Aerofly FS "new sim"
 

http://www.aeroflyfs.com/index.php/en/

http://youtu.be/tbs0myDheaM?hd=1

Very interesting !

Now that is state of the art landscape.

Meh, can't stand those satellite photo paste job landscapes, look nice at altitude, but total crap up close.

micro stutters and no aileron movement... like what we have now.:rolleyes:

Show me some low level shots...

Actually, it IS state of the art, for 1995. Sticking photographs as a texture onto a landscape was an old trick, granted with modern lighting and bump mapping and high poly ground structures to paste it onto it looks a lot better than 1995, but it's still a cheap trick and it still looks like crap at low altitude.

Yeah, what Dano said, he posted while I was typing. I clicked a few other vids for this while on youtube and in one I did see a fraction of a second of low alt scenery, and yes, it's as bad as all the rest....

What about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwtKHbl0pjs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvuc52kZYOk

Holy moly! Even though I exclusively combat flight sims I might just have to give this a shot, only 39,99€!

P.S Thanks for the tip GOZR!

..I think a bit of wee came out...

That's a fantastic landscape! :eek:

The landscape looks similar to some landscape products for Microsoft's Flight Simulator.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEncKSnnU9s

Doesn't look that bad, waters a bit naff but it's more support for the genre

How is that related to the Aerofly FS game? As far as I can tell Aerofly does not use the Outerra engine.

Yes, my fault sorry... it was directed to the guys who talked about bad low altitude quality.

I should have quoted them.

It also has no relevance to the comments as outerra uses terrain generation rather than mapped satellite images.

Hmm, I wish we could get an unedited video. In this one the ground level graphics look like modded 1946, at altitude we have nice looking satellite textures, but these edited videos NEVER show the transition between the two...

Some low level shots in this one, I'm convinced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJXdNtulwLQ

Haters gone hate.


I think it looks beautiful. The colours look natural; everything looks so organic. Compare to CloD and it's clear to see where the latter fails: an England that looks like an 8 year olds artistic impression with pastels (granted his teacher coloured up to the lines for him) and a lack of knowledge on how to make the terrain appear completely natural. (France in CloD is a lot different, however, as it is leaps and bounds over blighty in the graphics department).

I would love to see the transition process for this scenary more clearly. Certainly a mix b/w detailed low level scenary and advanced photo-realistic scenary from altitude is the way forwards in creating a jaw-droppingly realistic environment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvK5U...eature=related

at 0.45 you can see why CloD is better in terms of landscape-graphics... :)

Looks nice, but you have to remember that mountains almost always look spectacular when satellite textures are overlaid on top of them. That's why FSX, Xplane, and this sim are using them to showcase their graphics.

Looks like an expensive game as you can only use it with their controller, baffling why they won't let you use your own joystick

Meh.

As suspected, looks nasty down low with flat satellite images.

I think you're looking at the RC plane sim mate, Aerofly FS specifically states that you can use any controller you want.

Very interesting, I tried to see some low level stuff, as that makes or breaks the sim terrain for me. The F18 video was quite low level, but too fast to see how the terrain actually looked, and it never showed the terrain from the side view.

I googled aerofly 5, which is the RC sim, needed http://www.aeroflyfs.com/index.php/en/

I agree this satellite pasting looks horrid at low level. However, I really do not think that CloD is the pinacle in this department.

Yeah, as well as the background behind the buildings at around 1:52.

Well we will know real soon how it is .. also like any sims it depend of systems and settings used :).. I hope the Physics are great also the weather world physics that all Sims beside Condor are lacking ! :)

Agreed 100%

But CoD haters gona hate.. Let em

I am more interested in this Aerofly's flight model.. They make some bold claims.. Well all sims do.. But the why they are talking it sounds like they may have opped for a CFD FM over the 6DOF FM? It kind of reminds me of the claims Flight Unlimited made back in the mid 90s

Thinking of it...

http://youtu.be/YNajmDTC_-c?hd=1

http://youtu.be/IKKCRrczLUI?hd=1

Who said anything hateful about CloD in here? Also, hate is a strong word, try not to throw it around like an old rag. While on the same note it seems you "dislike" anything that isn't CloD, isn't that the same thing just in reverse?:rolleyes: Why is everybody comparing this flight sim to CloD? CloD is a combat flight sim, this is a recreational flight sim. Geez, lighten up, take in some new things instead of being such bigots. Regarding the graphics down low, no it doesn't look top notch but when you're at 3000 meters and looking down on those gorgeous looking swiss mountains, then who cares? But hey! let's go down that route, everything is sh*te except for CloD, you can clearly see this by the high activity and positive feedback on the main forum.:grin:

That's it, you bash him some, we'll all pretend to ignore philip.ed started it too ;)

S!

