According to Simbrief, we use passenger numbers and weight. Even the ZFW value.
We could add that to Aerofly FS as well. But do you just enter that into the MCDU as given by SimBrief or do you customize it, if so how do you set the passengers? Slider? Random? Based on real world data?
We could add that to Aerofly FS as well. But do you just enter that into the MCDU as given by SimBrief or do you customize it, if so how do you set the passengers? Slider? Random? Based on real world data?
Simbrief automatically adjusts the number of passengers and calculates the total weight of the cargo. We enter the total weight, excluding ZFW, into the "payload" section of Aerofly. We also enter the ZFW value into the MCDU field. We also get the V1, VR, and V2 speed values from Simbrief and input them into MCDU.
Simbrief automatically adjusts the number of passengers and calculates the total weight of the cargo. We enter the total weight, excluding ZFW, into the "payload" section of Aerofly. We also enter the ZFW value into the MCDU field. We also get the V1, VR, and V2 speed values from Simbrief and input them into MCDU.
Do you know how they calculate the V-Speeds? How do you know they are applicable to the specific aircraft in Aerofly FS?
There are many differences even for just A320-200 aircraft, some have higher max takeoff weights than others, some have different thrust ratings, older engines and so on. In the real world you have to be really careful to select the exact aircraft type and parameters for the accurate v-speed calculation.
Do you know how they calculate the V-Speeds? How do you know they are applicable to the specific aircraft in Aerofly FS?
There are many differences even for just A320-200 aircraft, some have higher max takeoff weights than others, some have different thrust ratings, older engines and so on. In the real world you have to be really careful to select the exact aircraft type and parameters for the accurate v-speed calculation.
We already select the aircraft type in Simbrief.
The system even shows how much fuel is left on the plane at each waypoint. I manually reduce the fuel accordingly.
Display MoreI've deleted off topic discussions about Navigraph and AIRAC update... Please stay on topic!
Our goal should be to improve the Aerofly FS route planning and make it faster and more realistic for every user, not just those that have a desktop PC and have SimBrief installed.
So what does SimBrief do for route generation specifically that you want to have in Aerofly FS?
Is it the enroute airways or better SID/STAR selection?
Or is it a better route summary?
Please defined what "more realism" means to you in this context, give us your personal priorities of what is currently missing in the route planner that you absolutely need and then continue with features that make it more convenient. You already mentioned weather specific routing, quick but realistic route creation, payload suggestions and fuel calculation.
Both, I'd say, and regarding the computer issue, I don't own one, I'm mobile. Well, about priorities and what's missing is only the flight plan import. Think about it, if you want To make it faster and more realistic, importing plans is the right approach.
Reasons:
1- It's much less time spent than manually planning the route, like I imagine everyone does.
2- Manually planning a route from London to New York, stop by stop, would take almost as long as the actual flight. Importing data is what makes long-distance flights viable and fun for gamers.
3- By importing a flight plan from external tools (such as SimBrief), the simulator can "force" the drawing of the correct route, ensuring that you fly the real path even if the waypoint does not appear in the search.
4- It's also important for those who like to do flights with legs, for example: PVG-AKL-EZE. Having the files ready makes it possible To broaden the scope of the simulation.
All SIDs, STARs and approaches and waypoints are real, just from the past.
Yes, yes, I understand. They are indeed real, but don't you think we should update the procedures?
Display MoreBoth, I'd say, and regarding the computer issue, I don't own one, I'm mobile. Well, about priorities and what's missing is only the flight plan import. Think about it, if you want To make it faster and more realistic, importing plans is the right approach.
Reasons:
1- It's much less time spent than manually planning the route, like I imagine everyone does.
2- Manually planning a route from London to New York, stop by stop, would take almost as long as the actual flight. Importing data is what makes long-distance flights viable and fun for gamers.
3- By importing a flight plan from external tools (such as SimBrief), the simulator can "force" the drawing of the correct route, ensuring that you fly the real path even if the waypoint does not appear in the search.
