Posts by Overloaded

Quote from edpatino

That's Ok Jan, I can confirm it's working with the MFD panel located in the pedestal. To me, it's way back in the pedestal

Found it !

Thanks Edpatino.

I found out what Jan meant, I am a bit thick, a picture is worth 1,000 of my words. Off a phone, my F12 is unreliable.

Hello, just saw similar too, don't think the last post was seen?

Flying School Days ...... when it was all new

Not so far Jan. FMS off does not help, I always have it off anyway. The range selector is the most important fix, the rest can be worked around.

My iPad 10.5 pro gives no problems. I have a now old beta in Android, it does not have working autopilot routes which I don't care about in the least but it has dimmed PAPIS which are excellent, it is much better with the visibility turned way down.

A cut down New York area scenery would be a good mobile add on, device storage has increased since they last finished any work on mobile.

I presume most PC users have mobile devices, I wonder why there is no longer any interest in this section?

A bit of drama on opening the throttles would not do any harm, there is more exhaust noise, higher vibration ... a bit of a simulation problem alright .... and the unforgetable semi-deafening loud beating from full throttle, full fine pitch unsynchronised propellors at maximum rpm. Talking about powerful twins, not the fixed pitch Aerofly Cessna 172 single though it is a 180, I never flew one but the PA-28 180 is very different from a 140 or 160. The Baron sounds a bit more throttled back and propellor pitch lever (you only move one) adjusted.

He must have some unique software or even hardware feature as this is an unknown phenomenon.

I still find it almost unbelievable that I have such a truly high performance, high visual quality and high fidelity flight simulator in my kitchen. The sophistication of what IPACS has delivered cannot be underestimated and the developers are regularly going out of their way to help people here with problems which are frequently down to personal PC issues which will offer them little in return to help improve their sim.

Good luck with the mouse!

The mobile version has been .... frozen ..... in development for so long that new SOC controllers might not be compatible, the Android version is especially overdue an update. I have the impression that the current mobile software will not be developed any further and any new mobile update will be based significantly on the PC work.

There are posts in the FB fan group pages of new high performance phones giving major graphics glitches. I used to forward those posts in here but I couldn't be bothered anymore for obvious reasons, I suggested that the fan group people involved should join the mobile forum here and see if they get any attention.

I have grayed out controls and I cannot adjust the range. The Nav1 course can only be adjusted from the left side and Nav2 only adjusted from the right side, is this intentional? I cannot work out how to select an arc or expanded compass rose for the HSI, perhaps it is the gray controls or perhaps it does not work.

The trim changes with power and speed are great fun and the flight director is very pleasant. The King Air really has the original FS nice flight feel.

FS2 is getting better and better.

This might look much better in a 4K2K display but does there need to be more attention paid to the inverse square law which means that the brightness of a virtual point source should be a quarter of that of a similar light at half the distance? As lights must be displayed by single pixels unless they are at point blank range, the presentation of individual lights powerful enough to be prominent at a great distance must be dimmed to simulate their lower perceived dimness in any display lacking infinite resolution.

The number of lights in a given scene area should quadruple at twice the distance so at the point where a reasonable simulation of single but dim distant lights breaks down, an average illumination glow would be better than a few anti-scale persistent normal lights.

I like the variety of light colours in the Miegs scenery

How do you intend to control your mags? A four way switch would be ideal but we don't have individual mag positions in the menu, will you use a pot with click positions? A twin will be interesting, Auntie Ju and a DC-6 or similar, even more so.

I'd be interested in the possibilities for a 737 flap control ( 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 25, 30 and 40!).

I got 60 fps again!,

I shut down Aero and restarted it and got the same. I went to restart my PC and saw an ominous Windows update pending and after that I got wild fps again😥.

I did another Aero shut down and saw a Steam update and now I have a constant 60 fps again and (mostly ultra) FS2 runs like a hot knife through butter, glorious smoooth.

OpenGL in use.

...I now get 60 fps with either unlimited or 120 fps in graphics settings...

(Rubbishy Anniversary Pentium, 2 cores running at 4.2 GHz, GTX950strix overclocked to near 99% GPU usage).

Perhaps they could have a subtle dark surround which could simulate the eye and brain's natural contrast enhancement process? It would allow a controlled maximum white emission which would not swamp the best 100% output from the red pixels. It needs to be attention grabbing.

Previous to the very recent post update-update my Asus 'GPU Tweak' software's 'Frame Rate Target' could hold FS2 at 60 FPS with unlimited selected in the Aero menu. Now despite 60 or 59 FPS being selected in 'GPU Tweak' the FS2 frame rate runs between 200 and 70 FPS in flight and about 900 FPS in the FS2 menu pages.

I have the latest nvidea sourced drivers and it was normal with the initial update about 10 days ago. I had found that a fixed 60 FPS gave me a very smooth display which I do not get with FS2 menu vsync. The best that I can get now is 120 FPS and below in the FS2 menu, I would much prefer a constant 60 FPS which is also my monitor refresh rate.

GTX950 2GB and OpenGL.

Is anyone having trouble with the Aermacchi's new DME?

Does anyone else hear seagulls when on the ground at Monterey?

When trying to make up a copy of the MONTEREY RNAV Z RWY 28L approach into an Aerofly FS2 navigation page route I ended up having a crazy dive onto the deck trying to make my next descent level and noticed hilly trees passing by my foggy view outside, not good.

The fixes west of Salinas and east of Monterey are miles out of place.

The first fixes south of SNS have tracks of 195 and 198 degreees in Aero instead of the published plate tracks of 214 for both. The critical HUTAD track starting the final approach track at 1,505 feet is 2 1/2 miles too far out putting the flight path in among the hills.

A repeat Aerofly FS2 spin using the published 28 localiser plate took me over the AEROFLY HUTAD fix at 2,200 feet at about 6.5 DME and on the SNS 208 radial (028 To). I copied this position into SkyVector.

As there is an outside pay scenery for Monterey could this be looked at? (Were the fixes plotted bearing true from SNS instead of bearing magnetic?).

Could you consider allowing users to edit the fix positions, make our own permanent fixes and save complex routes for re-use and sharing?

Some Do It Youself approach routes explode into spaghetti at the last minute, could short radius low speed turns be tolerated?

Can routes be allowed to cross over themselves?

SkyVector airport info' is 200 degrees localiser and 202.7 degrees runway.

The CAT I ILS localiser offset is away from high ground only 3 miles to the left of the final approach and the terrain protected published decision height is 220 feet, 20 feet higher than the system minimum.

People still complain if they select a localiser only approach, see Buchanan 19R on your map.

What happened to the real world localiser approach to Buchanan in FS2? I used to enjoy it in mobile, it is offset from the runway direction. It vanished for some reason and these suspicious alternative runway ILSs appeared in both PC and mobile, they never showed up in SkyVector and are not in Thomas' map.

....Later.... The 19R localiser can be dialed in manually, I had a very pleasant run in both the 320 (using its CDU page for the first time 😀) and in the 737 using the lovely manual dial ADF. The navigation page for Buchanan still looks very odd.

Thanks for the manual nav control Airbus, I will start to use it a lot more now.

ILS installations are being progressively dropped in favour of various complexities of GPS approach.

IPACS might look at the newer more sophisticated GPS equipment which can offer ILS like information, from simple non precision (distance based) glide path advice (down to a minimum descent altitude) to highly sophisticated precision low decision height, three dimensional guidance with possible curved approaches, depending on the airbourne and ground based installations.

Only the top, local augmentation based option requires significant airport expense so ILS will eventually go the way of NDB and VOR and become a limited back-up alternative.