Posts by Catboy

  • Garmin GPS on Baron 58 and Cessna 172

    Quote from Overloaded

    Like the existing FS2 Piper Arrow’s (still work-in-progress) Garmin 530 and 430 GPSs?

    IPACS have yet to recognise the gravity of our favourite sim's dead audio panels and the consequent lack of audio identification of navigation aids, vitally essential for realistically simulating responsible, legal and safe flight with all the current Aerofly light aircraft, Concorde and the peculiar analog cockpit (no visual idents) 737-500. Every other computer simulator even from decades back gets that core fundamental right, it is as deadly as a cockpit with no windows. Any potential argument that not many buyers would want that! would be a race to the bottom.
    Not quite appreciating basic flight sim essentials will IPACS really move to faithfully implement more technical depth avionics ahead of more and more external view market pandering fops?

    A new add-on sim RNAV for use in simulated controlled airspace would surely need an in date for the Aerofly sim’s specific issue period expanded, comprehensive and error free official navigation database?
    Generating real world IFR flight plan compatible RNAV routes or using the whole or part of officially laid down Airways, SIDS, Arrivals etc in the sim can not work if the new avionics device add-on is not perfectly compatible with the currently in use old Aerofly data which in this present era is quite opaque to us users. How will we possibly plan to use of such equipment without some new improved sim data library to access this long obsolete and long unavailable information?
    Users would need something like a new organised phone book size in-depth application, the very restricted blue nav page would be totally inadequate, it is already creaking at the seams, nearly as much of a hindrance to us as a help.

    Yeah, that's literally what I am talking about. Couldn't agree more.

  • Garmin GPS on Baron 58 and Cessna 172

    Quote from Catboy

    Simulators are here for realism. I don’t have to get PPL just because some person on internet said so. Yes, there are enough navaids in Europe, but in most parts of it there are only GNSS/RNAV routes and navaids serve for either RNAV navigation or GPS proof checking. So in many-many EU countries you can fly only VFR in planes without aRea navigation systems. Besides that, European Union plans to fully switch to GNSS in near future. And I even don’t start to told you about countries where airspace is controlled by armed forces such as China, Russia and many other located in Eurasia.

    Who says me or someone else don’t know navigation? What’s a point in saying such a thing? To show that you know it better than anyone? There’s nothing “special” in radio nav, it’s not a celestial navigation. Flying VOR radials, DME arcs, ndb approaches doesn’t make you special. Why in X-Plane for example even most basic planes have at least GNS 430? Why if people ask for useful feature that make Aerofly more competitive at the sims market some people start to show off their “superiority”?

    For anyone interested, according to ICAO: “The carriage of RNAV 5 equipment (identical to B-RNAV) became mandatory in European en route airspace in April 1998.”
    This quote is from EUROPEAN REGION AREA NAVIGATION (RNAV)
    GUIDANCE MATERIAL

  • Garmin GPS on Baron 58 and Cessna 172

    Quote from ThomK

    If you want 100% reality, get your real pilot's license. And there are enough VOR/NDB beacons here in Europe.

    Simulators are here for realism. I don’t have to get PPL just because some person on internet said so. Yes, there are enough navaids in Europe, but in most parts of it there are only GNSS/RNAV routes and navaids serve for either RNAV navigation or GPS proof checking. So in many-many EU countries you can fly only VFR in planes without aRea navigation systems. Besides that, European Union plans to fully switch to GNSS in near future. And I even don’t start to told you about countries where airspace is controlled by armed forces such as China, Russia and many other located in Eurasia.

    Quote from ThomK

    But we are not in the real world here, but in a simulation. In the real world, you still have to learn navigation first.

    Who says me or someone else don’t know navigation? What’s a point in saying such a thing? To show that you know it better than anyone? There’s nothing “special” in radio nav, it’s not a celestial navigation. Flying VOR radials, DME arcs, ndb approaches doesn’t make you special. Why in X-Plane for example even most basic planes have at least GNS 430? Why if people ask for useful feature that make Aerofly more competitive at the sims market some people start to show off their “superiority”?

  • Garmin GPS on Baron 58 and Cessna 172

    Quote from Martijn22

    As the others have already pointed out, there’s more than enough people that like gliders. There’s even more people that enjoy others getting new toys as much as themselves gaining new toys; be like them😘.

    Now I’m not one to correct other’s behaviour without correcting my own. When I initially saw this thread I thought: “Skill issue. You don’t need GPS for that.”, but I absolutely don’t mind Ipacs adding a GPS eguiped GA aircraft for those that want one.

    Besides that, I imagine that only modelling airliners might get a bit boring for the devs. Let the devs have some fun as well.😉

    World is bigger than just a US. In many parts of Europe and Asia there are no VOR/NDB routes/tracks or EVEN no VOR/NDB themselves. Besides that, you can't simply fly DCT like in United States because airspace is much more resctricted. So aircrafts with modern avionics is crucial for Aerofly.