On Stream:https://store.steampowered.com/app/434030/Aerofly_FS_2_Flight_Simulator/

About This Game

Aerofly FS 2 lets you explore the world of flying in a quality never seen before. Fly a large selection of highly detailed aircraft or a helicopter with fully animated and interactive 3D cockpits.

Aerofly FS 2 is a next generation flight simulator open for add-ons and sets a high value on realistic flight physics, highly detailed aircraft and a stunning, photo realistic scenery. World wide coverage of elevation data and aerial images is included with Aerofly FS 2. At the same time, Aerofly FS 2 features an intuitive user interface and requires virtually no training time.

Take your seat in the cockpit and enjoy flying over the famous Golden Gate Bridge or visit Alcatraz Island. Learn the basics of flying at our flight school or jump right into the captain’s seat and land the majestic 747 at one of the busiest airports of the world.


  • 20 aircraft included:
    – F-15, F-18, Learjet 45, C172, Baron 58
    – ASG 29 glider, Pitts S-2B biplane
    – Airbus A320
    – B737-500, B747-400
    – B├╝cker Jungmeister
    – King Air C90 GTx, Aermacchi MB-339
    – Corsair F4U, Extra 330
    – Swift S1 glider, P-38 Lightning
    – Sopwith Camel
    – Robinson R22 Beta II
    – Dash-8 Q400 (available as free DLC)
  • Highly detailed and interactive 3D cockpits
  • Adjustable cockpit lighting at night time
  • Realistic flight physics
  • Interactive Flight school for learning the basics of flying
  • High resolution aerial images and over 200 airports for the South West of the United States
  • World wide elevation and aerial images
  • Display terrain features like mountains, lakes and cities for easy VFR navigation
  • Route editor for easy flight planning
  • Adjustable time of day
  • Adjustable wind, clouds, visibility, thermal activity and turbulence
  • Replay system
  • Different view modes
  • Support for multiple joysticks, throttle units, rudder pedals and more
  • TrackIR support
  • Full Oculus Rift VR support and full Oculus Touch controller support
  • HTC Vive VR support and full Vive Controller support
  • Support for Saitek Multi Panel, Radio Panel, Switch Panel and Saitek TPM
    • Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
    • OS: 64bit Versions of Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10
    • Processor: Intel Dual core CPU 2.4 GHz
    • Memory: 4 GB RAM
    • Graphics: OpenGL 3.0 compatible 3D graphic card with at least 1 GB of RAM
    • Storage: 35 GB available space
    • Sound Card: DirectX Compatible soundcard
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-0
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-1
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-2
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-3
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-4
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-5
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-6
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-7
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-8
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-9
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-10
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-11
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-12
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-13
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-14
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-15
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-16
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-17
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-18
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-19
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-0
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-1
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-2
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-3
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-4
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-5
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-6
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-7
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-8
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-9
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-10
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-11
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-12
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-13
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-14
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-15
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-16
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-17
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-18
Aerofly FS 2 Flight Simulator-19


Posted: October 18, 2018
I have had FS2 for one year and one week. I am a 30-year veteran of flight simulation, and even owned a flight sim company a few decades ago. I have logged tens of thousands of hours in flight sims, mostly Microsoft products. I have also logged 611 hours in Aerofly FS2. Therefore my comments are not those of a novice.

When I first loaded FS2, I was totally blown away by it. The fluidity, even on my six-year old computer, was impressive. The graphics were superb, and the whole sense of "newness" compared to what I had been used to literally took my breath away. I was 100% convinced that I was looking at the future of the flight simulation genre. Now come fast forward a year, and I am considering deleting FS2 from my computer. A dichotomy indeed, why?

I still stand by my belief that FS2 represents the future of flight sim. By that I mean the graphics, the photoscenery, even VR. However, I have serious doubts that the future belongs to this specific product. It’s not the potential, it’s the pedantic pace of development. IPACS has done a great job, but they are too small a team, and too slow in development, and it is leaving the door wide open for other products and other (better heeled) companies to overtake them and steal their market potential forever. And that is a shame.

