Posts by Overloaded

Great fun and thanks for not making it too easy.

My 'tuppence worth'.

Don't zoom in too tight, you need to see the changing outside orientation. Keep looking outside more than with a plane.

Use the HUD. It allows low speed pitch and roll adjustments to be kept inside 2 or 3 degrees. This makes 'profi' mode quite manageable. The flight path vector symbol also mirrors the string instrument.

Use rudder trim, I'm using a twist rudder at the minute and trimming out the force needed is much more pleasant.

Don't use any excess throttle/collective, reduce it as forward speed builds up.

Like learning to ride a bike, there will come a 'I've got it' moment. Keep practicing.

I regret not having to pay for this excellent new aircraft. I'd like to invest in more sophisticated planes, just a bit tired of add-on scenery purchases.

Quote from Jet-Pack

The ILS is now implemented in the MB339, has been added with the last major update.

You can change the navigation source in the HSI to NAV and then tune in the frequency on your right hand side. Change the course on the HSI and then you should have a working ILS

The DME seems to have stopped working in the current version, it used to show in the top left (I think (PC u/s)) of the the HSI-like navigation instrument.

The nav' instrument does not receive TACAN but does also work with VORs. In the absence of DME a position fix can be established by switching between suitably orientated VORs. An ILS glide slope indication can be matched with HEIGHT to give a range out. This would not work in real life as false glide slopes can be received above the intended beam.

Never did much on the F-15, the FS2 passing 5,000 feet forced landing clean best speeds for the F-18 seem to be about 230kt with a 20 degree descent gradient, the Aermacchi seems OK at about 190 and an 8.5 degree descent gradient. I have no idea if these performances are realistic, they seem a wee bit poor to me.

Short wings do not really suit serious forced landing attempts.

Getting stopped on a runway is quite satisfying.

Much appreciated Jan, I'll get a super mouse on Saturday. Setting the height and speed bugs will be first. Perhaps add a helicopter rotor clutch before too long?

I got a frozen screen in FS2 and smoke came out of my wired (mouse-socket) red light mouse. I think I'd be better off going for a USB mouse replacement.

Do gaming mice work properly in FS2? I have an ordinary 2D display and my interests are principally navigation and using the instrument panel equipment. Another eight or so instant access switches would be desirable.

I'd be grateful for any advice and pointers as I want my FS2 working again ASAP.

Thanks in Advance!

There is a NDB on the field so displaying the false VOR on a RMI or a nav display without a (left/right) course deviation indicator would be perfectly authentic.

The manual navaids in FS2 are quite good now, we just need the ADF needle to dip towards the low wing a bit in a bank and have audio morse code identification (the 737 has a tuning needle!) for it to become a really serious contender. Then there are all the other ways that the NDB gets 'bent' in the real world, night, mountains, wing, coastline, distant beacons on the same frequency, lightning ....

and shifting winds in the descent .....

and stratus clouds ....

Have you looked at the STAR plates Phil? They are as much fun as the approach plates and are especially impressive in the mountains, guiding you on the safe tracks and heights. Happy navigating.

It is not a VOR, it's a TACAN only transmitter intended for military aircraft, the only use to civilian aircraft is as a sort of stand-alone DME, not of much use to light aircraft but an accurate input for an Area Navigation system in larger planes. The DME is much more RNAV dependable than a VOR signal.

Only a VORTAC is worth showing on civilian charts. Another factor with charts is that VORs are being withdrawn at a high rate and FS2 will feature VORs that are not there anymore.

If you select the Las Vegas 1:500,000 chart in SkyVector or if you have real charts, the Nav Aid symbols are shown on the edge.

Tacan only, the distance measuring equipment (DME) element can be accessed by tuning in the published frequency, a VOR receiver cannot decode a tacan only transmission. FS2 might not reflect this, a working VOR would not be authentic. A VOR symbol is a hexagon, a VOR-DME is a hexagon inside a square and a VORTAC symbol has solid black outer edges.

I put a post in a while back about the size of the real life PAPIs at Miami, they can be seen in both Google Earth and in the actual Aerofly Southern Florida scenery but the PAPI images do not seem to have been recognised for what they are by the scenery design people and Aero' put undersized and miss-placed mini-PAPIs close to the runway edges. It is easy to get the runway layouts from sources such as SkyVector.

This is a link to the original post, Jan was kind enough to read it and consider the possibility of doing some PAPI adjustments at a future date. Grossly undersized PAPIs are hard to see from normal distances.

Sorry MIAMI PAPIs also.

Try looking at the excellent PPRuNE, they do not have any opinion restriction and are broad spectrum post tolerant, you will find tons of helpful and honest material there.

Airline theory and practice needs a huge amount of work, the mental commitment is about as important as the financial.

Quote from J van E

I use just one regular monitor so this idea isn't something for me but it would be nice to have a view like that whenever I get more monitors or maybe one of those curved ones.

i use one monitor too, I meant to suggest a single continuous cylindrical projection so that a zoomed out view could represent the output from a simulated panorama camera where the sideways view is from a wrap around the viewer.

The conventional single image gives a straight and level horizon with pitch variations and does not present a realistic horizon relative to the viewer.

