Posts by Overloaded

    When will the co pilot's figure model be removed? It looks a little rough. If I can, I hope the cockpit is empty and full of exquisite instruments

    I never experienced it but the really low cost Android phone Aerofly mobile’s headless captain was amusing. He was seen a lot in the Facebook fan group.

    Thank You so much Jan, my favourite is the 737 so I’d tolerate letting the rest of my Aerofly fleet drift away from their current niceness to reduce the 737’s possible static (short term) neutrality in pitch. The other planes I just use occasionally but they seem very reasonable, in fact the Piper Arrow is really nice. Of course this is only my individual perception.

    I realise the turbofan engine acceleration lag and the underslung engine’s big thrust moment from the centre of gravity, worse with the wider CFM56s really, really complicates the handling. The current values of the factors you so kindly suggest might well turn out to be my favourites.


    Possibly the rate of change in attitude deviations might be worth playing with, short term static pitch deviations (like the basic stability of a dart or weather vane) could dampen down more aggressively? and slight roll excursions could (largely in the straight wing planes) eventually go more divergent in dynamic stability? initial static (opposition from dihedral and side-slip) stability seems fine to me.

    Hands-off but well trimmed planes tend to hold altitude reasonably but over say 20-40 seconds or more progressively roll off their heading. The sim might be just a bit more the other way round.


    (Are the TMD file stability related factors you mentioned arithmetic relationships or is there any exponential growth or decay?)


    Thanks again.

    Is/are there a/some file value/s that can be changed to adjust stability in FS2?

    I have control sensitivities on minimum and would like the longitudinal or pitch stability increased and lateral or roll stability significantly decreased. This would improve the realism of the sim for me.

    A greater tendency for a disturbance in pitch to result in the pitch quickly returning to near the previous position would simulate increased real world static stability, the dynamic stability is a perhaps a bit slower than I like? having some adjustment ability would allow trial and error experimentation.

    I want to fly from London to Miami but you can’t, hopefully a future update brings back the South Florida region.

    Forgive me if I don't offer some negativity.


    I like a slow leisurely Switzerland spin from Buochs south to Mt Titlis via Engelberg turning right and downhill for the Aare valley and Meirengen or Interlaken. The valley just south of Bouchs is very pretty.

    There are NO dangerous instrument approaches. Government aviation authorities evaluate all the hazards associated with a proposed approach and determine the minima required to keep the probability of death, serious injury or damage to the aeroplane from one unrelated event or fault to being well under one in a million.

    The perfectly safe Innsbruck LOC approach can require visibility and cloud limitations depending on aircraft performance such that the minimum descent height above the airport can be 3,000 feet up and 7.5 miles out. That is the safety requirement for a plane with a low missed approach climb rate.

    A dangerous approach is a visual one into something like a blind dead end or very high or down hill with surrounding obstacles. The pilot is a major factor in how dangerous those approaches are.

    Incorrect TKE indication in the B 737-500 CDU Nav page.


    Variation is 10 degrees west.

    Track true is 90°, track magnetic is 100°

    Aircraft is on track.

    TKE shows an incorrect R 10, it should be R/L 0.


    Aircraft is 10 degrees left of track, the Track Made Good is 90 magnetic. To get back on track its current track is 140 magnetic and the bearing to the next waypoint is 130 magnetic.

    TKE should show L 10, the difference between Track and Track Made Good.


    TKE actually shows the combination of the R 10 degree magnetic variation error and the difference between the current track and the bearing of the NEXT waypoint which is L 10 to give an incorrect indication of L/R 0 degrees.




    South East of Detroit, USA. Magnetic variation 10 degrees west in the Aerofly database. The (95 degrees) track approximates to 100 degrees magnetic.


    No cross track error but track error incorrectly reported as R 10 degrees.


    Ten degrees/7.12 miles of cross track error north of the track, track error incorrectly reported as zero degrees.

    Using the -500 (intelligently) is like going for a walk in the woods without a guide and finding your way back to the car park 8) . It is an important Aerofly sim link between the honest straightforward training planes and the auto-everything dumbed down friendly Air France debatable awareness compatible airliners.

    Will the tired old misplaced dwarf PAPIs be replaced in FS4? The teaser pic of Las Vegas runway 1L did not have near full runway width PAPIs on the LEFT of the runway. (Look at Google Earth🤓).

    Ryanair’s 737-200s had a small cigarette box end sized GPS display unit in the centre of the panel near the gear lever, it gave data such as waypoint distance and bearing and track and ground speed. The Aero ‘-500’ is basically a -200 cockpit so I’m sure many of the (few) real analog -500s got a similar device, even ones with a CDU.

    Removing the inappropriate (-200) EPR gauge would help with authenticity.