So why have I returned to my ancient FSX in preference over FS2? It’s all about immersion. ATC, AI traffic, moving vehicles on the roads, moving water, real weather, and the depth of simulation of aircraft from A2A, plus the selection of available aircraft etc. These factors have won out over the latest graphics and photo scenery for me. It’s the difference between true depth and mere surface gloss.

Is FS2 brilliant? Yes it is. Is it worth buying and enjoying for what it is? Yes. And if all you want to do is fly in solitude in a sterile world devoid of life, then it will blow your mind. I do not regret buying it. But, if you want a living world environment, and the feeling of being part of that world, you are not going to find it in FS2. I wish it was there, but after a year of hints and promises, these advances seem no closer due to limited manpower on the part of the developers. I am no longer willing to wait for them to bring the immersion to their beautiful sim. I am abandoning it and going back to older platforms.

I have no malice towards the very talented team. I have no regrets in buying the product, it was a blast. But, unless they make sweeping changes, the serious flight simmer in me will keep looking for serious flight simulation experience elsewhere. Even older products, when coupled with the many available addons, bring far better immersion.

When I have a more powerful computer again, it will not be FS2 that I will be installing on it…. Unless they have got their act together and reached their true potential by then.

Conclusion? Don’t be afraid to buy it and enjoy it, but don’t delete the sim you are used to either!


Posted: May 3, 2017
Early Access Review

Hi all – this sim is perfect for my kind of people. Who is "your kind of people" you ask. Well, the guy with multiple children and multiple jobs, not having time to install and configure new add-ons every week, troubleshooting for hours, struggling with getting smooth FPS and hammering a 12-years old core engine to "pretend" that it’s up-to-date. Sure, it’s a "lightweight"sim when it comes to some features, no doubt. But I jsut sit down, I fire it up (10 seconds), I set my parameters (10 seconds) and I load it (another 10 seconds) and ready to fly in a beautiful high-resolution scenery (in DLC areas). 30 seconds from sitting down to flying??? Are you kidding me? Try that with any "expert" Sim on the market. No 3rd party stuff needed, works straight out of the box, 64-bit, supports VR (and TrackIR, and EDTracker). As mentioned before, some features are lacking (more complex weather engine, sounds, ATC, traffic, etc) – but you know what (and this goes to the developers)? If any of those features bring in more "overhead" time for starting a flight or will degrade performance than please just don’t touch it, leave it like this. Great work guys, I like your angle on this, and I truly recommend this experience to anyone interested in flying.


Barney "630" Garrison

Posted: December 1, 2018
After more than 200 hours in this sim, and more than 100 in X-Plane, I think I can give an honest and fair assessment of Aerofly FS2, and compare it to X-Plane 11.

The good:

First, I fly only in VR. I have zero interest in 2D flight simulation. For the VR flying experience, simulating the *sensation* of flight, Aerofly is MILES ahead of X-Plane for one primary reason: AeroFly runs GREAT and with butter smooth fluidity. X-Plane, even with the latest 11.30b6, runs like total crap in VR, to be blunt.

Also, the visuals in AeroFly are very good. The planes are very detailed and well-modeled, and the areas of the map that actually have detailed scenery like the add-on DLC’s and free regions look great. If you build your own custom orthoscenery into AeroFly, it looks even better. Try flying the F-18 through the Grand Canyon in VR. It’s awesome.

Its interface is fairly simple, but it just works. I think I’ve spent nearly as much time screwing around with X-Plane mods and optimizations trying to get better VR performance than I’ve actually spent just enjoying flying in it. The opposite is true with AeroFly. I put all the sliders to max and never look at the graphics settings again. That was true even with my old 3GB GTX1060, which ran AeroFly just as well as my current 1080Ti.

