Posts by W.B.

    I have the same problem, occasionally. Airports area images seems to be intentionally lowered in Aerofly to create a flat ground. So that’s model loading failure, not elevation problem. Last time it occurs to me in LAX, along with all autogens.


    Try reentering the game and the problem should be solved.

    You can’t expect Aerofly downloading to take fully advantage of your bandwidth. The present speed (around 4-5Mb/s) is already improved and in my opinion, is generous. The downloading speed used to be 300-400kb/s and it took more than two days when I first downloaded Aerofly.

    Learning from steam database, there are usually no more than 50 people simultaneously in Aerofly, while the figure for X-plane or FSX is at least 1k. That’s sad.


    What’s even more sad is that I feel the PC version is becoming just an HD version for mobile one. This is quite understandable because, after all, IPACS has limited resources and they need to run a business. What this actually reflects is that we don’t get enough third party support. But look at the figure above, no wonder we can’t get support. No player->no developer->no player->...... I just hope one day Aerofly can break this loop.


    Another specific problem is how scenery is made in Aerofly. Pure photorealistic scenery does bring a lot trouble. Let’s take the example of the latest Paris VFR. I heard many complains about lack of reasonably detailed airport(especially LFPG) in this scenery that blocks the players from buying it. To make a scenery in Aerofly you need to do both airports and scenery while in the other simulators you only need to do one. A lack in either of the two features will incur refusal from customers, especially those who are new to Aerofly or has potential to try Aerofly. Somebody may mention fscloudport: There’s no deny that it’s a brilliant website but I’m sure most people prefer airports with taxiways. I wish IPACS(if possible) can develop some kind of kit as shown in the previous airport episode of Microsoft simulator preview. The edit of airports in it is so convenient.


    And by the way, speaking of orbx, I met an issue that in TE NL, the sim would not obliterate the buildings in distance that I already passed by. That causes after around thirty minutes of flight, the frame rate drops from 150fps to 40-50 FPS because almost the whole country is loaded. I can even see from Amsterdam to Rotterdam at 1000ft. Is there a way to solve this problem?

    Incredible! The giant city looks so nice at both day and night. Looking forward to see more great sceneries from this amazing developer group.


    The only problem is that maybe texture for taxiway and runways can be added for LFPG later? It even has very nice terminal and it’s a little bit sad that this lack of feature makes it one step from perfect.

    I feel that this survey is a playground of a clique with some members such as xplane, orbx and those frequent participants in the FSexpo. Only less than 18k respondents (and the respondents are majorly their customers). The number of FS players in my country alone is more than that, and I doubt 99% of them didn’t take that survey. Not to mention many in others.


    They list infinite flight, xpmobile but surprisingly didn’t add Aerofly mobile as an option. Clearly Aerofly mobile has great number of users. I don’t know how much did infinite flight and XP fund this survey but I’m afraid this survey is with bias and intend to guide the market and customers to fit the interests of certain developers. These statistics are far from convincing to depict a map of the whole FS market.


    So to IPACS teams and all Aerofly enthusiasts: don’t be bothered by this result, one subjective and limited survey absolutely can’t deny the fact that Aerofly is a great sim and the future is hopeful. But on the other hand I do feel Aerofly need to advertise itself more.

    Recently many new players (mostly mobile) complain that they are unable to get started because they can’t understand the voice tutorial in English of the flight school.


    I wonder if it is possible to add subtitle (in several major languages) for this? Perhaps it’s beneficial for building the brand and getting more customers.


    As a Chinese, I’m happy to help translating the Chinese version.:) I’m sure it’s better than using Google translator. Maybe some other community members from other countries can do the work of their languages so we can save the developers some time.

    Hi, I strictly follow the instruction on the wiki but the geoconvert SDK fails to generate any file in the scenery/images folder.


    I put the image (.bmp) file and .inf file into the input_aerial_images folder. Then using inf2tfwconverter to generate a .tfw file in the same folder. Then I change the NW and SE corner coordinates in the config-sample-only.tmc file, from level 9-14. Rounding up to 2 digits after the decimal. Then I run the config-sample-only.bat file. The generation is suddenly completed(green), and there’s no output files, only an .aid file in the input_.._images folder. Did I miss any step?


    The generation process took a long time at the very first time I run the converter, that time it showed “completed” but still no output. After that every time I run the converter, the conversion completed instantly (apparently it didn’t work). Why would that happen?

    I mean the any news about the Italy scenery this thread opened for:P


    Will its out date be put off due to the release of 777? Is that an IPACS official project or a third party one?

    The airport contained is KBOS, a mega international airport. What are the orbx ones? Even though they are highly detailed, no one can accommodate planes bigger than Boeing 757. This kind of airport is what orbx won’t be willing to develop even for the other two platforms and will never develop for AFS2, then why do you guys mention orbx? Besides Schiphol is also done cursorily.

    We should really thank the three developers’ courage to choose this site. This is the scenery that really push Aerofly forward, this is the kind of scenery and airport that the majority of players need! Look at how well the new AFS2020 mobile sells. Why? Because of the new 777: simmers love flying airliners! Aerofly can never be popular if only cater those of you who fly those tiny baby airplanes. Yes, the airport looks ugly, especially the terminals, but what do you expect from three guys who first step into this field? A flyTampa quality airport? You know this is not gonna happen for Aerofly now. Anyway, I think this is a good start for third party airports, real kind of airport, not grassfields or municipals.


    In addition, the city is done quite good. There are much more POIs and details than I thought. Although some downtown buildings use ugly textures (TE NL also use that), overall it looks nice, no to mention this is done by only three people.


    In sum I really appreciate the three developers for presenting us this scenery. It’s a good start, keep going!