Posts by orangedog433

    True, the ground effect seems to be a bit inadequate.

    One example is the Concorde which should (1) achieve smooth landing by just flaring 1 degree (!) and leave the rest for ground effect,

    Based on my research into aircraft codes, IPACS has indeed implemented ground effects for the Concorde. During flight, I also found that an approach at an angle of 11 degrees can support a smooth landing for the Concorde. Perhaps your experience might be influenced by insufficient ground effect forces.

    Compared to other products, Aerofly's aircraft handling can be overly sensitive. A friend told me this might result from insufficient aerodynamic feedback, causing minor details to be overlooked.

    IPACS prioritizes releasing aircraft quickly while ensuring aerodynamic characteristics align with the basic parameters outlined in the FCOM (Flight Crew Operations Manual). However, they are not a team specialized in aircraft development. They can't create products as extremely realistic as PMDG and FINEX.

    Writing aerodynamics is still an extremely tedious task. For my work on editing the B777, most of my efforts involve fine-tuning the aerodynamic codes, which consist of multiple lines of code. Even so, I'm just someone who has researched aerodynamic models and not a professional in this field. It's challenging to make every aspect satisfactory.

    XPLANE and MSFS utilize Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to simulate the entire aerodynamic model within the game. Yet, I think achieving this in Aerofly would be quite difficult.

    If you want to place your device on a desk and get a relatively good operational experience, purchasing a Bluetooth-enabled controller with Xbox functionality would be a good choice. AFG can adapt to them, and the key layout is the same as the default key layout for desktop controllers. The only downside is that on mobile devices, you can't customize these keys yourself, and in my testing, it seems that the pause replay key doesn't work. The control slider hides itself, and the replay function is lost, until the next time you don't connect the controller and start the game.

    If the airline is not interested in this matter, then that's good. After all, most people wouldn't initiate cross-border lawsuits for small benefits. If there is no assistance from the airline or publicly available information, there are generally two ways to create liveries: hand drawing and patching based on photos. From what I know, most cases involve ground staff assisting in taking pictures of different parts of the aircraft and then using filters and color adjustments to recreate them in the game. I'm not sure if IPACS uses this method as well, but I know that creating a high-quality replica livery always requires a lot of effort. And IPACS is working hard to provide even more detailed content. I once thought about inviting some airlines to create official liveries for Aerofly. However, it is still unclear whether IPACS would be willing to release their official repaint kits to support these efforts.

    Legally, the copyright of an airline's livery belongs to the airline itself. However, like many game artworks, most copyright owners are happy to have other artists create content featuring their designs to increase their visibility. Based on my understanding in my country, the proper process for creating liveries is to contact the airline's staff (some airlines have virtual airline divisions that serve flight simulation players) and obtain permission. Once permission is granted, the liveries can be created by aircraft manufacturers. Some airlines may require the manufacturer to provide an official toolkit for livery creation so that their own technicians can better create accurate representations of these liveries. I'm not sure if similar regulations exist in Europe.

    I have a question

    why when I change the camera position of the b787 the game crashes? Can you help me please;(;(

    Perhaps reporting the problem to IPACS would have resulted in a quicker resolution. I don't know the exact situation you encountered, if you can send a video on our Discord community to demonstrate the error will have a more direct explanation.

    At least in my Chinese community I always advocate using video to report any errors. But the fact is that it's hard to implement in any community.

    加入 Discord 服务器 ACC Aero Club - International!
    来 Discord ACC Aero Club - International 社区瞧瞧——结交近 161 名成员,畅享免费语音与文字聊天。

    Keep in mind that there are also different systems and software versions installed in real world aircraft. Just because you see it in one video does not mean it doesn't exist in a different aircraft.

    Jet-Pack (IPACS) This sentence pointed out something to me. Perhaps it's not about different system versions between aircraft but rather about the nature of input parameters. Here, I should apologize for my earlier assumptions. The aircraft systems are operating normally, but the set parameters are not.😂

    After consulting the PMDG forum, I discovered that this minor error had already been fixed in the PMDG737 for MSFS2020. Maybe I should shift my focus to their upcoming PMDG777 for Microsoft Flight Simulator instead of the outdated P3Dv5.:sleeping:

    According to clues provided on the PMDG forum, the appearance of the 'NO V SPD' prompt after landing is achieved through a timer. Their developers emphasized that modifying data should come from documents provided by the manufacturer rather than videos. However, I still couldn't find this clue in publicly available materials.:S

    Because I was overly convinced that this error was happening at all times, I overlooked some other potential possibilities.

