What We Want (Part 1)

[andyjohnston.net 617]

I would love to see more available failures and emergencies.  Like with FSPax, you could perhaps determine how likely your aircraft is to have a failure, rather than setting them up knowing what's going to happen.

[blueairone70 3]

1. the able to create different aircraft profiles for hardware controls 

2. a vr  camera section so you can setup different views like chaseplane and be able to assign it to hardware in vr

[Dominique_K 10,138]

4 minutes ago, blueairone70 said:

1. the able to create different aircraft profiles for hardware controls 

 

you can already do that. All my P3D aircraft have a different hardware profile within the sim for my Warthog HOTAS (I don't use FSUIPC). The only thing missing is tuning the axis  response curves like DCS does.

[Adrian123 1,015]

3 minutes ago, domkle said:

you can already do that. All my P3D aircraft have a different hardware profile within the sim for my Warthog HOTAS (I don't use FSUIPC). The only thing missing is tuning the axis  response curves like DCS does.

But, as in Xplane, each aircraft hardware profile can be configured without the use of an outside program such as FSUIPC. A very nice feature indeed.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Adrian123

[Paraffin 2,197]

7 hours ago, Noooch said:

- Time acceleration in-flight. I know it's not realistic but that's the only way for some of us to make middle or long-haul flights. (Don't know how we will manage the streaming, maybe with minimal resolution and no weather injection?)

Yes, and we need the kind of time acceleration that increases the speed of the entire simulation including flight model, not just accelerating the ground speed (although that could be an optional second mode). Time acceleration of the flight and aricraft systems modeling is the only thing that's "legal" for FSEconomy and won't break the flight. 

4 hours ago, vortex681 said:

But you can already do what real pilots do and check it online before you start your planning. As long as the sim uses actual weather data, this would be the most realistic way to do it.

That's true for the user, but it could also be helpful for the sim to "know" what the weather is like at the destination, so it can look ahead to METAR and other data along the route, smoothing out the transitions instead of doing sudden jumps between weather data. This could be active when the user sets up a flight plan in advance instead of just free flight.

That would be similar to a feature in ActiveSkyX where you can point it to a flight plan, so it can smooth transitions along the way. 

21 minutes ago, domkle said:

you can already do that. All my P3D aircraft have a different hardware profile within the sim for my Warthog HOTAS (I don't use FSUIPC). The only thing missing is tuning the axis  response curves like DCS does.

Yes, it's important to be able to set up those axis assignments and response as well, like XP11 and DCS. For example, I have different response curves for my throttle depending on whether it's fixed wing or helicopter, which gives me much more sensitive control over the collective range when flying helicopters.

Assuming this feature is added, it's also helpful to have a choice between assigning controls per individual aircraft, and also for broad categories of aircraft like helicopters, single engine GA, twin engine GA, airliner etc., so you don't have to do a custom assignment for each new aircraft model you acquire, but have a good starting point. That's how XP11 does it. For that to work, each aircraft needs a field for type ID in the model.

[rheinis 105]

 

Just one teeny tiny little request really...

Try to make everything (world, weather, lighting, atc, ground handling, aircraft systems/dynamics) AS REAL AS IT GETS.

Thank you.

😎

 

[vortex681 806]

25 minutes ago, Paraffin said:

That's true for the user, but it could also be helpful for the sim to "know" what the weather is like at the destination, so it can look ahead to METAR and other data along the route, smoothing out the transitions instead of doing sudden jumps between weather data.

That presupposes that your flight isn't going to be longer than 1 hour (the normal METAR interval) AND that it won't go past the time at which the next METAR is published. If either of these cases isn't true, the sim can't know what the weather will actually be at the destination.

[Noooch 1,084]

- Volumetric lights! So we can see the landings lights threw the clouds and fog.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Noooch

[Peter Clark 21]

7 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

That presupposes that your flight isn't going to be longer than 1 hour (the normal METAR interval) AND that it won't go past the time at which the next METAR is published. If either of these cases isn't true, the sim can't know what the weather will actually be at the destination.

I thought ActiveSky did that by filling in some large radius METAR stations and re-downloading every (update) interval. Special METARs for a significant change should be caught in the redownload cycle. What would be nice is if the engine reading the METAR data had better fill-in and transitions (and only updated if there is a change rather than “oh look, something repopulated metar, redraw * weather to be - the same!

[Krakin 5,748]

Can we have functioning and accurate (geographically) lighthouses???

[Dominique_K 10,138]

Something which needs to be improved is the replay function so it always includes the flight controls (aileron, rudder, elevator, trim) and panel gauges changes. Some aircraft do that (the Lotus L-39 for instance which in many respects was well advanced for its time) some , even the best on the market (A2A etc.) don't.

The replay function would thus become a very useful training tool to analyse what went wrong in a landing for instance.

[188AHC 2,138]

17 hours ago, Krakin said:

Can we have functioning and accurate (geographically) lighthouses???

We had that in Microsoft Flight. Some of the aerocaches were to find a particular lighthouse.

 

[ca_metal 2,015]

1 hour ago, 188AHC said:

We had that in Microsoft Flight. Some of the aerocaches were to find a particular lighthouse.

 

If they use the OSM data, it would be easy to accomplish that almost globally. There are a lot of general POIs (churchs, lighthouses, trasmission towers etc) already there, unless they have more accurate data.

[Dominique_K 10,138]

 

7 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

If they use the OSM data, it would be easy to accomplish that almost globally. There are a lot of general POIs (churchs, lighthouses, trasmission towers etc) already there, unless they have more accurate data.

Speaking of PoI it might be high time that MS recognizes that churches/cathedrals are integrally part of the European landscapes... Every town, village has one and they are useful landmarks to fly visual !

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

59 minutes ago, domkle said:

Speaking of PoI it might be high time that MS recognizes that churches/cathedrals are integrally part of the European landscapes... Every town, village has one and they are useful landmarks to fly visual !

Pubs too! Don’t forget pubs! 👍😁