Posts by W.B.

    I don't understand this obsession for more and more aircraft. The Aerofly FS 4 fleet is the best IMO: Learjet 45, KingAir C90, 737NG, 777-300, 787, 747, CONCORDE, CRJ and some classic airplanes.... I would prefer developers to focus on other features, maybe better weather options, ATC, etc...

    The truth is developing a new airplane is easier and rewarding than building new features and systems for the developers. The latter requires much more research and may not guarantee a successful output.


    I’m curious why it’s been a decade since Aerofly was born but we still can’t see weight and fuel, such a basic and important system in flight simulator?

    I assume the physical measures such as mass and inertia are already there in the sim. Why not just change them from a constant to a variable and changed with the fuel amount and thrust? It doesn’t look that complex to me. Although it might be more tricky to consider how the weights are distributed within the aircraft. Why not just start with something simpler, I suppose it would be at least better than nothing?

    P.S. (not relevant to this topic). Can I ask why the terrain errors in some major European airports such as Charles De Gaulle is still not fixed? It’s horrible to fly.


    When the pushback is out, can we have some of the static aircraft models removed from LAX? Since in LAX space is quite limited, planes need to be pushed a long way out of the terminal area.


    It would be interesting if there are more slots to park and let us play with the pushback. Currently most of the slots are occupied and we don’t have too many choices.

    Many thanks,

    Hi HiFlyer,

    Might sound interesting, as long as we don't find some kind of photogrammetry like (MSFS) with cauliflower shaped trees. ;)

    I’m afraid that’s the best the state-of-the-art 3D reconstruction techniques can do for now. You might want to try improve that. :D

    And that’s a price you pay for having unique 3D objects in the sim.

    In fact this is one of the factor I prefer AFS than MSFS. If only we can have more variations on the autogens according to the region and have better texture for the tall buildings in downtown…

    I prefer new scenery that has mountains rather than flat areas since these are more interesting from a flight perspective. While popular world tourism sites and islands are great in the real world, most of the activities that make these wonderful tourist sites (where humans actually get to walk around or lay in the sun) have no equivalent utility in a flight simulation other than as a destination for a jetliner international flight. Since I am not into simulating a multi-hour jetliner flight in Aerofly FS 4 where most of the time you are letting the autopilot fly, those kinds of places have no …

    You are confusing tourist site with POIs…… Of course we don’t need a beach with some umbrellas in a flight simulator. But the Parthenon, the pyramids can be great attractions to fly over.

    Greece and Turkey have mountains, water, islands and cities which are great for all types of users. For you, it would be fun to fly between islands or over mountains with the GAs. While the states you mentioned basically have nothing but mountains. Which looks boring IMHO.

    Well, I’d appreciate any new regions. But when it comes to giving priority. I prefer something different and exotic other than some remote states in the US. Thanks.

    Perhaps it’s a good idea to expand the current scenery from Greece and Turkey to connect to the Middle East region so that in the future we may see some interesting or popular destinations such as Egypt or UAE. Greece and Turkey themselves can have many great destinations and spots as well.

    I hope there are aerial images available for these countries.

    As far as I am concerned, the A350 and the A330 are more requested than the A220. Flying the A350 means flying long haul for sure because these regions that are included are not meant for flying the A350 on short haul routes. In Singapore and so on it would be another story. But yes, I agree, the A330 isn’t particularly a plane that flies long haul. But you also can’t deny the fact that that the A220 would be more variable with routes because of the regions that are included. Keep in mind that I am talking about realistic flying so for example routes in real life. I am also looking forward for the flying statistics.

    Most users fly Aerofly for relaxation, not for strict realism. If you are looking for variation, then we’d better get a military plane or cargo plane or something else instead of sticking with alrliners.

    since we already have a bunch of long haul airliners and only a few people (me included) are flying long haul because it’s time wasting many users think.

    Your statement is invalid. Firstly, how do you know the long haul players are the minority? Secondly, flying A330 and A350 doesn’t necessarily mean having long haul flight, you shouldn’t reject these two models and state that we need A220 more simply by the range. If you go back to the old vote on most expected airliners, you’ll find these two models are indeed the most popular ones. Statistics don’t lie. I think the flying statistics IPACS added in recent versions of Aerofly is a good reference. Hopefully they can collect the data and get to know what are most users truly need.

    And how many flight simulators do you know with real water that have the performance of FS2? Or FS4 ( probably )? I do not know anyone.

    Then why would IPACS add these autogens in AFS4? I’m sure it impacts the performance a lot. If performance is the reason that you think prevent more important features like water. Then perhaps this sim can stop being developed.

    Just out of curiosity, why is this so important for you?

    Not important? Are you serious? Then what’s important to you? System and visual realism are two key factors of flight simulator. Cloulds, rains, water, those are as important as what IPACS has been working on to improve the scenery. I believe it’s even more important than publishing new scenery and aircrafts. And I reckon many people would have the same opinion.