Clouds looked nice, trees were not shimmering nor the shadows, terrain did not shimmer at all and it looked pretty OK in general. Would be nice to try out the FM of it. And looks better than MS FS...

Someone who knows what he is talking about. WTG!

Hey, this was posted in the CloD forum so I saw every reason for comparison. I never hated on CloD too. I compared it truthfully, and I stand by my post. If every constructive comment against CloD is viewed as hate, I think that's ridiculous. I wouldn't post on the forum for a game I hate :rolleyes:

The terrain in this game does look a lot better to me than CloD. I would say that this and the French terrain in CloD are fairly equal, but England itself is a disaster for me. A great attempt, yes, but still rather awful. One of the earlier beta patches started a brilliant effort at overhauling the terrain, but the current patch looks nothing like England. This sim, however, shows terrain that looks realistic: the colours look natural, and the object placing seems extremely organic. Granted at very low altitude the terrain doesn't look as good, but how is that the main determinant for which is better? Most action happens at high altitude, and clearly Aerofly looks a lot better (at least to me).

CloD does tackle the terrain very well at low altitude, but as aforementioned, the organic nature of the terrain is vital to ensure it appears realistic. Tree placing in CloD is very poor: in most cases hedgerows would serve better than unrealistic lines of trees. A mix of CloD and this would be lovely.

I was referring to the hate comments, my apologies for being unspecific :)

What about gorgeous looking landing strips tucked away in mountain valleys?

That's cool I guess. One feature that really impressed me was the "change the weather conditions on the go" thingie. Check out the last video (flight physics) on the following link, at 00:39:
http://www.aeroflyfs.com/index.php/e...yfs/video.html

P.S Note the flags in the background :)

I live right in the area depicted by this sim and I must say, at medium altitudes, that this rendition is really really good.

Just ordered it.

Hey ParaB! Can you give some feedback on it here in the pilots lounge after you've got it and played around with it a bit? I'm interested too, but I have to wait until after new year until I can spend any money on games again. Cheers!

Sure can do.

I've spent many hours flying around Switzerland in FS9 and FSX with the fantastic Switzerland Professional sceneries, can't wait to see how this sim compares to that.

Thanks! keep us posted.

Whoops, saw your buddy philip.ed used the very same line/lingo first on the previous page and I assumed you and yours cleared it for usage? Yes No?

I don't understand anything. Is that sim only for Swiss German speaker ?

Ehr..no? Why would it be? I'm reading about it on their website, in English. You can choose language in the top left corner:
http://www.aeroflyfs.com/index.php/en/

addman Yes this is good ( the video and physics flags ) :)
Flanker +1 :)


Well lets see if this little sim is real good, will be fun to do some acro flights for sure..

Well it is true as the initial posts had said . . .

close up graphics is kinda wonky. It reminds me of half life era games . . .


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cZry...eature=related


if I was into non combat flight sims . . . but I can just hit the local flight school at my college for some non combative flight sim action.

Here's a link to a P51 taking-off & in flight - no in-cockpit shots however - it'll take a lot to match CoD's cockpits!!

The scenery down low looks good in this clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_26HM...I5mctKMOyVjUAN

That's a different sim I think, by the same developers.

Got it today and played around for a couple of hours. The photo textures are excellent, and the aircraft (8 different types) are nicely detailed. aeroFS is NO FSX or X-Plane. It's a rather "simple" (and I mean that in a positive way) flightsim that concentrates on getting you into the air ASAP. FMs so far seem "OK" to "good", but there's always room for improvement. The sim's easy to set up and doing VFR flights and soaring is great fun. The sim also provides a number of "challenges". There's no radio calls, no AI aircraft, a rather basic weather simulation and only daylight flying. So, more than enough negative points for those looking for them

I so far am greatly enjoying this sim. I hope it becomes successful enough so that the devs can keep working on it.

All screenshots were taken a maxed settings, FPS ~80 (!).

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero01.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero02.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero03.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero04.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero05.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero06.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero07.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero08.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...um/aero010.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...um/aero011.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...um/aero012.jpg

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...lum/aero09.jpg

Soaring? Do you mean that it could possibly replace the venerable Condor Soaring Simulator? GREAT!!! They have a new customer then!

I think the game has some great points.

