Hi,
then something else is messed up. Almost sounds like as if you are in the wrong flight phase for some reason. When I am in cruise the tod is fixed as it should be only in the descent and approach phase it is moving, but that is not really the top of descent, just the I'm leveling off here, continue your descent at this point if needed...
I'm looking into it.
Thanks for your replies guys i didn't realise it would have a performance hit on the sim,just want to take this opportunity to thank everyone connected with ipacs
& everyone who contributes advice & Content to the sim, It's greatly appreciated,the future's looking great for this sim
If it is done right it won't be an issue. The older system in the RC can't be used for all this though.
Contrails, vortices, condensation over wing, sound barrier condensation, smoke and tire smoke, YES PLEASE 
+ Rain and jet blast that throws water from the ground into the air (e.g. reversers or wheels)
Yes the RC series has smoke but it was a bit of a performance killer in my experience. I've been told the smoke didn't make it to the Aerofly FS 2 because of that. If it comes back it will have to be reprogrammed in a better way, using modern techniques. This just adds visually though, in terms of graphics Aerofly already looks quite good. There are other areas where we can improve which are more important right now, as you guessed.
Nevertheless, this could be another thing where the Aerofly engine could really shine. If it is done right and we have all these effects with very little performance hit it would be a good selling point I think, it just looks to cool and alive!
If Laminar still get can't get [autogen] right after all these years, then IPACS would/will struggle.
That is my biggest concern with autogen. The laminar guys are probably smart people and I don't know how much time was spend on that algorithm in total. But it has to be significant. If that is as good as it gets for a simulator that just relies on autogen than we are probably better off not chasing X-Plane. With more time spent, it probably can look better but is that worth it?
Maybe purchasing 3D models of existing cities or real life databases for the real world houses would be the better option. That way you get all blocks in the right position and in the correct height at least, no need to generate their position first and guess the buildings heights. And with that correct positioning and some good looking textures we could have automatically generated houses that are not completely generated from scratch or open street map roads. I think cultivation is what that is called and as far as I know that can already be seen in Innsbruck. And Innsbruck looks quite good in my opinion, I could live with that 
Hi Ed,
(Blame Bombardier...)
Currently there is no way to hide the yoke or tiller in the Q400. You can, however, assign buttons to the view move functions. I have mine set to the arrow keys: press forward to move the camera forward, left and right to move sideways, page up and down to much up and down. Just check your view control settings and remove any old arrow key assignments for other functions.
You can also move to the first officers camera and then look over and zoom in, though this isn't ideal either.
Internally I already prepared a bunch of yokes to be hidden and I might ask around if we can make this an official thing.
What a poor cockpit design by Boeing and Bombardier... Hiding important info behind the yoke. In a 747 you can't see the vertical profile all that well either... why would you put such a large thing in front of the PFD and ND... Also leaves no room for any food trays... Love the Airbus designs much better. But that is another topic.
Hi Mark,
there are multiple "top of descent" arrows in the A320. When you are at cruise altitude (ALT CRZ displayed on PFD) then the TOD should be a fixed point and I recently confirmed this in the Steam version. Once you are in the descent another arrow is shown, this indicates the next "top of descent" where the aircraft expects you to push the altitude button again to continue with your descent. This is of course dependent of your selected altitude but a blue level off arrow should mark the end of the descent and the white continue descent arrow, so to say, is right next to it.
Is this what you observe?
When you are in the descent the top of descent arrow (start descending arrow?) is moving when the selected altitude is changed. A blue level off arrow can be seen near it.
Why is he sitting in the wrong seat? What? First helicopter I've seen where the pilot sits on the left...
affs2 has no vfr terrain, so i would go with A380, B737-900, B787
or finish existing models before starting new ones? current are far from complete.
most models are available for other platforms, why not cooperating with the experts?
think about converting those to accelerate affs2's pipeline on real needs like nav, atc, ai, wx, fpl, ground ops, etc. 😯
Apart from maybe missing auto gen Aerofly has VFR scenery, the best looking if you ask me
Of course, finish the existing ones, that was just my personal wishlist . A simulator aircraft can never be finished 100%...
And yes, external add on developers can cover all of these aircraft, no default sim has all of the aircraft right away, that is where add ons come in
Oops sorry I thought the post was in PC FS2, same list though!
I just moved it over since you guys are probably all talking about the Aerofly FS 2 Desktop right now.
But I wanted to add my current list as well
My personal list for aircraft would be:
- Embraer 175, 190 maybe 145, CRJ 800 to 1000, MD 82 to 90, Boeing 737-500 to 900 NG (split scimitar ), Boeing 777-300, Boeing 787, Boeing 757, 767, Airbus A350, A330, A319 and A321, Bombardier CSeries 100 and 300, Gulfstreams (probably not happening 
), ATR 42 and 72, DC3, DC6,
Helicopters:
- V22 Osprey (that would be so cool), Bell 407, H135, H145 (EC), Bo 105, AS-350, UH1-D, NH90, MD902, RAH66 Comanche, AH-64 Apache, Tiger?, MD-500,...
Fighters:
- F35B (because we can), Mirage, Tornado, F14, Eurofighter, F16, Harrier
WWII as mentioned
T6 Texan, B2 Sprit, Blackbird, C5 Galaxy, Do228,...
And GA (and slightly bigger)
Cessna Caravan, Beechcraft Bonanza, Pilatus Porter, J3 Cub, DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-6 Twin Otter, PC-12, TBM 850, DA40, SR22, PLZ-104 Wilga, Huskey, Mooney,
And aerobatics:
Sbach 342, Yak54, Su31, Edge 540, MX2, MDM Fox,...
