Jereon, there are thousands of square miles of VERY detailed scenery that will make your eye's pop.

Well, I just flew around in Switzerland and New York, in the er...detailed parts, and er... yes, it made my eyes pop but not in the way you meant it. Man, did my eyes pop...! I mean, seriously... really, seriously... I mean... SERIOUSLY... er... well, you know what, I will leave it at this or I might get banned. I won't even upload screenshots. I am happy, honestly, for everyone who likes AFS2 but it isn't a sim for me. To each his own. Happy flying!

I loaded it briefly to set up the various options, but I will need to test those to make sure that (for example) the hat switch on my joystick works properly. However, I noted that flights can be set up for final approach at any runway for all of the airports in the database. That is a really nice touch, and I suspect that this will be my first experience of flight in the simulator. I love messing about doing take offs and landings, so this is right up my street. The fact that the south western USA region is a much, much bigger area than the San Francisco high resolution region in FU3/FU2 just makes it even better!  :smile:

Chris, I say this;

 

Set up a flight in the King Air, and create navigation between San Diego, and Roger's Field, near Lassen Peak.

 

Set up for a flight of FL180 at 200 knots.   Use the green box navigation aids for the entire flight.  Keep right through them.

 

I have found my sim;

 

I have never felt in any other sim, that I was....***actually*** flying.  Flying over the real world.  I have found my sim;

 

This flight, with the sun beaming down upon the fuselage, the wings, the haze...you can feel the warmth of the sun...the best light scattering I have ever seen in an simulated atmosphere, the clouds changing, and you don't even SEE them doing so....the best quite frankly, that I have seen in any flight simulator.  The scenery...well...you are there.  You are really flying over Sacremento, over the valley, on toward's Lassen Peak, and the right swing down through the mountains to a landing at Roger's Field, to the right of the lake, in those mountains.

 

The terrain (ortho) and so veritus

The atmospherics

 

The incredible control I have at my locked 60 FPS CONSTANT!

 

The sound of the King Air's props as they brrrr..and bite the air when the wind changes to a head wind,

 

I have found my sim;

 

I deleted P3D v2.4 yesterday, and formatted one of my Velociraptors just for this sim, and the anticipation of any further new releases of DLC content, or, hopefully, a build up of the entire North America, Central America, and South America.  I will CERTAINLY be investing in any of the aforementioned, if and when they come.

 

I realize now,that I am a VFR flyer. Totally. Not a 'study sim' flyer. I want to see the 'real world' out there, and I now realize that this is the sim platform that is custom tailored to my wants and needs.  I want to feel like I am really flying a plane over the real world.  I will never do this in real life..and so craved this in flight simulation.  P3D, FSX, XP(x), can not give you that. You, no matter what, see computer generated terrain, land features, colors, etc.  World-wide ortho lets you fly over what is there.  I really don't care if the world is a 'snap shot' of what was there when it was all formatted.  So what, if it is Ground Hog Day below the wing.  What is there, is damn gorgeous, and sets the mind up, that you are really doing 200 knots over the real world, over real cities, towns, lakes, mountains, and that is what I need for my sim'ming endeavors.

 

Each to their own, of course, the study flyer, the casual VFR/Study flyer.  I now know why I loved Flight Unlimited so much. It made me feel that I was OVER San Francisco, Oakland, Sonoma...etc.  Places I haunt in real life.

 

Folks,  If you liked that sort of flying...that visualization, then AeroFly FS-2 is Flight Unlimted 2, on serious STEROIDS, with a modern, and capable, graphics engine!

 

This is a specialized sim, for VFR and recreational flyers.   Most of us on AVSIM, already have FSX, P3D (whatever), XP (whatever)...and can fly study flights anytime.  You can not fly virtual reality flights with any of them, at present. You know that what is below you, is being graphically represented as what might be down there.  With AeroFly, you are seeing what is there...no matter a snap-shot in time, or otherwise. 

 

Final few words, and I'm going back to another flight.  This sim is a great addition to what you already have, because it doesn't 'duplicate' already what you have.  You don't have a sim that is based totally upon Ortho (actual real world view), even if at the present area's outside of dedicated DLC content is low rez.  The engine is there to bring where ever DLC comes, to full and true visual fidelity. What is there...will be there....

 

Like I said, I have dedicated upon my system, an entire hard drive to this platform, for I anticipate amazing contributions by Orbx, and other third party.  I realize, now, that I prefer Ortho below the wing...but to date, had nothing to compare to computer-generated auto-gen, and land texture tiles, other than FU-2 of which I had mostly forgotten the visual cue thereof.

 

Each to their own...each will persue their needs and what is important to them, for the sim to have, in features, and visual cues.

 

For myself, I have found my sim. I now only anticipate with excitement, to see it mature, see more content from IPACS, as well as any contributing partners. I have an entire hard drive waiting for what comes next.  Until then...I have months of flight enjoyment right now...with Southwest U.S., Northeast U.S., and New York and sq miles of area surrounding.

