Hi,
In ForeFlight, More, Device menu, just tap with the finger on the established connection (you should have a message in the upper right corner indicating AeroflyFS, tap on it).
It opens a new window with a slide to enable. After enabling, it should work fine.
Good luck.
Cheers
Antoine
Sorry, I have no information about these peripherals, but they seem overly expensive and overkill for AeroflyFS 2.
Such a price category and handle design seem rather targeted to hard-core airline simmers who build their home cockpit dedicated to some specific aircraft or aircraft category.
AeroflyFS is beautiful and promising, but despite there's no apparent clear development strategy (I mean apparent to the user and to the potential developer) and though IPACS is spending a lot of energy adding airliners to AFS 2 instead of implementing the basic features desperately lacking to current existing aircraft (operational switches, magneto, mixture control, etc.) AeroflyFS is of very little interest to the average hard-core airline simmer. There are sims (FSX/P3D / XPlane) that do it much better.
The real potential of AeroflyFS 2 lays in its graphical possibilities. One of them being VR.
If I was to invest in peripherals dedicated to AeroflyFS 2, I would rather choose simple basic HOTAS-style hardware, and keep my money for VR...
If you're planning to use your peripherals with other sims, my point of view may be different but the only question is to know whether such hardware can be recognised and assigned to AeroflyFS, I have no clear answer to that...
My 2 cents
Cheers
Antoine
Just out of curiosity: what would be the use of using these apps with AFS2? Not that I can, because I am using a Rift, but I am just curious.
One very good reason for connecting one's real flight app to a sim is practising. You can safely test any feature, check new releases, try different settings, practice gestures, keep up-to-date with your app in real life conditions without endangering anybody.
In real flight, I like to keep actions on my iPad mini to the minimum level, no need to search, no need to monopolise mental resources trying to figure out how to handle this new feature, etc.
Cheers
Antoine
Ok, if a camera can do that, move freely and fast in all 6 DOF proportional with the joystick all over the world, displaying the heading, LON/LAT coordinates and altitude, then it's pretty much the slew
mode we'll need.
In FS we do it with an aircraft, which allows to reproduce actual scenery load situations while the graphical engine gets easily overwhelmed and the memory management is troublesome.
Cheers
Antoine
What exactly do you want to achieve with a slew mode? Have a 3D camera and exactly place yourself where you want to be, too look at scenery only or also to start flying from there?
Hi Jan,
The slew mode allows you to move free and both very fast or very slowly in all 6 DOF and stop instantly without having to pause or fly or whatever (no flight physics).
When designing sceneries, you sure want to reload specific situations, but you need to move freely and fast in any direction to check your work from any angle, or quickly translate in all directions (check large areas, check load/unload behaviour, search for artefacts, etc.) without wasting your time having to fly.
If you're more familiar with aircraft design, imagine you're designing the 3D visual model of your aircraft. You need to rotate and move and zoom free around the 3D model.
If your tool forces you to move with the physics of a human walking around the aircraft, having to bend on his knees to check the undercarriage and hardly able to reach some places, it just makes the work difficult without any advantage.
The slew mode is an easy feature to program and a most scenery designers will consider it a must have. Those who don't need it should not prevent others from having it...
Cheers
Antoine
+1 on SLEW mode - best way to inspect scenery development. I also use it for performance checking. I set up a constant banked turn (yaw rate is nonzero) and let it do a few circles to see how the sim performs as various scenery is paged in. I would call it essential for developers not just a nice to have.
Exactly. The cam-reload feature mentioned by Jan is sure nice for correcting 1 specific bug or working on a tiny area. But it cannot replace the slew mode.
That's also what Austin M. unfortunately never wanted to understand for XPLANE, stating that one just has to fly at Mach 2 and stop, no need for a slew mode...
The slew mode is the most efficient way so far to systematically check your work while developing sceneries - nothing to do with "flying to the place"...
Cheers
Antoine
Well done HUD provides the only direct information to properly fly an aircraft whatever it is. Implementing as standard has been Dr Klopfstein's long life struggle. But he was largely misunderstood and in some cases the HUD, when implemented, was suboptimal.
Cheers
Antoine
I would even recommend going further by adding a SLEW mode like in FSX.
It's actually a very, very useful tool when it comes to developing scenery.
Then you can really go and inspect straight anywhere you need without having to bother flying your aircraft, it really makes the difference.
Cheers
Antoine
Well, this is what should be used in Aerofly FS 2 but it seems like its not working in all cases on some user machines.
Still, you will notice this one frame drop when new resources are being loaded.
Thank you for the hint. What settings would you then recommend for AFS 2 in Nvidia Inspector ? Even if the result is machine-dependent any advice on this forum is welcome...
Cheers
Antoine
Hi whitav8,
Thanks for your hint regarding proc affinity, I'll try out despite I believe it has nothing to do with the TrackIR.