Gliders (as above)
Duo Discus, Arcus, LS8, Discus,...
Others:
Canadair CL-415, G21 Goose, Space Shuttle, drones
Light aircraft
Paraglider, Wingsuit, Parachuite, Trike, C42 (UL),
Here is mine that Jan recommended.
Regards,
Ray
And that does or still doesn't work for you?
Take note that you can easily make a pdf of the tutorial with the wiki-options on the right: I like my tutorials on good old fashioned paper so I exported the page as pdf which gave me a perfectly printable document which I just printed in glorious full color on the professional printer at work (only the best is good enough for anything Aerofly FS 2 related
). Can't wait to give it a try but until I can do that I can at least read the tutorial a few times.
I tested that as well, the PFD throws off the formatting a bit (pictures on the right now span the whole width) but it is printable in this format. Don't know who would print 25 pages for the intro and another 40 for the tutorial
Btw, the two pages are linked in the main menu of the wiki on the left but here are both links:
Intro: https://www.aerofly.com/aerofly_fs_2/d…400_flight_deck
Tutorial: https://www.aerofly.com/aerofly_fs_2/d…flight_tutorial
V-speeds: https://www.aerofly.com/aerofly_fs_2/d…raft:dash8-q400
I think it has to be a folder with scenery folder inside it... so you would to for example:
<[string8][extra_user_folder][E:\aerofly\scenery]>and move your scenery inside that "aerofly" folder on E
later on in the aerofly folder also the subfolder "aircraft" may be read?
Oh dear, landing at Bern (BELP) in foggy conditions. What an aproach with all those trees just before the final! Have to disengage the AP pretty early on to get a steeper glideslope in order not run out of runway.
You should try it, so much fun
I have and I even tried auto-land back then and I think it worked... Not sure if it still does...
Wow! excellent tutorial. I'm just trying now to follow it. Thanks for the support!.
It is certainly very thorough! It looks like the Q400 can satisfy even the most study-oriented simmer, at least for a while.
Thanks for the excellent tutorial.
Awesome, great job. It wil take a while before i will endevour upon the Q400, first taming the Bus. But then this one will be next for sure.
Wow, great tutorial! This plane seems to be a lot 'deeper' and advanced than the Airbus!
Thank you guys, this means a lot to me
I wrote it for 6 days straight, though the entire weekend actually.
The big difference between the Q400 and A320 is the great automation of the Airbus. Don't let the number of click events fool you into thinking the A320 is less complex, it is quite advanced as well, it's just hidden underneath a lot of automation to reduce pilot work load.
To stop the full screen mode simply change the entry at the top of the main.mcf in c:\users\documents\aerofly fs2
from "true" to "false".
Or just use the in game option in the graphics settings... It's in the resolution selection, just press left or right and you will see "windowed mode" as an option. No need to manually edit any files.
I'm not sure if I can follow the need of this discussion as there is no Spitfire in Aerofly FS2 and this aerodynamic effect can't be simply applied to any other plane.
Considering that e.g. the Q400 and the C172 apparently simulate a moveable stabilizer instead of the correct elevator trim, I'd be already happy if the basics would be correct
Stabilizers are fixed (more or less, they have few mm movement as in real world due to bending etc.)
Further to these interesting suggestions / ideas we're sharing here, I'd say tha Yo-Yo gave the DCS user community the decision between implementing the effect of deflecting the flaps in the Spitfire.
For stick fixed, there should actually be a slight pitching up tendency, as it happens in IL-2 Battle of Staingrad, while in DCS as the flaps are lowered we can see the virtual stick moving fwd, and users with a FF joystick will see it also deflect fwd.
The V-Pilot then has to pull the stick to counter the resulting pitching down moment.
This appears to me as a better solution, even for non-FF joysticks, becasue it agrees with the RW effect. All pilot notes for the Spitfire report the pitching down tendency, and a need to increase the force on the stick to avoid it. In IL-2, for instance, since there is no virtual stick deflection, the end result is actually a slight pitching up...
As I said, two sides... If I completely remove my joystick spring DCS would simulate it incorrectly and IL-2 would simulate it correctly.
When it comes to maximum deflections, how toes DCS get around the fact that they just shifted the center position and I still have full movement up an down?
If before adding flaps the stick was neutral in the virtual cockpit and now it's further forward, what happens if I push forward all the way (slowly) does the movement stop before my real joystick hits the mechanical stop?
What happens if I pull up? Do I still have full elevator up authority, now that the virtual center is forward and my mechanical stop would be hit before the virtual one?
i dont think almdudl is in need for lessons. i perfectly understand what he was trying say, why dont you Jet?
To me it sounded like he thought you could just copy paste code into Aerofly (even if it is old technology and he doesn't want that) and it would work like plug and play. And I doubt that you even could. The rendering engine of Aerofly is quite unique (hence the crazy performance) so even if you could add something on to it from external it would probably ruin the platform.
That is all I wanted to say.
Yes we want new technology and breathtaking night lighting and clouds and clouds with landing lights on them and cities that illuminate clouds from below or a thin fog layer over the city that you can see though that washes out everything, street lights, taxiway lights, apron flood lights, all of that
Jan, could you relatively easily setup an option where you could output that to a variable that a force feedback system would use?
Look at the cessna.tmd file and search for "SenderElevatorForceFree"... So there is already something like that in there. With the external dll from the developer tools you should be able to receive that message and do what ever you want with that force... Probably in newtons... Modify it so that it outputs as real force feedback...
Yeah, we have a similar thread content over there, we should maybe stay with this one. My fault, since I started over there and only noticed afterwards that we have a totally new thread just about that.