    You previously mentioned, 'Could also be a different logic depending if you perform a full flight or if you started the flight on (short/long) final approach.' I reflected on this statement, and in the just-completed full flight, the correct result appeared. 'NO V SPD' did not appear prematurely. Although this wasn't my first time conducting a full route flight, it was something I had overlooked in previous tests—being too certain about the incorrect fact to notice the correct scenario.

    After a series of comparisons, I found the true cause of this issue:

    1. When using the game's preset long final approach, VREF in the CDU was already inputted. However, 'NO V SPD' appeared immediately after touchdown.

    2. When I manually input the APP REF page, I manually entered VREF, and everything simulated correctly after landing.

    So, the only difference is: the data input by the game is a smaller number, while the data I input is a larger number. Therefore, the conclusion is clear: the smaller number is not the actual input, or it merely displays a number on the PFD without providing the Fly-By-Wire with the actual V-speed. Thus, discrepancies occur after landing with the smaller number, while manually inputting the number presents no issues.

    Perhaps the next step is to figure out how to transform the smaller number into the larger number without modifying any aircraft system logic. That's it. Once again, I apologize for my earlier assumptions!;(

    I both cases this has nothing to do with the application of reverse thrust after nose gear touchdown.

    I don't see any connection neither with the interlock nor crosswind ops.

    These are just reference materials I could find in my search capabilities. Because I have limited access to actual pilots. I have no real flying experience. The keywords I found in my search were "maximum reverse thrust" and "nose gear touchdown." Most Chinese airline pilots are not interested in answering questions on forums, and most of my friends who have learned professional knowledge have been engaged in other industries and have no more in-depth knowledge. Due to family reasons, I did not apply for recruitment in civil aviation, too. That's it.

    Here I checked the LATAM's flight manual. Nor did they mention the matter.:/

    FL54 OK, I found a description of the Boeing's reverse operation. The mechanical structure of the interlock restricts the movement of the reverse thrust handle until the reverse thrust sleeve is close to the deployed position.

    A related description in an Airbus's video on normal procedures for crosswind landings: When facing a high crosswind landings, reverse can affect the operational efficiency of the rudder. Therefore, the reverse push should be maintained until the nose wheel aligns with the runway center line.


    Also my friend who works in an Airbus supplier factory told me that "The manual does not clearly state that this procedure does not necessarily need to be fully implemented."😂

    orangedog433 Since you seem to aim for realistic aircraft ops, reverse thrust must only be applied once the nosewheel is firmly on the ground.

    Idle reverse at main gear touchdown, but no reverse thrust.

    Thank you for reminding me. Here are some details I missed in my operation. Because I don't see this in the normal procedure.

    I consulted some friends in the civil aviation industry and experienced flight simulator players. But there are no real B777 pilots among them. It's hard for me to find such people on Chinese flight forums.

    The reply I received was "the main mode of deceleration is still braking, in general, when the handle is pulled to the maximum thrust level, the engine delay response time is enough for the nose wheel to touch the ground", "perhaps the specific regulations vary by airline".

    Here I checked the LATAM's flight manual. Nor did they mention the matter.:/

    Also, I did not use a professional throttle rocker to control my reverse thrust. 😂

    I used a button to activate it. So you'll see that when I press the button, the reverse thrust is set directly to the maximum thrust. The default throttle control provided by IPACS can set thrust reversals. However, it will directly interrupt the automatic throttle arm when using.

    When release new aircrafts, some older aircraft may have some uniformity errors. For example, some functions have been implemented on the B737 but not on other Boeing aircraft. The features on the 737 appear on other aircraft. Sometimes the same mistakes as those made by PMDG Boeing aircraft will occur.^^

    But I think this is understandable, because maintaining uniformity in code writing between models can facilitate timely correction of problems. Some features still need to be completed.

    What is gratifying is that these aircraft are continuously updated by IPACS in a short period of time. And all have the necessary cockpit functions. It is hoped that IPACS can continue to solve these problems through the accumulation of time. ;)

    Aerofly FS 4——————PMDG777 in Prepar3D v5——————Real B777 in PilotsEYE

    I used published a continuously updated post in 2022. Although I was not an experienced player at that time. The IPACS's update implements a large part of the functions that have been mentioned.:thumbup:

    May 15, 2022 at 4:54 AM

    Thank you, I will donate.

    Is there a way to not save all the files to lighten the storage and of course decrease resolution?

    I hope you hand will get well soon.

    Maybe download all files and delete the images level above 13 will save most of disk space. Higher level .ttc provide clearer images.

    This is just a advice executed on my device:thumbup:

    【Aerofly FS Global】B777-300ER Addon / Optimizing Performance for Reality V3.0 Available Now!

