Posts by Jet-Pack (IPACS)

    Jet-Pack - could you let us know where the thinking is up to in IPACS regarding in cockpit reading options? Do you have any ideas in development?

    In the C172 on the right seat there is a tablet device with a map on it. Obvious that that is some kind of test to get an electronic flight back in the cockpit.

    I'm also just guessing that that may be the plan but I don't have all info here either.

    Regards,

    Jan

    It sounds like we have different understandings of the slew function here.

    A) slewing the aircraft into a position

    B) move around the camera on it's own in relation to the world, independant of the aircraft

    For the first one you actually need to move the aircraft to a new position, for the second one, the one I'd use during development of a scenery, an aircraft is not required.

    So please elaborate your thoughts in more detail for me here.

    What are you hoping to get out of a "slew function" (moving the aircraft to a new location)?

    So far I got:

    • Taking a specific screenshot from a precise location that looks good
    • starting a flight from one freely adjustable location for making a video for example or start an approach. This might already be possible to some extend using the location dialog, so what are the things that would hold you back from using the location dialog for, say, putting yourself at the beginning of the approach?
    • maybe testing the scenery with the aircraft, e.g. flying under a bridge, testing the collision with objects, IDK, give me more examples please :)

    And for the other function, having a free camera to move around the world, I've noted these occasions:

    • setting up a spotter-view, e.g. at the end of the runway, to make a scenic departure video
    • explore detailed scenery like the inside of a terminal building
    • walk around of the aircraft
    • approaching the aircraft as if driving in a vehicle, getting some amazing shots from the birds eye view
    • scenery development, checking out certain areas, how they load, testing the frame-rate

    Few other views that could be important

    • freely flying around the aircraft to check out the cabin, fly out on the wing and look back
    • pan-around of the aircraft but with the option to get closer (without adjusting field of view)
    • air-to-air view, simulated chase plane or wing-man to get those nice break-off for formation flight shots

    Also noted: smoother camera handling in the cockpit, softer/delayed response to key inputs and mouse panning

    And then there are what you might call "camera effects" which actually should be coming from the physics engine:

    • shaking of the airframe on touchdown or on rough surface
    • turbulence of the air moving around the aircraft but letting your head relativly still for the most part (if you sit in an airplane in turbulence observe how the aircraft moves first then the heads of the passengers are pulled with it)
    • engine vibrations and periodic propeller wash or jet blast that makes the aircraft shake
    • aerodynamic vibrations like flap vibrations and shaking, stall buffeting, etc.
    • g-forces on the pilot that move the camera (already sort of implemented) and maybe red/black out

    Feel free to add to these items, we'll consider all of them


    Regards,

    Jan

    Looking great! I myself however would find it a bit odd to release the very first aircraft for AFS2 with deeper systems without the option to manually start it... I think this will also be frowned upon in the sim community. As I said this will be the very first 'deeper' airplane (don't what other word to use for it) so everyone will be watching it and if you can't start it yourself I do think some will think that's a bad start (no pun intended). I personally would LOVE showing off this plane to all my fellow simmers but I don't know if I would do that without a start procedure

    That is a valid point, adding engine start would be a lot more viral.

    Cold and dark is a lot more work though. The way we simulate it that would mean full electric and hydraulic systems or we would have to fake it for the time being. Sure we can make everything dark but then it won't be realsitic when you just put one battery one for example. It's almost easier to implement the real world electric network and then have the consumers fail when their electric bus looses power. We will get there some point but I don't think it would be a good idea to wait that long.

    If the Q400 is at the same quality level as the A320 - then it's more enough to start work out on this beauty. Then we'll receive updates anytime ... when it's done. It also lowers the pressure on the developer.

    It's called "Early Access". And I'm a fan of that...... :thumbup: :)

    Yes it's pretty much up there with the A320 and LJ45, in some areas it exceeds them. Compared to the current Steam version the LJ45, A320, B747 will get quite the improvement with the upcoming autopilot update, the 737 and C90 are also updated but aren't as much of a flag-ship for the Aerofly I think.

