AeroFly 2

    Thank you all for your feedback. We knew that our new Aerofly 2 would somehow polarise existing users of aerofly FS.

    However, as we stated before, it was necessary for us to release a new version and not an update to aerofly FS. The internal changes between Aerofly 2 and aerofly FS are just enormous, something most users won't notice right away. Aerofly 2 is now a whole earth flight simulator and has no more limits with respect to where you want to fly. You will see some of these changes in upcoming updates next year.

    You will also see updates to our new navigation features. But keep in mind here, that most of our users are not familiar with ILS / VOR at all but still want to use experience this feature. So what you see in the current version has been done on purpose, knowing that we won't make every user happy. We didn't want to overburden users by making navigation 100% real. Keep in mind that most users use flight simulator on mobile devices different compared to a desktop computer.

    We will consider adding a HUD in one of the next updates. Our experience is that if users get used to our flight info bar, they use it quite naturally.

    So Aerofly deleted my post that firmly, but truthfully, in my opinion, criticised their latest offering. Hmmm. rather than come back with a reply, they simply deleted my post! it's called, Censorship! Thanks guys. You know, I already bought your first Aerofly app and paid for extra addon aircraft, so I'm not exactly a hater. Anyway, now I know where you guys are at. Anything you don't like, we get told to either 'Not Mention it', or you simply delete posts.

    I'm certainly not condoning censorship and we are all entitled to our opinions but I thought your post in general was a bit harsh and given iPacs own these forums, I can understand why they wouldn't be happy to have 'negative advertising' on their own website. These are support forums after all and some of your comments were assumptions and not necessarily based on fact. It's the same reason why they wouldn't want competing products posted in these forums and is listed under the forum rules.

    If you want to help improve the product, constructive criticism makes more sense. The app isn't perfect but as someone who enjoys mobile flight sims, I'm hoping these forums will help shape the future of this app.

    We do reserve the rights to remove postings. That does not mean we delete any posting that contains critisim ( just look through older postings ), but its rather how one writes his/her posting. If we do not remove those postings, things get out of hand quickly. Thats another reason why we don't want to see other simulators mentioned here, either positive or negative.

    I love aerofly2. The best sim out there for my iPad Mini Retina.

    Love graphics, specially at night! It has the best panels.

    Would like to have in future updates:
    1. Sound of tires when landing
    2. Landing lights of aircraft on runway at night
    3. Would like more maps or regions (example: New York, Caribbean, Las Vegas)
    4. Hope to have more aircrafts (maybe a Pilatus, Cirrus SR22, helicopter)
    5. Would like to hear ATC
    6. When landing the A320, would like to hear altitude annunciator (500, 300, so on)

    Edited 2 times, last by drftorres (December 19, 2014 at 2:36 AM).

    One thing regarding shadows - as we come in to land, the shadows can help judge where you are but they don't meet up with the wheels on the tarmac. This is a little disorientating as it should give a visual reference to where you are in relation to the runway and it appears as if you have landed before you were expecting to. If the shadows for the wheels were present then they should meet the wheels as the plane touches down on the tarmac.

    The following pictures show one approach into runway 11 at KOAK. NNote the frequencies in the upper right corner of the NAV display.

    ILS should be somewhere, but nothing going on.

    There it comes! Finally!

    ...and things get interesting on short final.

    drftorres: (I think on your picture it is actually not aeroflys fault. You see the localizer of the left runway and right one doesn't have an ils.)

    CORRECTION: it is aeroflys fault. 28R has an ILS.

    @IPACS

    Quote from IPACS Support

    Our experience is that if users get used to our flight info bar, they use it quite naturally


    Somewhere at IPACS, someone is designing the most beautiful cockpits, that turn out to be the closest you can get on a mobile device to real aircraft cockpits. The layouts of real cockpits are the products of decades of extensive research of how people perceive complex information, done by aviation engineers, behaviourologists and other experts on professions my iPads dictionary doesn't contain. Just by mimiking the real cockpits, the guy who designs the cockpits for aerofly takes all this wisdom and brings the underlying concepts to the app user, who now would be able to be as close as possible to reality when he looks at his virtual panel and wants to find out what his plane is doing.

    Would. If there wouldn't be the college of our cockpit designer, who runs the customer underestimation department.

    He found out that users today are often to short tempered to learn how to use a complex program, that they often try for 5 minutes and then trash the app after failing at the first intellectual obstacle, leaving a one star rating in the store. Starting to look for ways how the app could be improved in this regard, he found out that perceiving information on a handheld device with a high resolution display works differently from an aircraft cockpit and, first off all, offers some possibilities you often don't have in the real world. The ability of the retina displays, to show complex graphics on ridiculously small spaces, makes it possible to put almost everything that the instruments show in something really small AND make it even more accessible and easy to understand then in the panel, where the guys I mentioned above, decades away from a retina displays being held 30 cm from the face, worked their asses of to achieve a good presentation of the relevant information.

    So the inventor of our flight info bar sounds like a pretty awesome dude, who just used advancing technology to free us all from looking at these stupid panels the other idiot spend months building in CAD, and thereby made us better (virtual) pilots. Right?

    Wrong. Somehow we all appreciate the work of the cockpit designer. That is because we bought a flight SIMULATION. We want to be as close to the feeling of sitting in a cockpit as possible. It gives us confidence and thereby fun to see that we can control the plane the way it was designed, not by IPACS, but by Boeing, Airbus, Cessna or Schleicher. This feeling of immersion, created by an 3D cockpit, is the main selling point of aerofly!

    But regarding this goal, the info bar is not an aid, but an obstacle. As you stated, the player will get used to using it instead of the panel. The part of the brain, that is responsible for turning information into action does not ask the consciousness if it prefers the tiny watchfaces with their little numbers and the numerous hands or the big, clean info bar. It takes what works best for it, and that is the info bar. That is what happens when you say that people use the bar naturally.

    Guess what I download from the App Store when I want this kind of instrumentation. It has the genome of a potato translated in XCode as an graphics engine and BECAUSE OF THAT, cockpits on the level of detail that you have were never considered. To make it work, they started with something way better then your info bar right away: the HUD view, that was also demanded by some on this thread, is the current stage of the real world development of presenting information to a pilot. But it isn't as close to the real world as your cockpits.

    You would have a huge selling point with your great cockpits. But the way it is right now, you put an info bar in my field of view and turn the panel into dead display real estate.

    Get rid of it. Those who need it will like a HUD view better. Those who don't need it want to use the autopilot without giving up the upper quarter of their display. The fact that people use it naturally is the reason it is an unrepairebly flawed concept.


    Jonas

    Folks, please open a new posting, it really helps us to stay on track here. For example: Topic runway names of Oakland International are wrong, or please give us a HUD.

    We have to confirm, the runways for Oakland are not correct. Thank you for reporting this, we will fix this in the next update!

    Hoinz (Jonas): Thank you for your detailed posting :), we really appreciate it. We would love to discuss the details further, but using the forum is not the right place for it. We really should introduce a user meeting in the future, so we can talk. Don't worry, we do have HUD on our list for one of the next updates! However, you don't have some of the user feedback we have and our decision for the flight info bar is a direct result of this. But you can expect to see the HUD real soon.