4- It's also important for those who like to do flights with legs, for example: PVG-AKL-EZE. Having the files ready makes it possible To broaden the scope of the simulation.
The requirement for 1, 2, 3 and 4 all magically disappear if Aerofly FS is smart enough to plan a full route realistically. And it would work on all platforms...
Yes, yes, I understand. They are indeed real, but don't you think we should update the procedures?
Sure, if it's affordable that would be nice to have. But not as long as the pricing is more than 40$ per user per year. That would increase the app price by a factor of 10x or more.
The requirement for 1, 2, 3 and 4 all magically disappear if Aerofly FS is smart enough to plan a full route realistically. And it would work on all platforms...
Excuse me, but what did you mean by that?
Excuse me, but what did you mean by that?
If Aerofly FS already plans the route then
1) not more time spent to manually plan route than in external tool
2) planning a long route would not take long
3) import not needed, because waypoints already set, no conflicting databases
4) stopovers could be added or routes could be quickly generated for each leg, so no files needed.
If Aerofly FS already plans the route then
1) not more time spent to manually plan route than in external tool
2) planning a long route would not take long
3) import not needed, because waypoints already set, no conflicting databases
4) stopovers could be added or routes could be quickly generated for each leg, so no files needed.
Oh, I see what you mean. We need an Option that can add waypoints between the SIDs and STARs. Would be a beginning. Like a „find path“ Option in the Navigation Menu. It automatically adds waypoints enroute with the actual existing airac. But it needs to follow airways. So it doesn’t simply add any waypoint that’s close to the route.
I really like the menu where I can choose an airport and select a flight in AF. But I don’t like that this flight comes
1. With the plane on the runway ready for take off instead of cold and dark
2. With simply no waypoints. Just departure and arrival airports. No real selected SIDs and STARs or routing
Oh, I see what you mean. We need an Option that can add waypoints between the SIDs and STARs. Would be a beginning. Like a „find path“ Option in the Navigation Menu. It automatically adds waypoints enroute with the actual existing airac. But it needs to follow airways. So it doesn’t simply add any waypoint that’s close to the route.
I really like the menu where I can choose an airport and select a flight in AF. But I don’t like that this flight comes1. With the plane on the runway ready for take off instead of cold and dark
2. With simply no waypoints. Just departure and arrival airports. No real selected SIDs and STARs or routing
1. Yes, I'd also like to see an option to select the parking position next instead of jumping right in.
2. Imagine the route was fully planned, fuel passengers and cargo all set, that is our goal.
1. Yes, I'd also like to see an option to select the parking position next instead of jumping right in.
2. Imagine the route was fully planned, fuel passengers and cargo all set, that is our goal.
Okay, and do you guys have any ideas on how this could be done? I personally thought the idea was cool, haha.
But why do you want to import the flight plan in the first place?
The game don’t have airway 😔
The game don’t have airway 😔
It's less work to just add airways than it is to add airways AND add file import.
It's less work to just add airways than it is to add airways AND add file import.
So please add airways. Even if the Airac is outdated, having airways may give us a better feeling of planing routes more Professional within the AF Navigation system and without external apps. 🙂
It's less work to just add airways than it is to add airways AND add file import.
IPACs, please understand us because I want airways, see!!
This is just 8 airways (OTHH>VHHH) ≈3300NM with Airway!!!
But when you don’t have airway:
simple 48 fix, 225 letters to write!!
That's why we want airways for the game. 😔🙏🏻
I believe that they’ve got the message now. And I would be totally fine with the airways support. As a developers point of view I also get the wish to stay in its own box and getting better with the own possibilities instead of opening the own work to other parties.
I created this route in SimBrief and the result for SID, AEROVIA, and STAR is this. Now, if you try searching in SimBrief, it's not there. There are some waypoints when going to another airport (like SBBR, SBGO, etc.), and also, I can't create the route like that in AFS Mobile; it's very difficult, hahaha.