    So not only will the Q400 be above average (by quite a bit), the average of airliner functionality is also improved.

    Dear Aerofly fans,

    In October I released a couple of screenshots of our upcoming Bombardier Dash8 Q400 (short just "Q400"), here is the link to the old thread: Bombardier Dash 8Q-400.

    Back then it looked like the release was just around the corner but the work was interrupted in order to get the software development kit (SDK) out. Sorry for getting your hopes up high and then don't release soon. But that is the risk I took when I uploaded the screenshots, I just wanted to share the process on the Q400 and didn't know it would be pushed back that much. As I mentioned back then the turboprop engine was pretty much the only thing missing. In the last months we picked up the Q400 right where we left off and implemented a new turboprop engine specifically for the Q400. It features a simulated two stage compressor together with core turbines plus the power turbine that drives the large propeller. The basic physics for that are working pretty great at the moment, We have some fine tuning left todo (e.g. improve the FADEC) but that is all manageable, apart from that we're pretty much done with that aircraft.

    The shut down engine on the screenshot below is the current state of my development version. We have not yet decided weather the initial release of the Q400 will feature engine start as well but we all agree that that would be pretty awesome. In the engine physics we would need to adjust a few things so that we can actually start the engine from zero rotation speed. We need to hook up a starter to the core turbine's shaft and then program the FADEC (engine conroller) just right to that it doesn't flood the engine. It's a bit more work for us, so maybe you can comment below if you would like to see such a feature from day one and if you would want wait just a little bit longer for that? :) Personally I'd love to implement the engine start procedure first

    The Q400 has quite a bit of system depth, here is an excerpt of its features

    (this list is far from complete, just the things that just now popped back into my head)

    • engine derates (MTOP, NTOP, MCL, MCR, RDC TOP) using condition levers and engine control push buttons
    • reduced propeller rotation speed for landing (REDUCED NP LANDING)
    • fully feathering propeller, reverse thrust
    • all system pages and display swaps
    • navigation source selection and HSI select (+DUAL FD on ILS approach) to make the autopilot follow the FMS, ILS or VOR inputs from either pilot or copilot primary flight display
    • HSI on the navigation display to pre-tune the ILS approach (see screenshots below)
    • ARCDU (audio radio control display unit) with multiple pages (including the expanded pages), option to disable the automatic FMS tuning with the knob (ON/BOTH/FMS)
    • set v-speeds
    • DH/MDA selection
    • caution and warning annunciations for several warnings and cautions (will be expanded over time)
    • gear warning, beta range warning horn (when levers are below flight idle in flight), takeoff warning (+test), elevator trim warning, altitude alert, stick shaker,...
    • ice protection panel with automatic or manual selection of the airframe parts to deice
    • annunciator and advisory light test (screenshots below)
    • a lot of push buttons are moving when clicked (the other aircraft have that as well in my developer version - will be updated soon)
    • pretty much every button in the flight deck is implemented in my developer version, the ones that aren't functioning yet will likely be disabled in the release but that isn't certain yet. Maybe you'll get to click everything, too
    • stick pusher for stall protection
    • sound is actually pretty nice and has quite a bit of features. Also a lot of audible warnings :D
    • handling is very nice as well, it's a lot of fun to fly, has noticeable prop-wash effects as well, straight takeoffs and climb outs actually require a bit of rudder and aileron trim
    • autopilot is simulated accurately and features almost all modes (e.g. VOR OS, VOR capture annunciation is missing but VOR mode itself works, so nothing is really missing except maybe MLS but that is rarely used IRL and we'd need to implement procedures and receivers for that first)

    The FMS will be implemented later, once we tackle it for all aircraft. So no changing of the flight plan from within the cockpit just yet.

    Electric and hydraulics systems are not implemented yet but probably will be in the future.

    Disclaimer

    The screenshots below are taken from my developer version that doesn't have all required features for the scenery, my trees are missing for example. These are work in progress (WIP) development screenshots that may contain certain mistakes or bugs, the final product may differ. Not all of the features shown below might make it to the public version on first release.

