First impressions of Fly II after a couple of days.

[Guest JamesT73J]

As someone who has come full circle back to Fly II, I thought I'd share some impressions I've had. I loved Fly! back in the day, although I only really played the standard installation plus the PMDG 757, which was more than enough for me. My P350 of the time struggled to push it along the moment the scenery got a little complex, so I stayed away from custom stuff, as it was largely pointless for me.When FS2002 came out, I had a more powerful PC; and some of the PSS produce tempted me away for a long time. I had purchased Fly II, (and the PMDG 772 to go with it) but I just gave up on it.Now, armed with DSL access and an even quicker PC, I tried Fly II again, fully patched. It's interesting to come back to it, as I'd got to know FS2002's flight modelling quite well.A) Light aircraft are huge fun. The Flyhawk does remind me of my experiences in a real Cessna. A gentle but positive technique reaps rewards. I was forever chasing the gauges in the MS Cessna, and I found the handling to be strangely 'elastic' (for want of a better adjective) with that model.:( Ground effect: Aircraft float. You really, really notice this one after MSFS. Whatever the aircraft in MS, the flare retards your rate of descent and speed, and nothing else - there is no float at all. This made landings where you were a little fast a doddle, as pulling off the power ensured you could just bump it onto the tarmac. In Fly, you'll do just that - keep flying!. I've ballooned a few times - just like real life! It's a hoot! You can really feel the difference between a flaps 20 and a flaps 30 landing.C) Functionality. You can get used to the compressed view of MSFS. Indeed, in the larger aircraft I miss being able to see information at a glance, but those large cockpits in Fly really are beautiful, and the directional viewing system is wonderfully intuitive. I'm one of those people who is still very, very skeptical of the whole VC concept, unless it's for sightseeing.D) Weather and clouds: I noticed in the FAQ there are replacement versions available. Whatever, with infometar the weather experience in Fly (both first and second versions) remains the best for me. From the Patter of rain to the 'creep' of cloud. Anyone whose 'kissed' clouds in light aircraft will recognise it.Still, I don't necessarily favour one sim over the other. Fly's smaller market does have one big advantage: The addons are much, much easier to source. I actually get scared of MSFS's HUGE resource of freeware stuff - I don't know where to start.Now all I need is a bigger hard drive, and more hours in the day to DL all these bloody airports..LOL

[RandallR 444]

Hello James - welcome back!Here are a few quick hints, in case you haven't already picked up on them:1. Get the free "Flyhawk" and Pilatus updates that Rob Young put together - makes the 172 even better and makes the Pilatus very flyable.2. Be sure to turn off the slope winds in Fly!II with this setting: ignoreSlopeWind=1 in the fly.ini or your "float" will become too pronounced.3. Get the cloud versions from Jure Dolanec - TRI had to dump the wonderful volumetric clouds of Fly!/Fly!2K to bring up the resolution of the aircraft and scenery in Fly!II. Though these different clouds are still no slouches, the beautiful touches by Jure add some real magic. Also, try out some of the different skies that are available - there are a number that are better then the default.4. For at least a short time, Real Air and PMDG did make some nice add-ons before they were forced to move on to MSFS to make a profit - grab'em.5. Watch out for the aircraft options - get them set for each aircraft, as is sometime missed in the FAQs or you'll have some controllability issues.6. Even though we don't have the huge add-on and resource bins of the MSFS sim, I'm sure you've already found that the Fly! community has kept busy. There's some real quality stuff out there and if you don't like what you find, we've got great tools to make your own. :-)7. Check out all the offerings from ROTW - they've achieved levels of quality in their freeware production that rival anything out there - anything.

[Pascal_LSGC 298]

JamesWelcome back!Very nice comments! You express very well some of the reasons why I like Fly! II so much!I'm not too much appealed by virtual cockpits BTW. Fly!'s scrolling panels is a feature I can't do without! Just one tip when I'm at it: do you know that CTRL + left mouse button is the easiest way to drag the panel.Regards!Pascal

[Guest JamesT73J]

I've picked up the PMDG 757 for FlyII. Quite a treat to try a definitive version of the jet I got so used to in the original Fly! After six more hours of flying today, I'm still totally sold on the weather for Fly. It's very, very good.Is there no way to accelerate time? Not a huge deal, but handy for when I'm genuinely pressed for time!

