Yeah. Same. Just going by what they said in the SDK Q&A (they clearly qualified that support of external flight model isn’t “in the SDK” not that they would prevent devs from doing it altogether) combined with what you said.
I’m very glad that we now have a working example, and that it works so well. The Bell is really a joy to fly even for a heli newbie like me.
Hi, looks great. Will it be in the MSFS marketplace? I’m trying to keep all things there going forward to limit my multiple update pathways!
Thanks,
Mark
Yep, the reason you stated is one of the reasons why I refuse to buy anything from outside the in-sim marketplace. Another reason is that if it ends up in the marketplace, that means MS/Asobo themselves would be approving the flight model override that they initially said they wouldn’t allow in the SDK Q and A (although we might have misunderstood them. An official clarification concerning this matter is urgently overdue imo). So basically, if I see this helicopter for sale in the in-sim marketplace, it would give me some faith to buy it knowing that the flight model override mechanism has been officially approved and MS/Asobo wouldn’t block/remove it in future.
You’re the one who misunderstood what they said despite the fact that it was clearly qualified within a specific environment (IE: The SDK), and kept complaining about it on this forum and basically every other environment I’ve seen you on, despite several third-party developers clearly mentioning that it’s possible.
Others have understood correctly without jumping to erroneous conclusions, so perhaps you should look inward instead of demanding “urgent clarifications.”
If third-party developers need one (since they’re the parties that have to work with it), I’m sure they’ll ask through the channels they have. Personally, I’m perfectly happy with trusting their word, especially when they’re reputable, as I’ve done so far.
Just had a chance to experience this aircraft in my initial flight. I have mixed feelings. It IS a first of its kind, in a way that helicopters don’t yet have official support. From my limited understanding of helicopter flight, the flight model itself seems very thorough and I appreciate the work and thought that was put into this. My feelings remain that at its current level and the price it was set to, the product just doesn’t meet several key criteria for me.
GRAPHICS:
Pretty good. Passable. Take a look at the screenshots. It doesn’t look bad, nothing pops out that tells me “oh god, this is awful, I wish it was done differently”. Nothing makes me jump for joy, either. It’s a far cry from when you first load that MilViz Corsair… or that Carenado Whatever. Or Asobo FlyingToaster, even… Certain things just look… plastic? There isn’t a lot of real-world look to it in terms of wear and texture. Let’s take the handles on the levers as an example, or that metal surrounding the instrument panel when you are looking from outside and to the front. It’s the same issue that brings down the NextGen Bandeirante for me - that cheap game-like look of the handles on levers and other surfaces that simply don’t make you feel like you are looking at the real thing, but rather something that was modeled in 3D software. It’s the same reason Carenado Asobo can make their stuff look better - same reason Asobo’s recent Ultralight Top Rudder looks better than VGP PowerSolo 103. It’s not grave, but when the aircraft is priced in Milviz and FlyingIron and Big Radials category and ABOVE Carenado, this is the stuff I am looking for too. This just doesn’t cut it to me, I am sorry. Perhaps future improvements can be made, but visually this is just OK. It’s not Bredok bad, but not Carenado good. Sits in the Bandeirante realm. Makes sense? 
SOUND:
I really like the way this was done and it’s pretty good. I have nothing to complain about and it sounds believable enough for me to suspend my disbelief. I haven’t experienced what the real thing sounds like, so that’s as far as I can objectively assess it.
FLIGHT:
I am a novice at helicopters. I don’t really enjoy them as much as I do “conventional” aircraft, but this feels like a ton of work was done on it. Unfortunately, I don’t find myself qualified in any shape whatsoever to comment on it, so whereas in other reviews I can confidently say something flies decent enough, I am WAY out of my realm here. So, I don’t feel that I am the best person to judge this and will leave it to others to evaluate. I am terribly sorry I can’t be more helpful in this category, and it’s PROBABLY the one that makes this aircraft shine the most.
