As you say this project isn’t bleeding resources or time, why should flyers more than happy to use AirLandFS be penalized waiting for the Native version when it’s not even necessary?
4 Likes
I don’t have a Twitter, so I hope I can add a little bit here. I think releasing the AirlandFS version early is overall better. Those who are ok to use AFS can do so, those waiting for native support can continue to wait. And you get feedback from the community early to make an even more robust product. Win-Win-WIN!
I don’t mind using AFS, it is very light on resources and can easily be tweaked to one’s liking.
Either way, best of luck to you all, you have a great development group and I love how you all push legacy developers to up their game 
3 Likes
Primarily because of Community Outlook. I get it, and as I fully support your decision personally, I don’t understand the cries to wait for native either. It doesn’t make sense to me personally.
That being said, at the end of the day, people are looking up to our Development Team and watching our growth with judging eyes. It’s like that with most development groups. It’s really easy to release a project that doesn’t satisfy the community and burn down the entire house you’ve been building.
If it were up to me, I’d release AirlandFS first, Native when it comes, and continue AirlandFS support.
I’m not spending the money however and my purchase is negated. The best I can do is satisfy the customer. As taboo as it sounds, unfortunately alot of customers don’t support 3rd Party Applications and extra requirements outside of MSFS to get an add-on working. That is really the only reason the poll exists and as results are currently dictating the support for a pushed back release date for native is currently in the lead.
3 Likes
Well I respect your teams concerns and those of users that prefer not having additional apps running, but it’s by no means unusual in flight swimming history right up to and including MSFS that leaps in capabilities beyond what can be supported in a timely manner by the sim OEM. Look at the weather and camera programs of the past and what we’re stuck with in MSFS for example. The issue really appears to be the visibility if having third party apps versus the reality, A2A aircraft managed a lot of non native functionality by bypassing the sim albeit hidden because it could run without visibly firing up an app to do so. I can’t see any harm in releasing a working model with ALFS if it doesn’t hinder GF activities and as pointed out by STTovo brings in feedback and a few coins into the coffers meantime.
3 Likes
The Marketplace version of our heli uses the built-in Marketplace DRM instead, and requires no external app. Internal WASM FM only in that case.
4 Likes
I don’t use Twitter so I can’t vote but I would say Airland for now and then native in the future. The last update to Airland had a quite noticeable improvement to the physics and is more enjoyable to use, at least with the r-44. Personally I’d love to see a full MD-500 but I’ll certainly take the mini! I had a blast with the mini 500 in x-plane.
1 Like
Will be an awesome chopper, surely. You guys do great work, I’ll hope it always stays that way. However, now in the current state of AirlandFS 1.5 (beta) ever since around SU6 and 1.5 version of AirlandFS I have basically given up on flying any helicopters that require it unless I just want to hover around an airport. At one point the flight dynamics were acceptable to me when using the R44 but as the sim has updated the flight dynamics have gotten stranger and stranger. Live weather seems to adversely affect the flight stability; anything above 80 knots results in real wonky TR input behavior. Like, to the point where the results are opposite to what you desire. Real strange crabbing effect, nose wants to eventually travel in the opposite direction. The slightest wind will ■■■■ near down your chopper still even though wind strength was adjusted in 1.4 according to the changelog. The helicopters are far from stable, they skip up and down and are real jerky. This didn’t used to be the case.
In my eyes, AirlandFS is a beta software, that from my perspective has enabled me to not desire to use any add-ons that require it, until perhaps the state of AirlandFS evolves. And where payware aircraft are involved, that’s banking on a lot, especially if you’re concerned about burning down your house (hot cash can do that) and maintaining the reputation Got Friends has.
Right now with the current state based off of what I experience with all the great freeware (models) that require AirlandFS, I wouldn’t pay $3.00 for it unless I just wanted to support someone for their time alone in development but never use the product in the sim.
There are currently two extremely worthy and well designed helicopters that fly rather nicely without the need for AirlandFS, and in my conclusion based off of what I experience with them in comparison to any heli that requires AirlandFS, it’s a night and day difference.
And they all fly beautifully! And are all well worth the money!
And this is what you’re wanting to do, correct?
For sure indeed, it is the reason why I don’t give anymore time to helicopters that require AIrlandFS
I’m not sure it does, to release a (payware) product that requires a (freeware) application in (beta) state. It makes sense perhaps if one wants a quick influx of money.
It might actually be worth it to collaborate with other developers, in this instance, Hype Performance Group and FlyInside. Developmental collaboration to better an end product can further increase probability of it being a win win result for all parties involved, especially the consumer. You may then be able to release the helicopter with a great flight model that doesn’t require AirlandFS much sooner than you might ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ (conclude).
Either way though, even these developers will be needing to make changes along the development cycle of MSFS.
I said this too when I first used AirlandFS 1.3 during the early states of the R44 release. The software alone might be nicely developed, but the end result to me lately is not what the software intends.
