Posts by blave549

    I love the EC135! Flying it around San Francisco in VR (HP Reverb G2 headset) is incredibly immersive, and the avionics emulation works the way I would expect (I'm speaking primarily of the engine instruments here). However, I did some testing today (does that make me a test pilot?), and I will assert that translational lift is not being modeled.

    Now, I have not flown the real deal, but I am a commercially rated (for fun) heli pilot, and have time in both piston and turbine machines. Everything I have flown will start to climb with the same power setting and cyclic input once a certain airspeed is attained.

    However, in the Aerofly EC135, if I lift off into a hover, maintain power, and very gently push the cyclic forward, I will of course start to move forward. But unless I exert more back pressure or raise the collective, the aircraft will stay at the initial altitude indefinitely.

    In contrast, the R22 does seem to model TL...



    Dave B.

    San Jose, CA

    Thanks guys!

    I just texted a friend who's into flight simming: "I just spent probably two hours in FS2. I am just blown away. I flew a bunch of the other stock airplanes (F/A-18, F-15E Strike Eagle, MB-339 jet trainer, Learjet, a stunt plane, a biplane, and P-38, almost all for the first time) around the Kennedy Space Center area, and it's just a magnificent sim. The smoothness (other than occasional hiccup, which I suspect is texture loading) is really something, and the "look" at any kind of altitude looks very commercial simulator-quality (at least in the CK area; most of the rest of the US does not have anywhere close to that resolution). At the moment I think I like it better for "my purposes" (boring holes in the sky) than DCS. I had the F-15 at 63,000 feet!!! That's a first. (According to WP the service ceiling is 60K feet, and it was slowing down at 63K, so it feels well-modeled). At the moment I would actually recommend it over MSFS, due to the stock aircrafts' fidelity).."

    Thanks for the replies and links folks! I do know about the add-on stuff, and I tried to install the SW USA texture pack, but I'm not sure I did it right. I'm digging into that today.

    Regarding Hawaii -- I owned a home on the Big Island for about 12 years, and so am very familiar with it. I can't wait for that team to add it as well!

    While I'm here -- I can't find mention of the "UL" flag that's shown in the center of the PFD sometimes, as shown here…rcraft%3Aec135_helicopter. What does that signify?



    On a whim, I bought the sim three or four days ago, after reading about how awesome it is for VR. Day before yesterday, I flew the EC135 around San Francisco, taking off from the Alcatraz helipad. My executive summary is that it was probably the best heli sim experience I've ever had. I know The City a bit, since I've lived just south of it (in San Jose) for decades, and was very impressed with much (but not all! Esp, as I moved north or south) of the detail. I come from years of MSFS, P3D, X-Plane (which I gave up on quite a while ago), and DCS. I've barely scratched the surface of the EC's systems but I am really looking forward to digging in more. The PFD and other instruments that I have used are just really well done.

    I have a question: what area in the default scenery gives the best terrain resolution? E.g. is that represented by downtown SF? Having spent some time in MSFS2020 I am really spoiled about terrain, but at least in SF, FS 2 is much better than I expected (given what seems to be a relatively small dev team).

    Another question -- does the Monterey, CA airport add-on include a detailed Carmel/Carmel Valley? I find the module to be pretty spendy at $30, but if it has at least Carmel-by-the-Sea modeled decently, I would be tempted.

    blue skies,


    i7 9700k / RTX2060 Super / 32GB / HP Reverb G2