OVERALL:
I am not sorry I bought this at all, but there is another thing that leaves me cold to this - the implementation of settings and activation. There is obviously need for developers to protect themselves against software piracy - it’s a REAL thing. Enough to drive some out of business. So I support the fact that it has been implemented in a fairly non-intrusive way - you can just copy and paste your activation code and be done. What I do NOT like whatsoever is the need for this Manager software to be open every time I want to fly this aircraft and what I like even less is that by default, it will make itself start and run every time you boot up Windows. Yes, I am aware that you CAN disable it from starting every time, but I shouldn’t need to. Yes, I am aware that it doesn’t eat much resources, but they add up. I currently have something like 93 aircraft available for selection in MSFS screen. I have about 160 or so in Prepare3D. This is the ONLY aircraft that requires me to have its application running while operating it. In some other cases, like SimSkunkWorks Fiat G-91, there is a stand-alone config app, which you can run, have it transmit whatever it needs to to the sim and close it. Same with a bunch of others on P3D - run them, close them, be done. This is the only one that needs to run. I don’t like it. And I don’t like the fact that if MORE aircraft like this show up, I will have MORE stuff running in the background. The more stuff running in the background, the more chance of them all adding up and becoming an issue. I simply don’t like this design and I hope it can be re-thought. I am OK activating via it, I am OK to set my realism options via it, but I do NOT want it running in the background, ESPECIALLY when by default it wants to start itself on every Windows boot-up. If no other adjustment can be made, at least have users run it only when they fly the aircraft. Cause I will most likely fly other things 90% of the time and I don’t want this Manager software to run in the background all the time. They DO add up. If 40 more aircraft come out and I buy them all, I don’t want 40 more things to kill in my taskbar.
Other than that major gripe, I think it has its place and I think people that enjoy helicopter flight will be happy to have it. At its current price point (which the developers have full right to set at whatever they feel is worth), my recommendation is that if you are simply curious about helicopters and aren’t really into them as much, stick with the Airbus freeware one. This one is right on that line where what it provides is a lot of fun for SOME, but for others, the price and the current level at which it sits visually as well as some implementation issues - well, to them, it may not be worth the $38.
I do hope for continuous work on this and improvement, but for version 1.0? Job well done. This is all I have.
Repost from the other active thread on this as there seem to be two going.
It IS a first of its kind, in a way that helicopters don’t yet have official support. From my limited understanding of helicopter flight, the flight model itself seems very thorough and I appreciate the work and thought that was put into this.
GRAPHICS:
Pretty good. Passable. Take a look at the screenshots. It doesn’t look bad, nothing pops out that tells me “oh god, this is awful, I wish it was done differently”. Nothing makes me jump for joy, either. It’s a far cry from when you first load that MilViz Corsair… or that Carenado Whatever. Or Asobo FlyingToaster, even… Certain things just look… plastic? There isn’t a lot of real-world look to it in terms of wear and texture. Let’s take the handles on the levers as an example, or that metal surrounding the instrument panel when you are looking from outside and to the front. It’s the same issue that brings down the NextGen Bandeirante for me - that cheap game-like look of the handles on levers and other surfaces that simply don’t make you feel like you are looking at the real thing, but rather something that was modeled in 3D software. It’s the same reason Carenado Asobo can make their stuff look better - same reason Asobo’s recent Ultralight Top Rudder looks better than VGP PowerSolo 103. It’s not grave, but when the aircraft is priced in Milviz and FlyingIron and Big Radials category and ABOVE Carenado, this is the stuff I am looking for too. This just doesn’t cut it to me, I am sorry. Perhaps future improvements can be made, but visually this is just OK. It’s not Bredok bad, but not Carenado good. Sits in the Bandeirante realm. Makes sense?
One other thing is the external view - it’s SO close to the aircraft that even with a maximum zoom-out, it’s practically useless.
