Do you use the Steam version or the one from the Apple Store?
I use the Aerofly FS 4 version 4.06.06.04 (20250131) in the STEAM beta channel.
Do you use the Steam version or the one from the Apple Store?
I use the Aerofly FS 4 version 4.06.06.04 (20250131) in the STEAM beta channel.
I also have an M4 chip and it works with it. Take a look there, I've already described it:
Ich wünsche mir, dass die Flugsimulatoren von Aerofly ohne Waffen bleiben.
According to my experience, FS 4 recognises the individual controllers very well and so far all combinations of different controllers work plug & play without additional driver software.
For me, the Thrustmaster Airbus Edition works with FS 4 on the Mac, but not with FS global on iPhone or iPad.
Diesen Effekt habe ich beim Start des FS 4 mit fast allen Joysticks, denn aus irgendeinem Grund steht der betroffenen Button auf aktiv. Daher habe ich mir angewöhnt, beim Start vom FS 4 mit angeschlossenen Controllern alle Hebel und Buttons einmal kurz durchzubewegen.
Ok aber sie haben gesagt wenn jemand fragt wird der a350 verschoben das finde ich traurig es Fragen viele Leute weil sie den a350 in aerofly haben wollen dan hätten sie das Thema a350 gar nicht ansprechen sollten
Since I can't remember that there was such an official statement from IPACS, I would be grateful if you could also name the exact post for your statement here. I only remember responses from members of the community to the ongoing questions about the publication for a while.
The Hawaii project for FS 2 is too complex to be transferred to FS 4 with just a few changes. However, a small team revised the Hawaii project for the FS 4 in 2024. I'll ask if and when it can be published.
Strange, on my Mac with the current STEAM-beta 4.06.06.04 (20250131) this building does not exist.
I had also experimented with outsourcing the user directory on a Mac a long time ago and remember that it did not seem as easy as with a Windows computer. My problem at the time was to name the external drive correctly. Unfortunately, I can't give a concrete tip today.
However, I think I remember that in the path name the folder "scenery" may not be called, because FS 2 itself searches for "scenery", so that it must be rather like this (possibly the last SLASH must also be omitted):
<[string8] [extra_user_folder] [disk6s1:/volumes/KingAero/]>
If you rename the MAIN.MCF and then restart the FS 4, a new MAIN.MCF will be created with the default values, which you can then also take as a reference.
It doesn't work, could you suggest what should be the path for the external scenery? I'm using scenery for fs2, what should the inner members be for fs4? Thanks
From experience, I think it's easier for you to show in a screenshot how you do it, because it's usually easier to see what it could be.
When using FS 2 Scenerien for FS 4 you also have to make sure that not everything can be taken over 1:1 directly, see also this post:
Thanks Michael, I'll send a PM in the next few days.
Thank you very much for your list - and so that everyone has something from it, I write my answer here:
(1) ELEVATION - "invalid filename ... maph_nn_nxnx_nxnx_mask.tth":
I also noticed this error when switching from FS 2 to FS 4. It seems that FS 4 cannot read "_mask" files in the elevation folder.
My remedy is that in FS 4, with very few exceptions, I have generally disabled the elevation folders of third parties ("elevation___OFF"), whereby I block all "..._mask.tth" files.
(2) AIRPORTS - "no valid identifier for":
With the affected airfields, I will see that I adjust the identifier FS 4-compliant.
Additions for the B787, which are available in the FS 4 original, must be saved in your user directory for the FS 4 in the folder "aircraft" in the folder "b787":
If the directory "b787" does not yet exist there, you must add it.
... indeed I noticed a lot of errors in the ''tm.log'' especially with third-party scenes, ...
Just by the way and outside the actual thread:
You are welcome to send me the error list of third-party scenes, maybe some errors can be fixed.
Alt cst is altitude constraint. It's a lower and upper bound. ...
In FS 4, I compared the "custom_missions.tmc" with the "main.mcf" using the example of "Sight Seeing in Venice" for the element "W0436":
Case 1 - <[bool][alt_cst][true]>:
"custom_missions.tmc":
"main.mcf":
=> FS 4 takes over the altitude as a default with a fixed value.
Case 2 - <[bool][alt_cst][false]>:
"custom_missions.tmc":
"main.mcf":
=> FS 4 takes the altitude as bandwidth.
Further findings:
When a mission is loaded in FS 4, data of the route is stored in the "main.mcf". There, data can then be adjusted retrospectively and unfortunately only temporarily, e.g.:
- [CruiseAltitude]
- [Altitude]
- [FlyOver]
These adjustments are usually not necessary, but they can be helpful if, for example, an interesting or/and more difficult mission is to be tried more often and more accurately.
... If it does not change the behaviour of the Co-Pilot, what else does it change for the flight? ...
According to my observations, [alt_cst] adjusts the height of the green mark (arrows and frame):
=> When flying manually, you have a very good orientation, where it goes in direction and height longitudinally.
=> The copilot follows the direction in my test, but unfortunately not the height.
QuoteFlyover is currently ignored
OK, the transfer from the mission is not currently taking place, although a manual adjustment in the MAIN.MCF is not ignored.
QuoteYou can change the vertical profile by adding altitude constraints if the mission is to be flown at a set altitude.
Unfortunately, the co-pilot does not pay attention to the altitude constrains. However, even in this case the altitude cruise can be entered directly in the MAIN.MCF.