AeroFly has been coded with a look toward the future, and has already implemented Vulkan with an advanced anti-aliasing option that makes VR look even more crisp than it already did. X-Plane releases update after update, beta after beta, and yet even with an oc’d 8700K and oc’d 1080Ti, with every setting at minimum, and the visuals looking terrible, X-Plane STILL can’t hit 90FPS in VR.

The flight phsyics in AeroFly, at least for the smaller aircraft (I don’t care about the airliners) are quite good and on-par with X-Plane too. In particular, the aerobatic Pitts and Extra in AeroFly are very well modeled, and their flight dynamics are better than anything I’ve found for aerobatics in X-Plane, even after spending another 40 dollars on a Pitts and Extra for X-Plane that fly nicely but do not have realistic spin behavior at all. I frequently see AeroFly’s flight models criticized, but I don’t know where that’s coming from unless it’s the airliners, which I admit I never bother with.

You get a decent and varied selection of aircraft with the purchase too, all of which look GREAT. Compared to the selection of free aircraft you get with X-Plane, AeroFly wins, hands-down. When I purchased X-Plane I was actually shocked at how poor some of the default aircraft looked! Example: the only jet you get with X-Plane is an F-4 Phantom , and visually it looks like something out of a sim from 10 years ago. Yuck.

AeroFly works great with a HOTAS, but also has a VR hands implementation that works very well with the Oculus Touch controllers that I use (I haven’t tried it with a Vive or WMR HMD so can’t speak for those controllers). I fly both with the HOTAS and the Rift and find both control methods to be equally capable, except for all the buttons and knobs I can map functions to on the HOTAS. However, this is partly offset by the fact that a lot of these things you can use the VR hands to manipulate in the cockpits instead of relying on hardware buttons and knobs.

And lastly, the new R-22 helicopter that was just added to AeroFly is a gem that X-Plane can’t compete with. X-Plane does have some nice helis for sure–even a truly excellent freeware one–but no rotorcraft I’ve flown in X-Plane match this new R-22 for realistic flight dynamics. Aerofly has been working on this for about a year, and even worked with a renowned heli pilot to fine-tune the flight model for maximum realism. If you want the most accurate R-22 in a sim, I don’t think anything can touch this right now.

The bad:

If you are a flight simmer who finds joy in all the technicalities of flight planning, and really only care about what you see on the screen as a pictorial reference to your pretend flight scenarios and operations, then you will definitely prefer X-Plane over AeroFly. AeroFly lacks any ATC functionality, has no other air traffic, and has empty worlds devoid of cars or other animated things you might see in X-Plane. That said, if you are a VR user who wants a sim that gives the *sensation* of flying in the most immersive and fluid fashion, AeroFly is going to make you much happier.

AeroFly has no 3D modeled water, just static orthophoto images. It doesn’t look great, but I don’t find X-Plane’s water implementation to be particularly realistic in appearance either.

AeroFly’s cockpits, though very detailed with knobs and switches, are not fully functional in most aircraft. The basics work, like radio frequencies, autopilot, flaps, gear, etc., but some things related to more specific aircraft functions like all the buttons and switches in the fighter cockpits mostly don’t do anything. Again, if you’re a simmer who wants study-level aircraft functionality, you won’t find it here, yet.

Aerofly currently only has certain portions of the world modeled. You can’t just fly to any airport anywhere and expect to find something there. However, there is a decent selection of free and add-on coverage available, and if you’re the type that likes to get their hands dirty you can use their SDK to build your own airports too. The high-res areas that are available look quite good visually and are based on orthoimagery.

Lastly, AeroFly lacks sophisticated weather modeling. No rain, but there are clouds which look decent but not amazing. Wind can only be adjusted from ‘calm’ to ‘strong’ and given a static direction, plus adjustable thermals and turbulence. It doesn’t come close to X-Plane’s built-in weather modeling, but it’s enough to simulate a crosswind landing fairly well.

