Posts by Overloaded

    Parallel viewing works when viewing YouTube 3D videos intended for use with the excellent Google Cardboard device. The videos have image pairs, left on the left and right on the right.

    The google cardboard accepts a mobile phone and has eye lenses for viewing against the face.

    Nice pictures, I got the 3D images working well, the cockpit depth is striking.

    This set of pictures does not work with crossed eyes, the distant cockpit parts appear nearer.

    Parallel infinity stare works properly. Try a reduced page size (vertically in a tablet) and stare into space with the eyes relaxed, slowly let a central image form and very slowly focus on the page. Once the eye is trained a larger image can be viewed. The parallel method is a bit easier than crossed eyes but the image is limited in size, the eyes cannot diverge so the maximum image size is the actual eye separation distance which is typically 65 to 70 millimetres.

    If the images are reversed then crossed eye viewing is possible and images bigger than 70 mm can be used comfortably once the technique is mastered. There is advice online.

    It is a shame that red/cyan glasses cannot be used in Aerofly, they give dead cheap colour 3D single image viewing if the residual interference is accepted. IPACS said that it is something to do with Open Gl.

    It worked fine for me using a 10.5 pro. You weren't using the 'co pilot' autopilot thing were you? It doesn't follow the ILS glideslope. Here is the manual ILS going past the NDB. You might need to click the image to see the ADF needle mid swing. The PAPIS looked in agreement with the ILS down to a height of 200 feet.

    It is common enough to see approach plates warning that PAPIS and VASIS do not agree with a particular ILS glidepath. The ILSs in Aero are usually pretty accurate but I'm not sure if the PAPIS are tuned to a specific precise descent gradient.

    The NDB at Monterey is passed at 1,600 feet in the ILS approach, it passes in Aero with the glideslope needle centred at 1,600 feet so the Aero ILS is working fine.

    There is something funny about the Cessna and Baron, the navigation menu doesn't work with them, they are always set up for Monterey with the VOR set at 090 for Salinas.

    Both, I haven't had my PC version working since the giant download in the spring (northern hemisphere). With the mobile visibility slider all the way to the left the visibility is somewhere around 0.3 nautical miles. There are no fancy ALSF or what ever approach lights at FS2 mobile Monterey. With minimum vis' the runway lights appear at about 120 feet height, 320 feet altitude, that is with the PAPIS fixed in beta.


    Wind from the right, threshold elevation approx 200 feet. 100kt is ATC friendly.

    Hand flying an ILS to minimums is just fun. It is great just flying Aerofly in the soup for ten minutes and maintaining a chosen height plus or minus 100 feet, the sim height keeping is harder than real life! Perhaps if a certain genre of pilots did a lot more hand flying they would be better at fixing unexpected events.

    IPACS have mentioned mobile beta testing, a 100% minimum visibility ILS is brilliant with the fog piercing PAPIs fixed. Seeing the runway lights appear properly when well below any sane decision height is so rewarding.

    Trying to copy photographs is 100% the wrong way to go, people do not take pictures 90 degrees to one side with light glaring off the into-the-sun lit water surface.

    Deanl90's pic is very good but the wave size needs to be kept small, big waves come from large bodies of open water.

    Jan's video is of a fairly calm day (waterside waves seen at time 6.56. San Francisco fog is a fameous but also a calm air phenomenon) in a land locked bay surrounded by high ground. They were departing off runway 01 Right and landing on 28 Right, 90 degrees apart.

    The Golden Gates view at time 1.09 shows the bridge towers shadows direction, the sun direction is about 170 true, about 155 magnetic. Some ocean swell and perhaps tidal flow is entering the bay at this point which is the best into the light view. The waves are not visible from that height (they would be visible to the eye and perhaps also in a 4K2K video) but the long wavelength swell hardly moves and the changes are largely from the changing bearing of the aircraft.

    The final approach is over fairly calm water with the light from about 50 degrees to the right of the tail. Little specular return off the waves could be expected.

    Even with little wave texture the video did show that the water lighting was not fixed and varied according to the sun direction.

    Old FS water effects on 'Ultra' are pretty good.