SOUND:
I really like the way this was done and it’s pretty good. I have nothing to complain about and it sounds believable enough for me to suspend my disbelief. I haven’t experienced what the real thing sounds like, so that’s as far as I can objectively assess it.
FLIGHT:
I am a novice at helicopters. I spent about 5 hours total in flight with this one and have to say that this is where the aircraft shines the most. I highly recommend starting with the Easy flight model, then moving to Medium, then finally to Realistic. Essentially, it modifies how tame it will be in your hands and how much adjustment for rotor spin’s effect you will have to do. If you start with Realistic, it will be pretty unstable and you will have to compensate a lot with a COMBINATION of inputs in order to control it. That is on par with expectations for this machine and it’s a total pleasure to fly. I haven’t been this excited about helicopters until I flew this (the Airbus one is nice, but it’s doesn’t QUITE come to this level)… I especially enjoy a possibility of engine failure if you abuse the engine (configurable to be enabled or disabled via the Manager). I was able to complete several take-offs and landings on the Realistic model after a couple of hours of flying. The key is SUBTLE adjustments with a purpose. Don’t treat it like your default conventional aircraft and you will be fine. THIS is where most of the pleasure from this aircraft comes from - the way it flies. A lot of work and thought has been put into this and I appreciate it. It’s what will keep me flying it. It’s absolutely perfect for its views and speed for sightseeing flights.
OVERALL:
I am not sorry I bought this at all, but there is another thing that leaves me concerned - the implementation of settings and activation. There is obviously need for developers to protect themselves against software piracy - it’s a REAL thing. Enough to drive some out of business. So I support the fact that it has been implemented in a fairly non-intrusive way - you can just copy and paste your activation code and be done. What I do NOT like whatsoever is the need for this Manager software to be open every time I want to fly this aircraft and what I like even less is that by default, it will make itself start and run every time you boot up Windows. Yes, I am aware that you CAN disable it from starting every time, but I shouldn’t need to. Yes, I am aware that it doesn’t eat much resources, but they add up. I currently have something like 93 aircraft available for selection in MSFS screen. I have about 160 or so in Prepare3D. This is the ONLY aircraft that requires me to have its application running while operating it. In some other cases, like SimSkunkWorks Fiat G-91, there is a stand-alone config app, which you can run, have it transmit whatever it needs to to the sim and close it. Same with a bunch of others on P3D - run them, close them, be done. This is the only one that needs to run. I don’t like it. And I don’t like the fact that if MORE aircraft like this show up, I will have MORE stuff running in the background. The more stuff running in the background, the more chance of them all adding up and becoming an issue. I simply don’t like this design. I am OK activating via it, I am OK to set my realism options via it, but I do NOT want it running in the background, ESPECIALLY when by default it wants to start itself on every Windows boot-up. They DO add up. If 40 more aircraft come out and I buy them all, I don’t want 40 more things to kill in my taskbar. Thankfully, the developer has come out (partly in response to an earlier version of this review) to state that they will make running it on startup optional during install. I find that it’s perfectly fine that the window reminding you to run the Manager comes up when you load the aircraft and the Manager isn’t running. For now this is easily configurable by disabling the Manager from starting up in the Task Manager.
I absolutely recommend this. The price of $35 is a little bit steep for the level of graphical fidelity in the textures, but it’s easy to overlook once you begin flying this aircraft.
I do hope for continuous work on this and improvement, but for version 1.0? Job well done. This is all I have.
Disappointed in requirement to have external application running in background, which is only there for “handles copyright protection for the FlyInside Bell 47G, and allows you to customize the flight model”. Customization could have been done in the cockpit (e.g. in some pad). And copyright protection could have been done with one-time execution of some decoding/hashing for current user’s hardware.
This is what I mean. Most of the time this eats up 1-1.5% of my CPU. Every once in a while (for a second at most, and about every 20-30 seconds), the usage for GPU jumps to 6-9%. This is why I don’t want these kinds of things running in the background. If something hidden SOMETIMES uses up to 9% of my GPU, I don’t think it’s worth keeping it running. These DO add up eventually.