[Guest tonyc]

"D" for accelleration, and " Shift/ D" for deceleration. "T" for time forward, and "Shift T" for time back.tony

[RandallR 444]

James,The "normal" compression in Fly!2 does not acceletate time - it accelerates distance (that's why the "D" key is used). With each successive keypress you will accelerate rapidly over the landscape, but the clock will continue at the same rate. That's a bad situation when you are trying to make a long flight - if you're like me, you still want the effects of time to take place (change in weather, movement of the sun, use of fuel, etc.). Rich was aware of this issue in the original Fly!, and was working to correct it in Fly!2.Fly!2 contains a new line in the Fly.ini which is supposed to activate true time acceleration when the accelerate distance command is used: distanceCompressionUpdateTime=0. Go ahead and set this to "1" and see if it works! I've been so busy working with shorter flights over the last year that I forgot to check out this feature - please check back and let us know. :-)

[Guest tonyc]

This is a good tip, Randall. I didn't know about this. I'll let you know if it works.tony

[RandallR 444]

Thanks, Tony! There is always something more to learn and we are a long way from testing everything out. I remember complaining about this with Fly!2K, back in the days when I was making a lot of long flights - this would be especially appropriate for an intercontinental flight, for instance.The subject came up again in the middle of the beta team patch process and Rich mentioned that the capability was already present and could be activated with that fly.ini value. I was working with a group updating the database at the time, and never got around to verifying that it worked.

[Guest Javier]

Mmm.. no replies from James yet...Well... I guess our friend pressed the "D" key too many times.. he might be five posts away from this one..:-) we might catch him on April 5th...:( Of course I am just kidding.Welcome back James! I'm Glad to see that you liked "D" only Flight Simulator. Indeed Rich worked really hard on FLY2! but the best thing he left to us is this great community.Love you guys!Javier.

[LAdamson 240]

Okay........................ the title always grabs my attention.. :)>A) Light aircraft are huge fun. The Flyhawk does remind me of>my experiences in a real Cessna. A gentle but positive>technique reaps rewards. I was forever chasing the gauges in>the MS Cessna, and I found the handling to be strangely>'elastic' (for want of a better adjective) with that model.I should mention that Rob Young has produced an excellent flight model for the "stock" MSFS 172 for both versions FS2002 & FS2004. Ron Freimuth also programmed a nice flying model for FS2002. I don't find handling strange, nor do I chase gauges. Just a different opinion I suppose.>>:( Ground effect: Aircraft float. You really, really notice>this one after MSFS. Whatever the aircraft in MS, the flare>retards your rate of descent and speed, and nothing else ->there is no float at all. This made landings where you were a>little fast a doddle, as pulling off the power ensured you>could just bump it onto the tarmac. In Fly, you'll do just>that - keep flying!. I've ballooned a few times - just like>real life! It's a hoot! You can really feel the difference>between a flaps 20 and a flaps 30 landing.Groud effect.. I don't really see it in either simulation. When flying any bird low to the runway, I never feel a need to push against the yoke or stick against a "force" to remain low in ground effect. Aircraft "float", ballooning, and bounces can be done with amazing results in both simulations; and just depends on the programming.>C) Functionality. You can get used to the compressed view of>MSFS. Indeed, in the larger aircraft I miss being able to see>information at a glance, but those large cockpits in Fly>really are beautiful, and the directional viewing system is>wonderfully intuitive. I'm one of those people who is still>very, very skeptical of the whole VC concept, unless it's for>sightseeing.And I'd never want to take anything away from FLY cockpits; just "plane" nice!!! But on the other hand, I really appreciate VC's sometimes, & feel they have their place. They provide an incrediable sense of yaw & airspeed when the eye point is pulled somewhat back. I've found that I now do more pattern landings with them. Before, I usually didn't bother. My own personal "sightseeing" is usually from "spot view" in either sim. I think it better represents a panaramic view, than we get with a one monitor cockpit view.I also decided a few months ago, to keep my "oldest" computer out of four, because it still has the original FLY, & all my TerraSceneII on it. Except for the 3rd party P-51D & SoCal scenery for FLYII.......... I actually prefer the orignal.L.Adamson

[Guest tonyc]

Those are good points,Larry. It's good to see that you peruse FLY forum regularily.I've moved beyond the flying, and enjoy exploring FLY2 from a guts stand point. And the fact that it's kind of an orphan appeals to me, I confess.On the other hand, I do have mfs2004 and can't seem to get into it. I like the scenery and the sheer beauty of it all, but when I'm in the cockpit I don't feel at home. I am no longer comparing sims; I've moved on...tony

[LAdamson 240]

>On the other hand, I do have mfs2004 and can't seem to get>into it. I like the scenery and the sheer beauty of it all,>but when I'm in the cockpit I don't feel at home. I am no>longer comparing sims; I've moved on...But..................You just made a comparison..... :)L.Adamson

[Guest tonyc]

Yeah, I know, old habits are hard to break....;-)tony

[Guest Eagle]

Haven't seen Larry around for a loooong time. Can Michael be far behind??

[Guest OU812]

Hi all. I recently bought MSFS2004 and really liked the atc, but I never liked the icons on the panels. the virtual view isnt to bad but my radeon is in another puter right now and this stinking 370 board has no agp slot so im stuck with built in video. in ms2004 i cant go any higher then 800*600 16 bit...looks like trash. but fly!2looks way better. I like the realizm that fly has allways had and it is something that ms lacks on. I bought msfs2004 cause avsim says its the most popular...They can keep it for now, Ive got FlY!2..