Anyone catch the leak posted on Reddit earlier?

[Kopteeni 819]

1 minute ago, Lokote1998 said:

If you have windows 10 and want to watch the videos in HD without downloading them or creating an account, Just download their app(bilibili) in Microsoft store and search for the videos there, They will be in HD.(@andrecarli737 @Kopteeni If you guys have w10 you can do this instead.)

Thanks but I'm good. I already handed out all my personal information to them  😄

[Carts85 1,203]

The video of the a320 above the clouds though my lord, I guarantee my wife leaves me before the end of the year! Have the house love just leave me the PC!

Edited May 22, 2020 by Carts85

[Shack95 2,658]

I love that Donegal approach and landing. Yes, slightly too many trees and wrong architecture (I first thought it was in Norway), but if you don‘t know the place inside out it looks incredibly real. The overall atmosphere is just phenomenal. 

[badderjet 181]

Well, this thing is gonna be phenomenal. Period. Finally got that stall warning whine that I asked for recently, nice. Not that they made it because of me (they very much likely didn't), but they modelled it. Cool!

Some nit-picking and other remarks (yes, keeping Alpha-state in mind):

• Still not a fan of the lightning strikes. I still maintain their duration should be much shorter, and no blending and fading in and out. Ideally just one frame, except maybe more super high frame rates. In case there will be such thing. 😄 It's just always the same for those wx effects, aircraft strobes, approach light rabbits, REILs... I wish they'd just fix those altogether.
• Interesting to see that the rain drops on the windshield will actually repeat themselves, the same drops at the same locations all over the time. In no way does that ruin the overall amazing effect, but now with a longer sequence I found it fascinating to see.
• That grass seems to green. And so long. I hope that the grass on grass strips is actually cut short. 😅
• That Mont-St-Michel clip makes very clear how 3d those waves are. Awesome.
• Not sure if those C172 wing tip nav lights that can be seen in the hangar are actually that opaque. The rear one seems more transparent, but then again I haven't seen a 172 irl in a while, let alone a current one. Maybe someone with more knowledge can comment.
• I had hoped so much for a classic analog 172 version to go along with that beautiful 152. Too bad...
• That ATC seems to be very similar to FSX as far as I can remember. The TTS doesn't exactly convince me so far, also the pronunciation of waypoints as letters seems weird. Hope they include a much broader variety of phrases in the long run.
• The A320 hi alt clip with the wx and time changes makes me wonder a bit about the icing model. As I see it irl icing will usually start quite uniform at the leading edge, then going backwards. This looks very irregular here. Also, if you just keep flying in clear and dry air the ice will usually just dry off over time, also on aircraft parts that technically can't be deiced. Can't wait to see their model in action.
• Those A320 strobes seem to illuminate the forward part of the fuselage at night time, but apparently just the first of the two strobe flashes triggers this.
• The Cessna videos, especially the long C152 VFR one, show a weird flickering on the left wing strut.
• Still don't like those prop discs, as I maintain it's simply not what the human eye sees. You might have this blurred blade effect at low rpm, but certainly not in flight. I feel like this should be a uniform, semi transparent disc. The only variation that you can see irl is when the sun light hits the prop from certain angles, then you can see this variation in lighting due to the actual depth of the disc.
• The C172 G1000 volume knob has a tooltip that suggests you can change the audio volume. I can't wait to see if we actually have a more sophisticated aircraft audio system this time. With all the Wwise tech anyway.
• That Courchevel info box says things like "Wind 2.75 Kts 90 °". Seems like an odd format and precision.
• In one of the older screenshots they had an alternative HUD, with a round VSI (I believe). I wish they had kept that, as it apparently allowed different ranges for the instruments. I still think a +/-6000fpm range is not suitable for SEPs. And I wish these ranges could be defined on an per-aircraft level.
• Also I think the engine indications on the HUD should be rearranged, to have them side-by side. Especially pronounced on the B747, where you have #1/2 (left wing) in the upper line and #3/4 (right wing) on the lower one. Splitting them up left/right would be more logical.
• The KSEA runway materials seem way off, and again there are no pronounced skid marks. I dearly hope they will fix this for the heavily used runways.
• Also the taxiway centerlines seem white in that video. Maybe it's just the rendering distance, but it seemed weird. Or Alpha, if you wish.
• That video was obviously sped up, so it's hard to tell, but I hope they'll finally improve the sequenced flashing lights. I will absolutely continue to complain about them. First of all, they were on during daylight CAVOK. Those are usually just active in severe IFR wx. Second, they were on and visible in both landing directions at the same time. That's just wrong. It makes sense for a free-flight scenario, but then I wish they included a switch to enable a more realistic behavior here: Have the lights and approach aids like ILS enabled only in the active runway direction.