Summary — If you want a technical simulation of flying, meaning planning, ATC, and all the procedural complexities of flying, AeroFly won’t make you happy. If you want to be able to fly anywhere in the world and land at any airport, AeroFly won’t make you happy. If you want real-time weather modeling that varies with altitude, AeroFly won’t make you happy.

BUT — If you want the best VR simulation of the *sensation* of flight in a variety of beautifully-modeled aircraft, with butter-smooth performance that you set once and never have to touch again, that lets you just get in and enjoy the experience — you’ll love AeroFly. If you want to jump into an aerobatic Pitts or Extra and fly spins and rolls and lomcevaks with realistic physics, AND a smooth stutter-free 90FPS framerate in VR, AeroFly beats the pants off X-Plane. Also, if you want the best R-22 helicopter simulation available in any sim, AeroFly has that now too.


Posted: August 5, 2016
Early Access Review

So, I have been flying around in this new flight simulator for a while now and I think it is time for an early review. I will start by writing about the pros and cons at the moment from my point of view.

First the pros:

Virtual Reality

The biggest pro of this sim must be its support for VR. I dare to say that this title has a place in the top 10, maybe even 5, of best VR experiences around at the moment. You have to see it to believe it, the scale is top notch, the lighting is breathtaking and control of the virtual cockpit is well thought out and just works. From the first second you are in the cockpit you really feel like you are there.


The lighting engine of this flightsim is really the best you can get right now. Metals are shiny and reflective, the sunlight on the cockpit and instruments just feels real, the asphalt of the runways and taxiways and the markings on them feel real. The landscape is wonderfully rendered with the use of atmospheric scattering and somehow buildings all seem so real. Then when it gets dark you can be amazed by the cockpit lighting of the various aircraft included. You can control the levels of the background lighting, map lights, individual displays, etc.


There are lots of airports which are all wonderfully rendered wether they are small local airfields or large airports like San Francisco Intl. You will find well known airliners around the airports and all different aircraft types are at the right location of the airport. So you will actually see the large passenger aircraft at the double jetway gates and the cargo aircraft at the cargo section for example.

The scenery is also very varying as the developers have chosen a part of the westcoast of the United States as the first area. You can visit the Grand Canyon and the dry lands surrounding it, fly over Las Vegas and see the strip wonderfully lit up at night, go to San Francisco and see the bay… Oh and if you get tired of the US, you can always download the Switzerland DLC and visit Europe.

Then the aircraft, you will get 16 of them and they are all very high quality. They are extremely detailed and there are many different types like a 747-400, an A320, a Cessna C172, a Baron 58, two gliders, some stunt airplanes, two military fighters and some historical aircraft. Graphically they belong in the high grade payware section.


The developers are responsive and actually listen to the community. Some feature requests are implemented within days. Great work guys!

Ease of use / loading times

The sim is really easy to use, you can select an airport from the map, choose a starting location (runway, final approach, platform) and choose an aircraft and you can go. Want to plot a route, just a matter of a few clicks with the mouse. And the best of all? Very short loading times, just a matter of seconds.

Then the cons:

Night lighting

While the aircraft cockpits and building lights excel at night a lot of night lighting is still missing. For example the planes all have working taxi/landing lights, but they do not light up the ground or other objects. There are no taxiway lights and no lights on the platforms. The roads have no lights on them and cities without buildings do not have any night lighting. The lighting that is there is beautiful and rendered very realistic, so the potential is there, but it really needs to be filled in. As an avid X-Plane user this really is the biggest omission right now and I think it should be handled with priority at least partially.

The world is still too flat in many areas

The larger cities are wonderfully detailed and absolutely not flat, but other regions are very flat. In X-Plane this is solved by using Open Street Map data to render roads and buildings. It would be great if at least some level of automatically placed buildings could be implemented so the world gets some more depth.

Airports are great at the moment, but they still lack windsocks, taxiway signs and lighting armaments making them flat in many places too.

Still lifeless

Everything around you is still very static. From the water to the roads to the airports. More effort should be taken by the developers somewhere down the road to breathe life into the world. This can start by introducing some animated scenery objects like windmills, windsocks or maybe a rotating ferrywheel in Vegas.