+ awesome high altitude terrain
+ great plane immersiveness (canopy reflections, stains, pilot model etc.)
+ great non-combat content as far as I can tell (challenges / trails etc)
+ gliders available!

- no multiplayer (seriously...?!)
- questionable low altitude graphics

All in all neither CloD nor Aerofly FS are amazing. They all come with their pro's and con's.

For me, personally, Aerofly FS isn't that amazing since it lacks multiplayer. The low alt graphics I could forgive but I'm not the single player type of guy.

@ParaB
The screenshots are a little over the top. I'm on a fast connection but not everyone is. Also mountain screenshots are usually kind of worthless. They ALWAYS look good. Even in Flight Unlimited from 1995 the mountain view looks great from high altitude so please please please never post mountain screenshots to show off a game.

Thanks for the feedback ParaB!:grin: Might have to check this one out.

Thanks for taking the time to post these pics, ParaB. The aircraft graphics look good and the scenery at altitude is breathtaking. What are your thoughts on the clouds? They look very good in the pics, do you find they're well done in the sim as you fly through and around them?

i can percieve an stereoscopic effect in that mountain shots, mindblowing

@Madfish: You do realize that this sim only covers Switzerland? A bit hard to find areas that are not covered by mountains, to be honest.

;)

@Snapper: I think the clouds are "ok". I've seen much better ones in FSX 3rd party addons and they also lack CloD's effects of fogging/icing up the canopy.but the devs are working on them.

There's a landscaping contractor in Texas that could level and grade those pesky mountains in 2 days....maybe a week, tops! LOL

Looks ok for what it is (a small Swiss flight sim) I don't expect its a full blown dynamic weather all singing and dancing simulator, just some basic flying around the Swiss mountain side.

It suffers from the usual terrain stretching by the look of it.


PS:

12/29/2011: Update to version 5.7.1.9 available for Max OS X and Microsoft Windows.

If only Battle of Britain had taken place in the Swiss alps :-)

I would like to get stoned and fly this , it would be wild.

I didn't see anything about navs or approach charts or the ability to fly them as per real world in the sim. I didn't see anything about route traces or flight plans.

A flight simulator must have those items as required, along with on-the-fly weather changes, and emergency procedures.

Fully working gauges doesn't mean you can fly cross country at night on navs and make a precision approach.

The photo scenery looks good, but the MSFT FSX at night on IFR (instruments) is excellent. I've never realized much value in VFR flying in a flight simulator.

hmm id rather get my board on that scenery than anything else.

any pics of grindelwald ?

Yes, we don't. Navs, approach charts and other highly structured procedures because they were pretty well non-existent during the time frame of COD or IL2. There were some simple navs and waypoint plotting with instruments, but nothing like modern navigation. When I say modern... I'm talking about the mid 50's up to now.

That's what I like about WW2 air combat. A lot of action without alot of complicated navigating and procedures.

There are some of the primitive nav tools in the Daidalos Team IL2 modifications.

There are some in CoD as well if you use the map!?

Some days I go to the airport and open an IFR flight plan and sit there staring at the gauges for hours on end...other days I go to the airport, crank over that big engine in the little Pitts and remember what it is I live for! It takes me places nothing else does, and I land at the same airport I took off from most of the time....there's a lot more to flight than procedures. (You know that I think). I agree about the "utility" aspects of a sim being primarily for procedures, but that's largely because none have a good enough FM or physical interface to make that side of things much of a training aid. Not to mention that there isn't a lot of "utility" in anything the Pitts, Extra, Su-26, or Edge does...that's not what they are for...they are for gluing a ginormous smile across your face for days or months after you fly them!

It's clearly the absolute best looking Pitts recreation ever (I just wish they had an S-2S and an S-2C) but I really must sample the physics!

Eco +1 ;)

actually navigation was well advanced in the 40s, and a navigator of those years was way more prepared and competent of the modern ones.. astronavigation, dead reckoning, flight computers were all used normally, and radio beacons became very popular too.
It's something that's always been missing in IL-2, but as someone else said, Daidalos is starting to implement this stuff now :)

How many time since we last spoke and flew together EcoDragon! :) Glad to hear from you!

I see we still have the same interests... then I think you sohould buy this great simulator. I've did not flew the Pitts but I did a pair of flights in Extra 300.

After testing the simulator, I thing it has a quite good FM, at least better than CoD because it has propwash modelled.

And of course, I did a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpLV5L5Vq-0

Looks really good Tuckie. Can you just download it or do they send you a hard copy once payment is received? I'd prefer to just download it.

