Yes, which airport is this?
And do you have the global scenery streaming enabled or not?
Yes, which airport is this?
And do you have the global scenery streaming enabled or not?
The pitch trim rate of the MCAS is about as fast as it should be. It's not all that fast according to the documentation that I found. Manual pitch trim would be faster.
Fixing it internally does not mean it rolls out with the next update. We just merged all my aircraft changes when the max was added and any reports after that can take several months until they are fixed. I don't yet know when the next merge round comes up and when my fixes will be included.
Please be patient and don't repeat the same bug reports in several threads. It just obscures new bug reports by other users.
The indicated green numbers are the thrust rating indication. Depending on your desired airspeed and your current payload and fuel level you will need a different amount of actual thrust. That's why there is a margin between what the engines could do (green rating CRZ %) and what is currently needed to maintain the target airspeed (current N1%)
Again, I'd like to ask because the app is getting updated often: Can these positions be added? Without it, these two HD airports are useless. I don't think this is very hard to add so I'd like to ask you if it can be done over-the-air or through an update in the next two weeks.
Last time I checked there were parking positions with pushback at Singapore and Hong Kong. Perhaps you need to somehow clear your cache to refresh the data that you still have on your device?
The physical size of the screen is irrelevant for the application. What matters is the screen resolution. In the graphics settings you can adjust the screen resolution and with the same left and right arrow field you can set the window mode or full screen mode with a specific resolution.
Only waypoints that are close to the map location are currently loaded. So if you are flying only a small region around the aircraft is actually loaded and the waypoints inside that region can be inserted into the MCDU or CDU. If you see the waypoint on the navigation display you should be able to insert it as well.
Now is the complexity of the B 737-500 the same as the A320 and A380 or not ? would like to know because I'm looking at getting that bundle.
The 737-500 simulated complexity is quite good but the aircraft in the real world is not nearly as complex as the systems on an A320 or A380. It's comparing apples and oranges. That being said, we've spend many times more time on the A320 development than most other airplanes and a lot of my free time went into the A320.
The features of the 737-500 are described here:
Yes, this has been reported before and is already fixed internally but is not yet in the public release.
My recommendation would be to model the longer variant with the newer cockpit which is closest to the A320. You can always shrink the aircraft later with relative ease, that is natively supported by Aerofly FS even. You don't even have to build a second model if you make the fuselage sections that need to be removed a separate object. Aerofly can then move the entire cockpit and empenage programmatically.
In terms of cockpit design I would keep the screens almost identical to the A320. The older CRT monitors may have a little bit different screen rendering which isn't implemented.
My guess would be that there are both -200 and -300 with the newer screens.
Wenn man globale Szenerie einschaltet hat man rund um die Welt Flughäfen, Gebäude, Bäume und andere Objekte in der Welt. Dies Daten werden vom Server im Internet gestreamed, also nicht als Gesamtpaket heruntergeladen wie bisher, sondern eben nur das, was man in der Landschaft gerade braucht.
Just a quick question since this thread is relevant,Regarding Aerofly fs 23, are the boeings and other aircraft then not bought from aerosoft because playing with the A380 is just as bad as the A320 holding a maxinum of 15 to 30 fps which makes the game pratically unplayable and with other aircraft it's between 60 to 80 fps,This begs another question,Is it just the Airbuses that are bought from aerosoft which causes the low fps ?
Aerosoft did not make our aircraft. The A320 model was originally based on the Aerosoft A320X but it has undergone many changes over the years. So it has nothing to with Aerosoft.
The reason why the A380 and A320 may be a bit slower on your device is due to the complexity of systems that are simulated and in the A380 in particular the number of landing gears and wheels that all are simulated numerically in real time.
I'm not sure how the algorithm works for clearing the approach but it probably requires a certain order in which data is loaded. If the device memory is already full and no additional data can be loaded this might cause an issue like this. I'm not sure though. admin any thoughts on why the algorithm sometimes fails to clear the approach?
Would IPACS consider adding this feature? It sounds cool but I understand its too insignificant.
By design the fuel pumps inside the wing can supply fuel even under negative g load for several seconds (I think it was 10 seconds). So it would be quite difficult to achieve during flight actually and thus it's very rare. But knowing our users it would not be unheard of to fly an airliner inverted...
If we implement the fuel system and fuel mass like we plan to then the natural fuel flow under acceleration ("gravity flow" during normal flight) would be natively simulated.
Well if IPACS accept to release it publicly, it will for sure be available for iOS.
In general we are not releasing user made content publicly though. That would mean we would have to be the ones that offer the support for a product that we didn't make. If the aircraft has any issues or bugs we are the ones the users come to, this is why we have not allowed user made content on mobile yet.
We will have to wait for the final aircraft product, if it meets the quality standards it might be considered. But it would need to be sold as in app to offset additional cost for supporting it and for this it would have to be on par with existing aircraft in terms of quality.
Thanks, I guess this should not be too difficult.
Same with open source. Usage conditions of a free or open product may include that the redistribution is only allowed if it is free as well and follows the same open license. Welcome to the copyright nightmares.
Well if someone on the internet said the differences are marginal then it must be true.
Who of the DEVs had guessed 6 days until they find a hack for MCAS?