    Engine data is not fine-tuned yet, might be off a bit on the screenshots but we are not done there yet.

    Shut down engines:

    Annunciator and advisory light test in action:

    Taxiing out to the runway (this is OrbX Innsbruck but in my developer version I don't have all the new scenery features yet)

    Ready for takeoff:

    Lift off, pushed the "NAV" button on the autopilot to follow the route (FMS as nav-source required)

    DUAL FD - CAT 2 ILS approach (this thing can't do CAT3 with autopilot or do a fully automatic landing sadly - it has only one autopilot, two would be required)

    Initiating a go-around by pressing the GA-button (assignable in control settings)

    ARCDU, expanded page for the ATC/TCAS: line select the squawk and push "EXP" to get there...

    HSI is displayed on the navigation display so that you could continue to follow the FMS but can also already monitor the NAV receiver, nice handy feature!

    All in all there is a lot to play with in the Q400. So much that we will need a thorough tutorial for it perhaps.

    Regards,
    Jan

    Yes that is one downside of the current way of creating scenery. In FSX you can take the default airport and change it's taxiways and signs and runways and approaches and so forth, too.

    The plus side is nobody can steal your Aerofly airport and publish it in another sim and the scenery is smaller in size and can be loaded faster. For example you don't have to generate the vertices and triangles first, you just push them up to the graphics card, done.-

    Runways are given the numbers based on their magnetic orientation but since the magnetic north pole moves constantly runways have to be given different numbers every now and then. That explains why it might be 10/28 and not 09/27. But since that airport doesn't seem to have a second runway the "R" and "L" don't make any sense. This might be mistake or oversight.

    A bug would be caused by the programmed algorithm (e.g. not loading the airport even if content would be installed), this problem isn't caused by any algorithm ergo it's technically not a bug.

    Thank you for reporting this to us,

    Jan

    All your replies so far were to argue why we should not need it...

    Hi Antoine,

    We need a camera to fly around and look at certain details, as mentioned before such a camera is already implemented in our developer versions so it might be easy to make it public. The handling of the camera isn't totally easy that's why it's probably not in the official version yet. That dev.-camera saves it's position during sessions so you can exit out of the sim and can resume the dev-cam at the exact same position as before. No need to fly or slew back to the position.

    A slew function for the entire aircraft isn't actually needed I think. I'd rather see more positions on the map to start from (e.g. downwind, base, long/short final, beginning of the approach, start at ramp/gate/parking position, start on hold short line, start after pushback and prior to taxi, prior top of descent, at 10k during descent, etc).

    Regards,

    Jan

    We will adress this in a future update. Right now it's not really worth creating an intelligent algorithm to steer around the mountains when we have real world approaches from a database lined up for development. As ATC is currently in development features like realistic approaches will come automatically.

    For now just use the selected modes, I've seen plenty videos where pilots in the real world do exactly that in Innsbruck.

    I've actually not seen a fully managed approach into Innsbruck RWY 08 yet, if you have a video please share it with us :D

    Cheers,

    Jan

    Wow that looks truly amazing. At first I was a bit surprised that he used oxygen, because he didn't look THAT high. But I forgot the ground is already kinda high, and at 17000ft I'd use oxygen, too, for sure.

    I'd love to see these clouds in Aerofly :D The weather looks almost perfect for gliding, too. The thermals look to be strong clouds are indicating them very nicely. The cloud streets could be a little bit longer though :D He also mentions there's no place to land, 240 miles away from home, I'd like that as a challenge :D

    Regards,
    Jan

    The torque effects can be adjusted in the tmd file of the corsair. Change the propwash rotation values for example

    Do you maybe mean the inertia when you go from idle to full power on the ground? The actual inertia of the prop spinning up and the engine coming up to its revolutions? Once the governor kicks in the rpm shouldn't really change at all, only if it hits the full fine limit, then the RPM should start to drop at idle power... The governor's target speed could be made slower, then you'd have a slower response when you pull the lever. However the governor itself has to operate very quickly, otherwise you'd get into overspeed conditions if you applied power to quickly, then all the constant speed governing fails.

    Regards,
    Jan