• I want to keep a good framerate. These options are nice, but the danger would be that the game becomes too "resource hungry" for tablets and phones.

    Agreed. Out of that list, the ones I really want are:

    2. A/I traffic
    5. Clouds
    8. More regions, no use for the A320/737 for 100 nm flights

    Clouds and Regions are my two biggest wishes.

    • Official Post

    Hi donka,

    And with a multi-player environment, we could do this:

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Just imagine clouds looking that photo-realistic and wing vortices!
    I wouldn't even need scenery to have fun with them :D

    If we don't focus on instruments we should at least boost the fun factor :D


  • The visual improvements I would like, would improve the immersive realism. If one is passing a richly textured mountain it could be 1000 feet high or it could be 4000 feet high. Put some true scale trees on the mountain and the scale clicks in like a 3 D or a focused image, some near a runway do the same thing, a bit like a (non bland) aeroplane waiting at a holding point, the true size is sensed.
    FSX has rubbish giant trees everywhere, even close to the runway threshold, it actively ruins realism.

    • Official Post


    yes but the taller the tree the less trees there are. I'd go for atmospheric scattering and slight blue-ish fog to create a sense of scale. And of course: cumulus clouds + shadows. Because the clouds base it at a nearly constant hight one could easily depick the mountains that are taller due to the distance of the clouds above them and their ridge line.
    Also: those little air bubbles of a cloud have about the same size independend of the clouds scale. A small cumulus cloud would maybe have one bubble and a gianormous cumulu nimbus thunderstorm would have houndrets.

    [Blocked Image: http://hdwpics.com/images/1800A432AFC6/Towered-Cumulus.jpg]

    To the left of the picture there are smaller cumulus clouds and on the right there is a bigger one. Look at how the shadow of the air bubbles creates about the same half circle.


  • I like the new layout for changing view, but I think it could do with buttons to change as well.
    I think buttons for changing flaps would be also be good; this new system is okay, but a bit fiddly. On planes that have lots of flap settings, the list can be almost as long as the screen, maybe it would be better to have a second row so all the settings are easy to get to.
    Do people with real flying experience think that the new stalling is realistic? My only experience is with RC models, and stalling them is more dramatic and harder to recover from than on aerofly.

  • [quote='Trisnpod','https://www.ipacs.de/community/foru…32638#post32638']
    Do people with real flying experience think that the new stalling is realistic?/QUOTE]
    The big divide in stalling is how the plane behaves when the airflow over the wing breaks, some mush down and others drop a wing and almost look for a spin. The Corsair behaves well and drops the wing violently as it should, the Cessna should give a stronger wing drop but it is so hard to stall that realism is not an issue. The airliners should mush, they have huge vertical stabilisers and only drop a wing if they are too slow in asymetric flight but that is not really stalling.
    The problem is with lack of control at low speed in the sim. Control could be increased overall with reduced authority at high speed where aerodynamic loads on the control surfaces inhibits their movement, powered controls have variable synthetic feel applied.

  • Do people with real flying experience think that the new stalling is realistic?

    The "2" version .35 stalls are really much improved, I was unfair about the Cessna stall, it is very good now. The "FS" mush-stall singles are absent in "2". The PA-28 Cherokee series all have benign predictable stalls and the Robin has strong wash-out on the outer wing panels which unloads the outer wing in the cruise for lower induced drag (at the reduced angle of attack wing tip). This guarantees that the stall develops over the inner wing panels first with attached air over the outer panels well into the stall.
    The only fault now is that aileron can be used in the stall and the sim will even stall-drop the up aileron wing! Try that in real life and a spin will be really close, almost flicking towards the down aileron.

  • Hi,

    from my experience I guess that the aileron-in-stall behavior is not correct because the adverse yaw effect also isn't realistic yet, or better said it cannot be directly influenced by parameters in the tmd file. I've spoken to the developers about the stall and adverse yaw and they would like to improve it but because of the lack of customers who would even notice that they better spend their time in other, "cooler" features for the majority of the users. To be honest the response to rudder is also not the best in a stall yet. After the stall point everything is fine, before the stall everything is almost perfect but in the stall itself... "nahh..." (don't understand me wrong here! The stall is still way better than in FSX or X-Plane, its just not quite there where Condor already is in terms of stall and entering spins)

    I actually tried aileron in stall in a couple of gliders in the real life. Its not as bad as everyone sais, at least for the aircraft I flew and tested it in. Some aircraft showed reduced aileron effectiveness and of course intense adverse-yaw. I never encountered a bad wing drop to the downwards deflected aileron, which leads me to the conclusion that the drop in lift coefficient and increase in drag is not that bad at stall speed. When you increase the angle of attack another 5 degrees or so on only one wing, than you get a nice wing drop and probably a spin if not countered right away. I've not tested full up elevator and full aileron yet though, only in a side-slip with opposite rudder, which was quite stable for most aircraft.
    When I want to spin I only use the rudder to get in and out of it. Ailerons in or agains spin direction had not that much effect upon entering the spin from my experience, and leaving it - depends on the aircaft. Some aircraft like ailerons into the spin, some against it to get in and out faster. But if an aircraft is able to spin than it gets there even without aileron and if it does not enter a very flat spin you should be able to get out without ailerons and only with counter rudder - elevator neutral. If the aircraft is too front heavy you probably also won't get into a stall with ailerons against or into the stall. They do the wing drop just fine, enough to bring you way of course, but they just drop right out.

    Of course you should know what you are doing when trying it, have enough altitude, check airspace for traffic, read the manual, have done spins with a flight instructor before and tested it in a simulator dozens of times, etc.