Another repost from another thread:
This is what I mean. Most of the time this eats up 1-1.5% of my CPU. Every once in a while (for a second at most, and about every 20-30 seconds), the usage for GPU jumps to 6-9%. This is why I don’t want these kinds of things running in the background. If something hidden SOMETIMES uses up to 9% of my GPU, I don’t think it’s worth keeping it running. These DO add up eventually.
I feel like this is the biggest drawback of this offering so far. I have gone ahead and disabled its start by default. I will just have to remember to launch it when I fly it. I don’t understand why settings can’t be saved somewhere and read from there when you need to fly. If the biggest reason for this app is copyright protection checking, I call this excessive. I am ok checking copyright once in a blue moon or on initial launch. I am NOT ok with this sitting and running in the background all the time.
Tony, and the rest at FlyInside: I am sorry some of this stuff may sound negative, but this is really how I feel about this.
Thank you for taking the time to review this. I’m very particular too about what I run on my PC, so I regret this will be a dealbreaker for me. As someone who’s working in software for 25 years, I totally get and agree with the need for copyright protection. It’s a very real problem that will probably never go away. But at some point the protections distract from ease of use for us honest customers.
If this can be added to the MSFS store then it’s a different story. I hope Asobo will approve your request soon. Best of luck!
No worries. But software that starts itself regardless of how often I actually use it and that does stuff I am not sure about in terms of its function has always been a bit of a pet-peeve. So if my review were to omit that, it would simply not represent how I really feel about this whole thing. I really wish it wasn’t a thing I had to “complain” about.
I’m totally with you. This is a hard problem with no easy solution that benefits both the creator and the customer. Heck, even with the 10 or so addons I’ve purchased, I run the exe installer in a VM so I don’t get all that extra hidden software installed. Never had a problem.
There is something PMDG does that I really like in terms of license protection. When you install their stuff, it doesn’t ask for anything. Once you load the aircraft for the first time, it asks for your license number and then automatically embeds it into the MCDU of your Boeing. From there, you have an option page where you can deactivate your current license should you wish to uninstall the aircraft. If you want to reinstall later, if you followed the instructions and deactivated it first, you won’t even need to contact them. If your license is not active, you can reinstall the software if you wish. So that way, it won’t fly without it, but it doesn’t keep any apps running in the background.
FlyInside should get praise for the first realistic payware chopper in MSFS when the game doesn’t officially support it or have a default flight model.
However I need to pass for two main reasons. First, I’m not really that impressed with the visuals. It just doesn’t excite me. I want to fly a chopper but then I see the seemingly untextured unfinished visuals and it’s a turnoff.
Second, I’m not installing a third party always on DRM for a MSFS add-on. That’s just not happening.
I believe the “daemon” runs the custom flight model, and is not “always on DRM”.
The devs can clarify that when they visit again.
I’m unaware how the H135 people approach that, as I haven’t used that one yet.
I only got to do a short flight but with the realism cranked it’s a joy to fly. All the fine control and helicopter quirks you’d expect in a sim that supports helicopters like XPlane are present here. This will fill the gap that moving from XPlane has created with regards to helicopter flying.
Hi, I have the impression that some “Pilots” do’nt know how many things are running in the background all the time. So I have no problem with one more!!!
Anyone know how this does on VR?
Very well for me, smooth with really good fps with the Quest 2. Only thing I noticed was some tearing in the rotors as they spin up to speed when you look up but once up to flight RPM it’s gone. I’d say that’s more a sim implementation thing as seen similar elsewhere with other aircraft or when quickly panning around in external view. Apart from that no glitches or other abnormalities that I’ve noticed so far. Cockpit scale looks spot on as well and the bubble cockpit gives (obviously) great visibility.