9 hours ago, Claviateur said:

In the new screenshots, it seems Lukla is also done with procedural ground textures as far as I could see...

Yes, that centerline in Lukla is far from 1m wide irl.

And finally, I wonder if and how Asobo will react to those leaks. Kinda reminds me of Steve Jobs when he introduced the iPhone 4 or whatever that was, showing pictures at the keynote and saying like "I'm sure you've seen some of these before...". 🤣

[Shack95 2,658]

2 hours ago, wainwj said:

Anyone know where the video of the Bonanza doing stalls may have been filmed over?

I believe it's one of the videos with the offline mode watermark. I'd like to compare what I believe to be the none-streamed scenery with Bing maps if possible.

It‘s over the Upper Rhine Plain between Mannheim and Gernsheim in Germany.

[Rudiii 257]

11 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

It‘s over the Upper Rhine Plain between Mannheim and Gernsheim in Germany.

Don't know how you did that but you are a genius. 

[ArchStanton 156]

I know, it´s Alpha, but I dont like the roads in the spin video. They' re way too prominent....but good for VFR orientation.

Edited May 22, 2020 by ArchStanton

[Rudiii 257]

9 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

I know, it´s Alpha, but I dont like the roads in the spin video. They' re way too prominent....but good for VFR orientation.

 

I was looking at that myself. I can see how they have ended up like that as this footage seemingly being offline scenery, only the roads marked up as roads on Bing are displaying and go right through fields and such but with the towns buildings being somewhat correct.

 

It would be interesting to compare the full streamed scenery in this area too but good to see the fidelity of VFR is there even without being online. 

I'm thinking Ordnance Survey maps for navigation in the UK at this rate!

[Shack95 2,658]

20 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

I know, it´s Alpha, but I dont like the roads in the spin video. They' re way too prominent....but good for VFR orientation.

Me neither, but since the vast majority won‘t be flying in (non-pre cached) offline mode, I think that‘s a negligible blemish. 

[mccracken 26]

1 hour ago, badderjet said:

I had hoped so much for a classic analog 172 version to go along with that beautiful 152. Too bad...

Nooooo 😞 really bummed if this is the case

[Noooch 1,084]

In the long Cessna video, in California i guess, the airport beacon is visible from more than 20mi away (you can see it before it goes into the blurried zone) this is cheating and an immersion killer.

I was hoping they fixed it until now, but now I am worry they won't fix it at all.

It's like in FSX. 😞

Edited May 22, 2020 by Noooch

[AflyingDoge 27]

Don't get me wrong, all of the footage looks absolutely stunning, can't wait to get my hands on this baby when it's out. But I am concerned about the (lack?) of wing flex in the Airbus. It seemed to me there was little or none, and for how much it was moving around there should be some visible wing flex. I feel like this point was raised in earlier replies, and I agree. Hopefully Asobo puts accurate wing flex on its list of features before release.

[Shack95 2,658]

4 hours ago, wainwj said:

Don't know how you did that

The roundabouts suggested Europe, the big river and the densely populated plain flanked by hills looked like the Upper Rhine region. I know the area, that‘s probably why I looked there first and it turned out to be much easier to find than I‘d expected.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Shack95

[rick celik 1,243]

3 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

The roundabouts suggested Europe, the big river and the densely populated plain flanked by hills looked like the Upper Rhine region. I know the area, that‘s probably why I looked there first and it turned out to be much easier to find than I‘d expected.

Yes I agree, also the 747 looks like it could use a little more flex too...

[Deleted 250]

14 minutes ago, AflyingDoge said:

Don't get me wrong, all of the footage looks absolutely stunning, can't wait to get my hands on this baby when it's out. But I am concerned about the (lack?) of wing flex in the Airbus. It seemed to me there was little or none, and for how much it was moving around there should be some visible wing flex. I feel like this point was raised in earlier replies, and I agree. Hopefully Asobo puts accurate wing flex on its list of features before release.

I think it isn't easy. Aerodynamics is currently "calculated" over the surfaces. If these move, can it be difficult, especially for the processor?