What I wanted however to point out is raw fps number don't mean much in AeroflyFS 2 while the perception is pretty much "different" from what we've been used to for decades.
A robust, limited 60fps in AeroflyFS 2 isn't smooth at all while a stable 25 fps in FSX/P3D can be very smooth, on the same monitor.
Cheers
Antoine
LOL!!!
A few months ago, if somebody told you you would be having an issue with only 170fps, what would you have said. :cool:
I was just thinking earlier last week, how quickly I myself had gotten spoiled.
You're right, but rather than pure fps it's a question of fluidity. For instance when I switch on VSynch I get a good image with a robust 60 fps, but it stutters a lot despite the graphical engine should be less loaded.
Also, when turning the head with the TrackIR movements totally lack of smoothness making the simulator unpleasant to play.
For comparison you can go as low as 20-30 fps in a sim like FSX and still get a good fluidity enabling a smooth immersion, while AeroflyFS 2 with 60 fps isn't currently immersive.
Limiting fps to 120 in AeroflyFS provides smoother movements and better fluidity but lacks the vertical synchronisation, especially when turning the head with the TrackIR.
Setting unlimited fps the score goes very high, but unstable depending on load and no vertical synch...
I would prefer loosing some pure fps and ensure vertical synchronisation, fluidity (no stutters) and smooth head movements...
Cheers
Antoine
Well, most of the few featured Swiss AD'S are flat empty, unfortunately...
Currently the planner is rather a very basic took for easily feeding a route in an airliner while the FMC is not fearured or in a very basic way, what virtual airline simmers would call arcade game.
The tool would be better suited to GA if you could choose a departure and a destination airport with a straight leg from and to the AD, instead of the 20 nautical miles cross-country navigation outbound to perform an airliner departure / approach.
In real life you fly as straight as desirable towards your destination AD until an entry point of your approach chart. Afterwards you fly according to the VAC if visual or IAC if IFR...
Cheers
Antoine
Well NYC at night is probably where the DLC gives the poorest results IMO. There's nothing but buildings. It's all dead...
The XPLANE night lightning is excellent because ground textures are actually dimmed down to black, and only lighted by Street lights. Buildings also get totally black except where specifically lighted. Cars have realistic lights. Street lights have a beautiful haze cone.
The default C172 gets totally dark like in real life, you can dim instrument lights in a very realistic way, the taxi/landing light are pretty accurate, closer to the torch lamp than the BMW Xenon headlights...
I don't like XPlane that much, but I immediately felt that specific Night VFR touch trying the stock Cessna with the default Seattle night situation. Something which is unfortunately impossible with either FSX/P3D or AeroflyFS 2, because there is only a dim light mode instead of night.
Cheers
Antoine
It is a bit lighter than these two images suggest, it is also of quite low contrast.
There was a consensus in the mobile forum a while back which favoured that look. The idea was that the eye adapted perfectly to night darkness, I've done a lot of night flying and the view outside was always pitch black in rural areas, must be because of the instrument lights and of any occasional chart or plan checks preventing perfect dark adaptation in the eye.
Built up areas can have a diffused illumination from street and industrial lights reflecting off cloud or mist/fog.
With the adjustable cockpit and instrument lighting in PC FS2 it might be possible to adjust the graphics card or monitor settings to have a prefered environmental darkness and still have very good instrument visibility.
My experience of night VFR flight is that you dim all internal lights as far as possible until you hardly can see the needles, in order to maximise outer vision.
In any case everything that isn't lighted is pitch dark : fields, lakes, hills, forests, mountains, most houses, roofs, street without public lightning or traffic.
Even lighted windows are hardly to be seen. What you see in first position is crowded highways and street lights.
There's unfortunately no night in either FSX/P3D or AeroflyFS 2.
The only current simulator featuring a realistic night is XPLANE 10. Try the default Seattle scenery at night, it's amazingly accurate.
It's actually the only point IMO where XPlane is better than other sims...
Cheers
Antoine
BTW I do not agree with JV's description of this sim's market: "The market is for the 15-30 minute casual flyer who just wants a great experience and a quick fix." Yes, the sim will appeal to casual flyers but also to simmers, I am very sure.
I couldn't agree more on that point. There are several long time simmers around the place who can see beyond the not (yet) featured aircraft system and imagine how AeroflyFS could grow up.
I agree AeroflyFS typical market target won't be the hardcore airline simmer used to PMDG or FSLabs, and that's where the lonely high detailed airport without a detailed surrounding flight region hasn't much interest IMO.
Cheers
Antoine
Orbx never announced any kind of support, or you have informations I don't have.
As far as I could read, JV announced he tried out AeroflyFS 2 and was amazed and he's thinking of making one scenery for AeroflyFS (which is very good news indeed), but not right now (do not expect anything before June, he wrote), which some people in various fora obviously interpretate as Orbx is going to kind of purchase IPACS...
BTW he had also big plans for XPLANE, but that's another topic.