Good luck in your endeavor!
3 Likes
Every sim update seem to play havoc with flight models for one reason or another, my experience with ALFS has been extremely good, particularly the latest version. Of course much depends on the config file for the particular model and your own setup, but that’s true for any method implemented.
The RSP H125 is an absolute joy to fly in its latest rendition surpassing what I considered best available before, which was for me was the H145.
What is important here though, is the choice to fly with whichever processing method you prefer, it’s on offer for the taking, so why would anyone deny the opportunity to do so?
1 Like
Airland, because why not. It’s easy AF to use, and those who want native can choose to just purchase at a later date. I’d hate to pin any release on Asobo’s development progress if it’s not absolutely necessary. They don’t seem to have any interest in bringing helos to MSFS. Must not be enough Xbox demand.
1 Like
Great discussions, feedback and thoughts everyone. It’s really nice to see how the community is currently responding to various helos and how they chose their developement path.
I’m unfortunately just getting back from a grave-shift, so I’ll be fast asleep for the next 6 hours or so.
Keep an eye on https://www.helisimmer.com/ today, an article about the Mini-500 with some unreleased screenshots will be out for the public.
Thanks for the support everyone.
Update:
2 Likes
Airland works pretty good for me as is.
It’s a simple two clicks after you load particular chopper and you’re set.
No big deal to me.
The Mosquito XE, R44 and R125 all run and fly great with Airland imo.
2 Likes
Definitely an interesting discussion…
-
Native support/WASM and all that… When I voted for NATIVE, I personally don’t care HOW it gets implemented. If it’s the same way as HPG and FlyInside though without native Asobo support? That’s fine for me too. So, when I said “native” I didn’t mean you’d wait until Asobo gets their stuff together for helicopter support - as you said, we don’t even know if it will be any good. But if it can fly as good as H135/H145 and Bell, that’s good enough FOR ME. Other people’s mileage may vary.
-
XBox support. To you as a developer, it may be an important issue to consider and for XBox users it may be as well. I think I made my stance on XBox known well - I don’t really care about it.
-
AirlandFS. I have actually tried it when it was first released with one of the early helicopters requiring it. Yes, it works well, and it’s not any more difficult than buying a FlyInside chopper directly from them and having that DRM app to launch every time you want to use it (one of TWO instances where buying directly from the developer actually works against the consumer). So AirlandFS is INDEED a well-executed piece of software. It does its job and I have no qualms with it. I just PREFER not having to launch external apps of any sort. This goes for FlyInside DRM, it goes for SimSkunkWorks’ old way of doing a loadout and weapons (and something still present on the Starfighter), it goes for Boeing 717 and Majestic Dash8 Q400 on Prepar3D where the loadout again has to be an external app - it’s just a personal preference where external apps annoy me.
That doesn’t take away from the fact that the app may be nicely done.
Just two cents.
I’m not sure I understand this comment? If you’re thinking of using an external program, then, that too would not be supported by consoles. WASM support is supposed to be ready for consoles shortly. (Which is extremely confusing to me. Why did they go with WASM to begin with if it wasn’t supported by consoles? Nobody wanted it.)
They have a TON of flight model work to do before they can natively support helicopters properly. The prop simulation is just the first step, and even that’s not finished yet.
No offense intended, but, not everyone really has a grasp of how to install and run programs. I’ll bet many barely keep their MSFS install going. I would say, it’s not so much “cries to wait for native”, but, more, “I won’t be purchasing if I have to manage yet another program just so I can fly this one vehicle”. I’ll bet, also, the avid helicopter pilot population who also understands their computers deeply is relatively small compared to the general population, so you have to take that into account as well when interpreting what people are saying, if you know what I mean.
2 Likes
As others mentioned, they have a internal flight model and there’s also an app that’s used for DRM purposes, but you can tweak the characteristics of the helicopter with this app.
Even though MSFS claims to not natively support helicopters, the Bell 47G is really good.
Looks awesome! I’ll be keeping an eye out for it!
looking forward to checking this heli out.
i’m cool either way you go, airlandfs or waiting for native flight model.
also, regarding airlandFS, i ran into issues with the newest version with my setup/config. so i went back to version 1.4 which still works for me and all the heli’s that i fly that use it (xe, h125, r44).
Looking forward to checking this out and also have Airland installed and or ready to use. I found the Huey to be the best chopper yet but I enjoyed the Mosquito EX too. Not really sure if Native would be better or not as my experience with choppers is pretty null however I did recover from a spin on advanced so I was happy! I would go for performance first option though if there is one. It’s also much easier for people to stomach when there is no dependencies required.
However most of the chopper nuts already use Airland so yeah. Either way I will check this chopper out and would vote BOTH option if applicable. My first question would be which way offers the best performance?
You have my money whichever route you go, the effort and quality from your team is always phenomenal!
2 Likes
