the skies. Fly! is behind in this department, but it does have the ability to import weather data. FU3's limitation in its geographic areas is a huge disappointment, but the product states this quite clearly in the advertisement and on the box.


To Page 5 of 5 . . .