Ultralights...

Quote from Oculite 1

From the casual flier point of view it's a good experience, From the VR user point of view it's highly immersive, smooth and enjoyable

You are exactly right! It's a great casual flyer flight simulation. Even without VR the photo-real scenery provided along with the improved autogen buildings & trees placement make it worth taking a look around in any aircraft that is good for flying low and slow and that has a good unobstructed outside view from inside the cockpit. Sadly, there is only the DR400 that fulfills this criteria presently and to have that you need to download, install, then run the FS 4 converter tool in the FS4 Aircraft SDK, which I don't think most people know about or want to take the trouble to do. That is why I am all for IPACS adding ultra-lite and LSA aircraft of that nature even if it requires an additional paid-for DLC. I very much dislike IPACS' focus on jet & turboprop commercial transports, WWI and WWII aircraft and jet fighters.

They made a wish here again

@Tomfa Although it is a just a little bit off-topic for this thread, I read your Switzerland quality thread and too tell you the honest truth as I see it, Jet Pack who is the official IPACS company representative for this forum kinda gave you the answer to your request already in his post RE: Image quality comparison of Switzerland

My interpretation being a native US English speaker is that he is saying that IPACS only licensed the various Switzerland imagery used for FS 1 for FS 1 only and the imagery used in FS 2 for FS 2 only. So IPACS can not just turn around and use the Switzerland FS 2 imagery in FS 4 without paying for another license specifically to allow use in FS 4. But that is economically infeasible for IPACS since they already paid for a complete Western Europe imagery package from another vender which already included Switzerland even if the new imagery package with respect to Switzerland is inferior. So they are not going to do it since IPACS doubts enough people are going to be willing to pay for an extra Switzerland only DLC to make it justifiable from a profit (keep the lights on and meet the payroll for IPACS employees) standpoint.

Edit: If you have a true product defect bug to report, I feel that it is better to send an email to Aerofly tech support because IPACS will enter it into their internal bug tracking system and you will get a email response and updates as the bug report is processed. Also you can create a support request at the Aerofly.com support center https://www.aerofly.com/ticket/index.php

Aerofly Support email: Aerofly Support <support@aerofly.com>

Quote from Tomfa

Afterwards, you also have to take other parameters into account, such as traffic, water, the weather, which are non-existent, but which require a lot of resources. Not sure that after that we would still be in the top, level speed or fluidity (FPS) But for me, it suits me well.

Yes the "USP" is clearly the good programming and the fast loading times and smooth display (especially in VR)
and immersive flying feelings / physics ... also with "not 5000,- Computer-hardware "

Could it be solution, to make a "switch" inside the Sim ... so that you can activate more things .. .like traffic, people, whatever .. that your ressources on your hardware is adjustable ... inside the sim .

Then everyone can decide whether they prefer to have less FPS and more features.

I think this is makeable in the software ?

I hope in the FS4 world for (switchable) driving differnt cars, vans, bus, trains, boats, running people, bicycles , gangway , suitcase van

"LIFE on earth"

Well, I imagine the IPACS Aerofly FS 4 product manager is looking at this thread with amusement and thinking to him or herself, "Small number of comments by the usual cast of suspects, oh yeah this would be a real money maker...we will get right on it...NOT!"

Quote from jayeye2011

Well, I imagine the IPACS Aerofly FS 4 product manager is looking at this thread with amusement and thinking to him or herself, "Small number of comments by the usual cast of suspects, oh yeah this would be a real money maker...we will get right on it...NOT!"

Most users dont write here ...

But I think there are many thousend who will pay a 10 or 20 Euro DLC if its good ...

But as I write ... its risky ... they have to work .. and in future they see if money comes back

But I think so ...

As owner of an ultralight aircraft, I would also be very happy if an UL in AF 4 was available. The DO 27 from AF 2 is not an ultralight, but at least a slow plane with a lot of windows for good sightseeing. I tried to convert the DO 27 to AF 4 without success. I think that's a trifle for someone who is practiced with converting.