    Thanks to IPACS, most of AF4 applications can be easily achieved in AFG!Cheers!:thumbup:

    A tutorial guide on custom payloads for users is added in my lastest post now !

    Refer to my post for updates here:

    January 3, 2024 at 2:52 PM

    External Content
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    【Aerofly FS 4/ Global】B777-300ER Addon / Optimizing Performance for Reality V3.0 Available Now!

    Remake the aerodynamic model again, and it will perform better this time!

    Addon for Aerofly FS 4

    【By OrangeDog TEAM】B777-300ER Addon / Optimizing Performance for Reality V3.0 Available Now! -
    This MOD is made by orangedog. IPACS Jet-Pack contributed greatly to this achievement. Thanks to him very much! V3.0 What did OD modify? * The aerodynamic…

    Addon for Aerofly FS Global

    【Only for Android / Aerofly FS Global】B777-300ER Addon / Optimizing Performance for Reality V3.0 Available Now! -
    This MOD is made by orangedog. IPACS Jet-Pack contributed greatly to this achievement, he also permitted us to provide this mod Android! Thanks to him very…


    What did I modify?

    * The aerodynamic model modified again and again. Fix some errors when compare to real plane videos or PMDG777. Now it wouldn't pitch up some much on cruise. And joystick will be much heavier than before when landing. :)

    * Modified the elasticity of the wing, so that it has close to the real physical performance at all times.

    * Some changes have been made to EGT. But it doesn't quite match the real situation. :sleeping:

    * Adjust the pilot view for a better control of PFD and outside.

    * Now the auto spoiler will not be opened early, and the automatic brakes will not be activated early.

    * Notice refer to FCOM: In B77w, you should adjust the airspeed to 5 knots more than VREF to resist gusty winds and obtain the best approach angle of attack! ;)

    Follow the SOP and enjoy the perfect experience in your flight now!:saint:<3

    User tutorial guide for custom payloads :

    The unit of measurement is the kilogram

    Fuel Change :

    1. When you change the mass of fuel sum them and adjust the value.

    2. Sum the value of all fuel on aircraft and adjust the valve of Fuel on board.

    Payload Change :

    1. Change the mass of payload and cargo.

    2. Sum them and add 167832.0 to get the Zero Fuel Weight on your plane.

    ( ZeroFuelWeight = AircraftWeight 167.832t + PayloadWeight and CargoWeight )

    Plane can only read these values to get total weight displayed on CDU in game.

    Mass decides the physical weight in game.

    File path for AFG on Android

    Put the .tme file in below route:


    External Content
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    The approach marker is a navigation receiver that displays the outer, middle and inner marker on the PFD. The R0 position, the location relative the the aircraft center, is not all that relevant. The signal is received for several seconds as you fly over the omnidirectional marker beacon on final approach and the position offset would only affect the timing by a split second. Even 30m is not that far if you travel at 140kt or 72m/s.

    The location of the approach marker receiver has no affect on the PAPI lights.

    Jet-Pack (IPACS) So good that I spent half a day trying to define the position of the receiver to the aircraft's nose in any way. But it seems that none of the methods I know of have succeeded. I still think that if the signal receiver is positioned in the right place, the glideslope displayed by the PAPI will become similar to the glideslope displayed by the instrument, instead of the PAPI always showing you above the glideslope when using an ILS approach. . The position of the receiver should now be in the center of the aircraft. I want to try moving them to where the real antennas are. At least I think it's necessary to try.:S:thumbup:

    Jet-Pack (IPACS) I wonder if it's possible to define the position of Approach Marker Receiver. So that plane can have a correct view with airports' PAPI when using ILS approach.

    I have tried some tpyes of codes but nothing happened and even led to stop and crash.

    // approach marker
                   <[tmvector3d][R0][ 30.0 0.0 2.6 ]>

    Does there any solutions or it just can't be define with any grammar?

    Jet-Pack contributes all of aircrafts' codes. All modifications should have real data reference, such as FCOM or some information provided by the manufacturer. Some features are not implemented yet or are not perfect, so they are hidden. You can try to learn how to write code in AEROFLY wiki. Running a logic is not just something can be easily implemented with a single line of code. They are a combination of many parameters. It is not surprising. But if you don't understand the meaning behind the codes, don't modify them, wisenheimer will only lead to errors and crashes. Jet Pack will complete them in future updates. Any changes will be overwritten in the update.

    Jet Pack is always written with reference to the actual documentation of the aircrafts. If you want these features to be added, please provide their data to IPACS or learn to write a whole new code yourself. Every code writer doesn't want more errors in their code.