Their A320 is a killer feature.
A few hours ago, I tried the A330 of XP12. I trashed XP12 immediately even though I was teased by other points.
phase 1, phase 2
The calibration in Aerofly includes 2 phases: moving levers from min to max / validate + put levers mid position / validate.
The CL (CLIMB) position is centered on the device, so it returns 50% instead of ~56%, the position in the cockpit.
I'm still hoping a device calibration based on IDLE, CL, FLEX, TOGA positions by throttle separately.
But all of this can be caused by the fact I'm using a Mac with so called pure PC device that IPACS makes worked (thank you again for that).
In Aerofly, at the time of phase 1 of calibration, move the FLAPS and SPEED BRAKE levers in all their amplitude, but for the throttle levers do not go further than between FLEX and TOGA from IDLE.
Then, in phase 2 of the calibration, center FLAPS on 2 and SPEED BRAKE on 1/2 and THROTTLE on CLIMB (this phase does not seem to have any effect).
This method makes it possible to fully hang the CL detent, but on the other hand makes it more difficult to engage the FLEX detent. However, it is less evil than losing the A/THR in flight!
I like it for the ability of making a flight plan without charts. And the ability to set the MCDU from zero anyway!
And the most of all, it is also a Mac application. IPACS knows programming.
The A320 running in FS 4 is the same that runs in FS 2019…2023.
And it never crashes. Never, ever, ever.
I can also add:
AEROFLY FS 4 / USA / MCDU / APPR / BARO cheat works but the plane takes care of it as 100 ft RADIO.
Dear Jet-Pack (IPACS)
AEROFLY FS 2023 / A320 / MCDU / APPR / MAG WIND / cheat issue update:
Finally, it also happen with Aerofly FS 4 in USA. It seems to be linked to the USA (flight from KSFO to KLAX).
I suppose the Aerofly FS 2023 & FS 4 encounter this problem in USA not in Europe.
Dear Jet-Pack (IPACS)
It is the same with Aerofly FS 2023.
Plus, in Aerofly FS 2023, the MCDU/APPR/MAG WIND cheat does not work (ok in Aerofly FS 4). The fact, it applied a 0° wind but adds turbulence.
Dear Jet-Pack (IPACS)
With Aerofly FS 4 (December update), macOS.
Prepare a flight plan from Amsterdam to Madrid for exemple (800 NM). Voluntary choose to cruise at FL330. Put the A320 ready to takeoff.
Use Skip Time.
Everything is OK until you Skip Time brings you to the defined cruise altitude. In this case, at each Skip Time action, the cruise altitude will be increase of 1000 ft. Until reaching FL390. At FL390, the next Skip Time action will maintain FL390 but will set FL CRZ to 40000 ft.
It happens whatever the flight you make, even if you chose FL390 as cruise altitude, even if you start from cold & dark.
It is bearable because when you use Skip Time until reaching descent you retrieve your way (appart the MCDU message that says 40000 ft has been set as cruise altitude).
The initial version of Aerofly worked OK, it appeared a few versions before December.
One more thing, my Mac as 16 GB M1 GPU/CPU memory, Aerofly uses 6 GB, so you can strike the heap. The M1 architecture accept a memory use that goes over the memory size, so you can target something borderline.
Happy New year to all.
On Apple iOS the operating system might remove those downloads in case storage becomes low. I am not sure if that is the case on your devices. There is no way for us to tell the iOS system to not remove those files automatically when free storage is getting low.
iOS does not unload data of applications in this case. It only unloads the unused application itself keeping its data locally if the user launches it again.
By the way, the bunch of GB of the regions are even backed up on iCloud so they are considered as data.
This discontinuity bug is represented by an interruption in the pink line that represents the route elaborated on the navigation screen of the simulator. As I explained in the previous post, it is possible to avoid this bug by activating the HDG function so that the plane does not leave the route. After completing the route of the discontinuity, you must activate the LNAV function so that the aircraft resumes following the route. If you are very close to the destination airport and if the approach is ILS, keep the HDG function engaged and adjust the heading according to the final approach course. After intercepting the course, you must activate the approach function so that the plane captures the locator and the glide slope and thus automatically aligns with the runway.
Yes. Like it has to be done in real life (ATC gives vectors).
But, without ATC, a cheat that fills the gap would be appreciated for those who want to use it.
At Salt Lake City the gap can easily be of 20 or 30 NM wide before intercepting the localizer.
You can also use the bearing to a point in PROG page of the MCDU to determine the exact HDG to select.
For some reason, many of the STARS do not connect with any APPROACHES. Many times I leave the APPROACH blank so the NAV will connect the STAR to the runway. Other times I leave it alone and just fly using heading mode when close to the VOR or ILS.
I also tried other approaches because sometimes they connect each other.
I also clear the STAR and remake it waypoints by waypoints.
I don't think these are the same discontinuities as the other ones internally because they are hard coded parts of the arrival/approach.
I confirm that these "discontinuities" are not shown as -- F-PLN DISCONTINUITY -- in the MCDU. Previous versions (when STAR/SID appeared) naturally linked STAR to APPROACH. So I was hoping for a cheat as an option that links them or not. It would be nice to perform a brainless arrival.
Dear Jet-Pack (IPACS)Blog ArticleUpdated Tutorials for Airbus and Boeing (M)CDUs AvailableWe've updated the A320 MCDU Tutorial and added a tutorial for the FMC preflight for the Boeing 747, 777 and 787 for you.
For an instant, I believe that it was possible to clear gaps between STAR and APPROACH (in certain case) . I know it is like this in real world but I would really care for a cheat that virtually links the end of the STAR to the beginning of the APPROACH.
A developer explained to me via email that pushback is not ready yet and that it might be introduced in future updates. Let's stop criticizing the developers and support more the beautiful work they've been doing in Aerofly 2023. If you're not enjoying the simulator, go to RFS or Fly Wings and don't come and bother with meaningless claims.
Quality and perfection appeals more.
I surfed over many competitors and crushed them, leaving puddles of blood behind me. Aerofly is the best, especially if you think in terms of A320.