 

Life is good...and sim'ming just got way better, from two days ago!  Water bodies are real, Canyons are real. Gullies are real, valleys (Sacramento) is real 'down there'...

 

My recent flight set up between San Diego, and Roger's Field, near Lassen Peak...told me, "I'm home!"

 

Cheers, all, from an un-bridled, and unapologetic flight sim enthusiast!   Happy New Year to all!

 

Mitch

Someone mentioned somewhere about IPACS considering worldwide coverage at 4.8 metres per pixel, which would be extremely welcome. They also stated that this would be around 160MB, but that is way too low. Does anyone know how much disk space would be required for the entire planet at that resolution? I guess the water would not need to be that detailed, so that eliminates 70% of the total surface area required!

 

I'm wondering at the context of that quote. To be exact, since JV says the Aerofly focus of interest, at least for now, is North America and Europe, maybe they were speaking about enhancing those specific areas?

North America and Europe at 4.8 metres per pixel would be fine for me. In fact, I would bump it up to 2.4 metres per pixel if they asked me! Obviously all areas around airports and detailed cities need to be at least 1.2 metres per pixel.

Bush flying ?

Bush flying ?

 

Like George W.  ?

Like George W.  ?

 

Who is that ? 

Bush flying ?

Depends a little on what you mean with bush flying. Actual bush area's have been modeled. The water isn't water so that isn't an option (when I think about bush flying I often think about floats...).

Depends a little on what you mean with bush flying. Actual bush area's have been modeled. The water isn't water so that isn't an option (when I think about bush flying I often think about floats...).

 

I consider landing on dirt strips and I feel XPlane offers the best in bush flying . 

I consider landing on dirt strips and I feel XPlane offers the best in bush flying . 

 

Afaik Aerofly doesn't have dirt strips. Besides, with bush flying I also (somehow) think about flying low above trees and all (might be totally mistaken here LOL) and Aerofly isn't suited for that.

Afaik Aerofly doesn't have dirt strips. Besides, with bush flying I also (somehow) think about flying low above trees and all (might be totally mistaken here LOL) and Aerofly isn't suited for that.

 

thanks . XPlane is the best for that kinda flying. 

Afaik Aerofly doesn't have dirt strips. Besides, with bush flying I also (somehow) think about flying low above trees and all (might be totally mistaken here LOL) and Aerofly isn't suited for that.

 

I'm not sure why not. They can add higher resolution areas at any time, and 3rd parties could also potentially do so if there was a market.......

 

We keep having Glass-half-empty/Glass-half-full moments, here.

 

About a product in early access?  :unsure:

 

I agree its not a current focus, though.

I'm not sure why not. They can add higher resolution areas at any time, and 3rd parties could also potentially do so if there was a market.......

 

We keep having Glass-half-empty/Glass-half-full moments, here.

 

About a product in early access?  :unsure:

 

I feel it should also suit the simmers way of flying . Not saying Aerofly ain't good , but the kind of flying i do is GA only and mostly bush flights or taking small flights from one airport to another in my country where Xplane does quite well  , yes good resolution orthos are nice to have no doubt.  

 

 Addon makers are the ones who actually make a sim shine . just waiting for it to get more matured to suit my flying type low fast and dangerous  :wink:

I'm not sure why not. They can add higher resolution areas at any time, and 3rd parties could also potentially do so if there was a market.......

 

We keep having Glass-half-empty/Glass-half-full moments, here.

 

About a product in early access?  :unsure:

 

AFS2 is certainly suited for dirt strips but there aren't any. And it is not suited right now for low flying because the scenery isn't that good at low altitudes (and it's not only about the resolution but also the amount of properly placed 3D stuff). Imho Aerofly FS 2 in its current state is best at airline flightlevels. I think Orbx scenery might help here though so who knows what happens in the future. Early access etc. indeed. But right NOW AFS2 isn't a sim bush flyers.

AFS2 is certainly suited for dirt strips but there aren't any. And it is not suited right now for low flying because the scenery isn't that good at low altitudes (and it's not only about the resolution but also the amount of properly placed 3D stuff). Imho Aerofly FS 2 in its current state is best at airline flightlevels. I think Orbx scenery might help here though so who knows what happens in the future. Early access etc. indeed. But right NOW AFS2 isn't a sim bush flyers.

Just in counter point usage...I just had a grand trip from one airport in the Northeast to another....TOD was 10,000 to the numbers. The distance between airports was 120 miles. Everything looked good, from the rotation, to the numbers.  Always...a person's personal opinion in play...always....

 

This one sim, in my opinion, already as is...tops all my other's on my system for 'realism' of view, when you are not staring straight ahead at the cross-tree scan of the panel...

 

I'm very easily becoming addicted to it. When they flesh out most of the United States, or a continent or three in high-def DLC...this will be the first sim I run to, for the flight of the day.  You look down...beyond the wing, and see reality, where ever the DLC takes you...