I'm not sure JV had a deep look yet at the SDK, but out of what is currently available IPACS still has a long way to go before Orbx can start doing something for AeroflyFS.
That's fully understandable, and I'm sure IPACS is working hard and is already several steps ahead of the currently available SDK.
But Orbx's approach and development techniques relie on a sound knowledge of the very powerful FSX/P3D SDK and request a robust and clear simulator layer architecture : mesh/landclass/vectors/photos/autogen/classes/regions/seasons.
Fortunately enough IPACS didn't implement landclass, which I hate. But it limits Orbx's current technologies to micro-sceneries, where they do an excellent job, but that only makes sense if these micro-sceneries can be integrated to a high quality flight region, which we are lacking so far. Base photo is excellent where HD, mesh is acceptable, but all the rest is missing yet.
Once again, it's very normal that Base sceneries and the sdk are not yet fully grown-up, it's not the point and I don't know what IPACS have in mind, I really don't want to sound negative, AeroflyFS has a real great potential.
Anyway, I would be very surprised if Orbx come with home-made Aerofly FS products in a near future.
But maybe some people have better information.
Cheers
Antoine
I fully agree with the message in screen, but FSX/P3D give (actually since at least FS9, don't remember if older versions had it) the quite simple possibility to display it or not, according to ones tastes.
A solution could be to add the information in the overlay - as well as gear up/down info - similar to throttle percentage or flaps position. I expect people who want to display that overlay might be interested by these informations, while people who hide the overlay cab enjoy a clean cockpit.
My 2 cents
Cheers
Antoine
Look for Fly Inside in Google. It's not (yet) compliant with AeroflyFS 2, but VR is still at early stage, such kind of tools will definitely be needed to access external data while "inside the helmet".
Cheers
Antoine
Thank you both for your answers. My apologies if I sounded negative, it was not my goal. I rather wanted to draw your attention on the community and its needs and concerns.
All the surviving simulators so far live only thanks to their community. Without it, there would be no more FS, P3D, XPlane, etc. They would have vanished just like Fly Unlimited or AeroflyFS v1, although both of them were very promising.
And for each simulator, the community is vast, with a lot of very different use, from the occasional gamer to the hardcore airline simmer with his home cockpit, via the VFR Pilot. Although it's all about flying, their needs and aims in simulation are very different.
Ok, the virtual airline simmer is not the ideal target for AeroflyFS 2, but the VFR pilot could definitely find in AeroflyFS 2 its long wished best simulator, provided that he can develop it in that direction.
Please observe that New York just has a tremendous amount of buildings.
Well I would rather say it has a tremendous density of buildings on a 1-digit percentage of the scenery and the rest is empty, with average sprayed trees no matter where...
It's a beautiful demo of what can be done with the graphical engine, but beyond the initial wow effect it doesn't make a scenery. I enjoy circling around Manhattan in the Corsair, or aboard the C172. But even with the C172 the built zone is crossed within less than minutes.
Everyone is overexcited by JV's announcement to try and make a scenery, fine. But Orbx only makes micro sceneries like airports (great, but very small). The rest of their world is raw landclass, a technology that was fortunately enough discarded from AeroflyFS. They have no experience in photo realistic sceneries. In other words, it's great if Orbx makes one (or even better several) scenery/ies for AeroflyFS, but they will need to be merged in a regional "flyable" scenery, otherwise it will be an island in the middle of nowhere...
Studying the SDK and reading the few posts from IPACS members I'm simply afraid that IPACS vision of the community is Editor A will make Chicago, Editor B will make Hong-Kong, Editor C will make Ouagadougou, and that's it... in between we have low red satellite pictures for the one who will want to fly at FL390 between sceneries.
The reality of the community when AeroflyFS 2 starts growing as an open platform will for instance look like this (US example, but it would be the same in Europe):
Editor A will want to provide a higher res mesh for, say, the US East Coast, while Editor B will propose a slightly coarser mesh, but for the entire US;
Editor C will want to propose photo scenery per US State, but with inconstant quality, while Editor D will propose very high quality HD photo scenery, but only for some zones;
Editor F will maybe compile buildings and vegetation autogen out of databases per US State, but with some holes where data are missing;
Editor G will provide a very generic Air and ground traffic product for the entire USA, while Editor H will compile highly efficient and accurate traffic, but from some region only;
Several Editors will provide bigger and smaller airports, but some will be in competition on the same ones - those that have higher hit rate;
Etc.
And the simmer will want to pick here and there what he wants and build his own sim world according to his needs and tastes. That's the way it works. But it is only possible with a real SDK like the one from MS for FSX - did you look at it ?
I know AeroflyFS 2 has still way to go, and I really hope the best, potential is very high, but please don't miss the train.
For the rest, I'm very happy if it loads the way Jan says, I'll check again, I really had the feeling the longer NYC load time also occurred when loading the Swiss scenery, which would have meant everything was being loaded.
Keep up the good work !
Cheers
Antoine