Quote from Challenger2

The DO 27 from AF 2 is not an ultralight, but at least a slow plane with a lot of windows for good sightseeing. I tried to convert the DO 27 to AF 4 without success. I think that's a trifle for someone who is practiced with converting.

The aircraft conversion requires that the intermediate files be generated from the original 3D CAD files (i.e. Blender) using a FS4 plugin which is what the converter wants to see. You cannot convert a finished user installed FS2 airplane directly. So the only one who can do a Do27 FS4 port is going to have to be the original author who I think is no longer present.

Here is what I think it would take for IPACS to offer up an CFM Shadow Ultralite addon:

IPACS Marketing Guy: " Hey, our Apple IPad focus group say that FS2023 users really really want to see a CFM Shadow in the App store"

IPACS Aerofly Product Manager: "Holy Cow, Batman! It'll be ready for upload to the Apple App Store by the end of next week,,, Believe It!"

IPACS Aerofly Product Manager: "Oh, as long as we're doing it, might as well sell on the Steam store for 20 euros"

IPACS Marketing Guy: "Man, that's cold. We only charge 2 euros in the App Store"

IPACS Aerofly Product Manager: "Yeah, but those Steam guys are a bunch of A-Holes"

Quote from Tomfa

By doing some research here, you will certainly find, or at least part of the answers to your questions

Well, if you know something don't keep it to yourself as inquiring minds want to know how to convert and FS2 airplane without have the actual 3D CAD program source files.

A slight correction regarding my remarks about requires 3D CAD files for FS2 aircraft to be able to convert to FS4. You actually only need the aircraft's FS2 plugin generated Intermediate 3D Model files (.tgi file extension). These are not included in the user install package for the aircraft. Even Mr. Kaniewski does not include his 3D model source files or the .tgi files in his GitHub repository.

According to IPACS you can reuse the following FS2 files for the FS 4 converter tool:

You can leave the following files unchanged:

• Raw sound files (.wav)
• Raw texture files (.bmp, .png, .tif, …)
• Intermediate 3D model files (.tgi)
• Aircraft options file (option.tmc)
• Aircraft clickspots file (controls.tmd)

Updating Aircraft for Aerofly FS 4 | Aerofly FS

So the files missing in the user install package for the Do 27 (or any other aircraft end product) are:

The Raw texture files, Raw sound files, and Intermediate 3D model files The .tmc, .tmd files are part of the end user aircraft install package.

Here is the actual file list sorted by type that are in the FS4 Aircraft SDK DR400 folder which you run the FS2toFS4 converter tool on.

You just do not get these files in your standard end user Aircraft install folder.

Here is the Do27 installed aircraft files listing.

So no, you cannot run the FS4 aircraft converter on the Do27 folder.

Quote from Tomfa

Ok, are you sure? Well, guys like you should know that there is also an email address at IPACS

Sorry, I just thought you were just saying you knew how to make FS2 aircraft like the Do27 work in FS4 without requiring the original source files so I wanted to find out how that is possible since I had already read the Aerofly link on what needed to be done to do so and it did not seem possible using the already compiled end user installation files.

Msfs are losing customers hand over fist because slow load times /crashing ect i for one have left, if FS4 did more in the way of microlight they would gain much more, microlight industry in the UK is very bigbigger that people think, popular types skyranger, c42, savannah,foxbat,jabiru,rans to mention just a few.

Looks nice shame we cannot modifi a few from MSFS, and why arnt orbix or any other third party devolopers doing FS4, seem like it's dying before it's begun.

Such a shame as it could be the best flight sim ever, let's face it (VR hands) are brill, no one has even got anywhere near yet.

Can anyone build aircraft or aifields, a shed loads of airfields in the uK but not on the sim,

Quote from wyrleybird

...

Can anyone build aircraft or aifields, a shed loads of airfields in the uK but not on the sim,

There are already a few small airfields for UL in Denmark and North-West Germany, which usually fit the images well. I have already finished some for Wales and will upload them to Flight-Sim.org soon.