A car going down a steep hill has the distant horizon high in the straight ahead view and leaning back towards the rear on either side, sloping through level at minus and plus ninery degrees to the straight ahead. Our peripheral awareness of this gives us a sense of our orientation relative to the horizon and especially to the true vertical which would be slightly behind the car's overhead in this example.

The monitor does not need to encompass a 180 degree vista to benefit from cylindrical projections, the realism would just increase with a widening field of view.

Peripheral vision is not going to be a strong point of VR viewing. Head moving left and right will be more necessary with the R-22 or else some enhanced sort of pitch reference for the straight ahead view. Some dead flies on the helicopter windscreen could be very helpful. They would make visual flying better right now.

The realism and natural feel of flying the upcoming helicopter could be increased by enhancing the peripheral vision in Aerofly FS2.

The normal image is a rectilinear projection similar to that given by a camera. With wide angle views the edges become stretched out, a bit like pulling the ears of a portrait. With a very wide, close in view the ears could be as wide as the face, the result of the camera remaining centred on the person's nose with image of the ears being spread over an oblique part of the film/sensor plane. Sort of like I_ versus \__ .

Zooming Aero wide or using multiple monitors does not give a normal view of the peripheral scene, it cannot simulate a turned eye looking directly at the side view. A camera rotating around the centre of its lens can simulate having a curved sensor and several images can be fused to create an image which accurately depicts a scene projected onto the inside of a cylindrical surface.

The relevance to the R-22 is that the peripheral vision is an important cue to the awareness of the helicopter's relation to the horizon. Holding a good flat attitude is key to stable hovering flight in a helicopter and achieving the 'learning to ride a bicycle' moment when instinct replaces laboured coinscious control.

These two cylindrical projection panorama pics cover 215 degrees, directly left and directly right are in the scene. The edges show the effect of the centre of the image projection being above or below the horizon.

This is true in the wide angle simulation of a helicopter flight. These multi view windows in FS2004 cover 225 degrees of view, the edges show the actual left and right views. LaGuardia runway 13/31 runs completely across the picture.

Level attitude.

Speeding up.

Slowing down!

Flying the sim is enormously easier with the peripheral vision cues. The uphill and downhill off centre horizon is vastly more informative than trying to assess the plane of flight using the relatively small rise and fall of a flat horizon within a single rectininear (flat) projection front view. Our off centre vision lacks resolution but it is sensitive to motion.

I use the excellent and free Hugin panorama creation software, its response to view adjustments in its preview window is instantaneous, with the wonderfully high performance of the super fast software created by IPACS for Aero FS2, could more advanced image projection be considered for use in the future?

Please for one second consider a real world pilot in a piston twin. Would he/she go for a flight in normal weather autumnal Europe expecting with high confidence to get to the destination with non functioning mixture controls and an inability to identify the nav aids en-route. Add to this broken cylinder head temperature gauges and frozen exhaust gas temperature displays. The various lever and knobs might move but that FS2 aeroplane needs a truely enormous overhaul or else needs to be scrapped.

Opening cabin doors is .... well secondary to the realistic operation of an aeroplane in the air, we can probably find an Xbox driving sim that could absorb that sort of pointless, marginal diversion.

A twin needs a fuel powered heater. Sort of a bit of real life stuff.

I can't afford a VR set-up but I admire the insight and success that IPACS have displayed in this field. It will get very well deserved attention, please make the best of it.

FS2 is obviously miles and miles ahead of the opposition, I only moan because it could be tons better if it didn't waste resources on trivia whilst endlessly defering screaming holes in the core sim. Please try to look at a thirty year old Frasca simulator or book a trial lesson in a twin on a grey overcast day.

It is the very best, it will get better and all the future add ons will be 100% excellent, absolutely worthwhile free or as in sim purchases.

I used the Flims area a lot in the Swiss Scenery in FS2 and in FS. It looks like the plane crashed at a descent steep angle onto a local area of flat ground. It is the site of a gigantic ancient landslide and has unique terrain, it was probably a highlight of the sightseeing flight.

Very sad especially as it involved people who were flying for the pure joy of flight.

The trees look bland, there is no warm sunlit side with a cooler dim side lit only by blue sky. The stark vivid buildings make it worse, they are miss-matched.

As well as practically no boats the mooring jetties look 100% absent, Rotterdam's water looks painted over with a big midnight-blue crayon, they couldn't even pick a realistic colour.

Quote from ftp2leta

It need to sale.... sale a lot so they will continue making stuff for AF2

I will buy it

Ben

There could have been better coordination between Orbx and IPACS, we are being offered another flat landscape just after Southern Florida.

I'd buy some nice hills from the Black Forest over to Salzburg.

That could be a big video craze hit theme!

Lessons will need to be the absolute best in computer sim history or there has to be an easy get yourself started beginner's level. Perhaps the lessons are the real cause for the wait?

The MAAS of shipping is just not right though. Where are all the Rhine barges?

Do the Miami lights penetrate low visibility more than other lights?

Dead link

Copying real rnavs is not so easy, the routes might go in OK but when flown, the route can explode into spaghetti at the last minute or the route can switch to earlier waypoints. The DIY routes following real examples might involve speed limited short radius turns or reversals over themselves at a lower altitude, these do not work well with the current FS2 route software.

Copying real routes is rewarding because it is a realistic, often beautiful simulation and because it does not involve flying through (not between) mountains.