Looks good Tuckie! :)

As far as I see, they send you a hard copy. In my case, at first the shipping from Germany to Spain would cost me 20€, but finally the cost was only 10€... Still expensive for a transport I think...

Maybe it's due the huge scenery, it weights 2 DvD compressed.


I did more videos... the fist one is for Ecodragon, you should test this Pitts, I cannot say if it's good or overmodelled, do the pitts snap roll so fast?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K73WXyMqF0U

Another one with the Camel; it is not as good as the Rise of Flight one, this apparently has not modelled the powerful gyroscopic effect of the rotative engine, so it spins out easily, while in RoF every spin develops a flat spin and it's hard to exit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im9KiV2Tyqg

And making a normal test flight in the Cessna 172 SP; I've teste the real thing and when it stalls without power does not bank as in the simulator. Real plane only banks on stall with power applied. Anyway, general behavior is quite good!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGN35BeYkeE

What I see on your vid is that there is nearly no aero model. The plane act with itself only and the air does not seems to slow it that much.

In my mem the Pitts had a 270°/sec roll rate so it might be even more snap rolling it ;)

see there ard min 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPn4B...eature=related

Well, there's discussion about the Pitts, I've asked to some Pitts pilots of my aeroclub, some of them reported that the rotations of my video are exagerated, but at least one pilot told that it was really like that, it dependes on the pilot, fully deflecting or not the flight controls.

I hope that Ecodragon comes back and tells us his oppinions, it would be nice that he tests the plane, so he is a Pitts pilot.

Some things must be tuned in this sim anyway...


But it has a lot of potential... just see the wind and a crosswind landing with speed excess:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex7t09LjSnI

The damage model is simple, it comes from an RC simulator, but I feel it as acceptable for a civillian simulator:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYMjaDtG1Ao
At least there IS damage model, not like FS and it's "Crash" ridiculous message!

Testing some sutile aspects of flight model...

Adverse yaw in a glider compared to reality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEbwR93AUkc

Propwash test, comparing Aerofly FS with the best Extra 300 expansion for X-Plane 9 and 10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg7CKCKlJC8

When I mean that CoD has no propwash, I mean that this effect is not modelled. And this is a must be in a propeller plane simulator!

Don't forget that CoD hve to deal with higher speed and heavier airframe. You can't use basic airfoils calculations to get a representative model (at least if you intend to do a serious work - yuck yuck)

To show us that the prop wash is really an INTEGRATED feature of the FM pls re-test with different load-out (CG) and let's see how it varies.

The damage model is good. Remind me a lot a certain unspecified looking glass product ;)

But what means this savage assault against parked cars ? Is the one of your boss in the lot ?

Maybe that's the problem of the F-18 on this simulator, it behaves Ok but i has no G limits and ir tuns more than the real thing.


I can only say it works in all prop planes. CG and loadouts can't be changed for the moment. Anyway I've re-tested it comparing to X-Plane's Extra 300 Patty Wagstaff edition, and I can say that both planes are the best Extra 300 ever modelled... although X-Plane's one is the Extra 300S and the Aerofly FS one is the 330LX, not exactly the same plane:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg7CKCKlJC8


Lol! ;)

Thanks for the video's Tuckie, I didn't know about AeroflyFS. It looks like it has some nice features.

S!

Well, this product could turn out to be something with time :) Only shame it is civilian flying which I do not like at all..boring to say the least ;)

Civillian flight has always the funny flight side: aerobatics :)

And Aerofly FS does it very well ;)

A few more shots here

http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/1...0suisse252.jpg
http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1...0suisse202.jpg
http://imageshack.us/f/715/aeroflyfsdr400suisse202.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/f/52/aeroflyfsdr400suisse172.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/f/94/aeroflyfsdr400suisse112.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/f/831/aeroflyfsdr400suisse102.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/f/515/aeroflyfsdr400suisse042.jpg/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wyo8LrtKSFc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXXxEqU9z_w

it is only available with german instructions right now (even though I found one with english booklet, the ordering does not go through ???).

I don't mind a bit of german...but the shipping is 40€ :confused:, more than the product itself, which brings the total to over $100 USD...

Will wait until they come to their senses...

The game comes in both English and German.
You can download the English instructions from their website.

I read at the AeroflyFS forums they are contemplating a downloadable version but I have no idea when it will be available.

Good videos JT Medina!

I was about to make a DR400 video, but since I've seen yopurs, now I can relax :)

The DR400 take a lot of drift from cross winds when speed decrease on the runway (canted wings). As there is nearly none here it wld be interesting to confirm the cross winds landing model (20kt wld be enough)

~S and thx for all the nice vids