The waters right now are just a satellite image which has both its ups and its downs. The upside is that the water looks very realistic from high up, the colors can differ and streams are visible from the sky. The downside is that there is no reflection of the sun and no movement when you get lower. Another downside is that waterplanes are not possible at the moment. A semi transparent overlay with waves and reflection may do wonders here, bringing the best from both worlds.

When you look at the roads you see nice roads from higher up. But these roads are also just static images and the cars are stuck on them. A road system like in X-Plane would be awesome here, with lights and moving cars, at least for the highways and main roads.

The airports are also still very lifeless, there are a lot of planes though which is awesome. But they are all static and there is nothing else happening at the airports.


If you are into flight simulations, you should definitely buy this one, if only to support the development team to make this sim into the flight simulator we’ve all been waiting for (it really has the potential). This is a must buy if you are into VR as this is one of the best looking VR applications available. There are lessons, so if you don’t know how to fly an aircraft, this is a great opportunity to learn the basics.

The sim has a long way to go, but I have the confidence that this one will become a big contender as the main simulator for lots of people. It already is a lot of fun though, there is a lot to see and the airports and aircraft are beautiful. I think you get some great value for a very small price and it will only get better from here.

Peter Zwegat

Posted: June 8, 2016
Early Access Review

UPDATED: July 2016

As an old flyer I owned another lately released flight sim and was curious to compare Aerofly FS2 with the other one (knowing, that the intentions of the two differ a little).

Yes, this is not ment to be a full blown simulator (as the other product). Provided that, I was surprised how many of the systems are implemented in Aerofly FS 2. But many (crucial) systems are not. After all you have to keep in mind, that this is an early access.


– nice scenery (good graphic engine!!!); very fluidly on ultra settings; gives a much better sense of flying than other stuttering sims (including recently released ones)
– many nav aids available, including ILS
– good variety of airplanes; well modeled
– acceptable physics
– short loading times
– nice views
– easy flight planning (for unpatient pilots)


– some important systems are not implemented (yet)
– no ATC (yet); at least some background chatter would improve the atmosphere highly
– bad sounds (aircraft)
– no real weather (yet?)
– no weather presets
– no fuel or load system (yet?)
– limited scenery/area: west coast US (and Switzerland as DLC)
– needs more 3D objects (trees, buildings, etc.)


For a quick ride this is the right product. Very nice grahpic engine. Dovetail should get together with these guys, regarding the engine. I know that the area to fly is limited. But with the fast loading times and the fluid graphics – even on ultra settings – I see much potential for more.

Some systems need to be implemented as quick as possible as they are crucial for the product as it’s ment to be used:

– the autopilot needs also be improved on most of the airplanes. For example you’re not able to set vertical speed on the Learjet (you have to use shortcuts). NAV mode is mostly not implented; also VNAV would be a nice to have
– more detailed configurations for the main instruments (PFD, ND Lear)
– radio navigation (e.g. in the B747 you’re even not able to tune any radio NAV manually)
– Real weather and weather presets!
– ability to safe and load flightplans
– ATC chatter (at least, just for the atmosphere)
– AI traffic (you feel very alone in the air)
– better sounds for the aircrafts!!
– exterior lights should actually emit light!!

I wish to see more scenery, knowing that this means a lot of work. Overall I was surprised by the qualitiy of the product. For now Aerofly FS 2 is better than Flight School from Dovetail. Expecially regarding the scenery and graphics engine!! Here you can see where to go in that matter! But also the variety of planes is well balanced. The physics are ok. Could be much better for a product which tries to sell itself with the slogan "highly realistic physics".

Update July 2016: this sim is now VR ready (Rift and Vive). It’s in the early stage (beta), improvement has to be done, but this is THE main reason to purchase this sim, if you are an owner of a Rift or Vive. My Vive works great with it.


Posted: January 17, 2018
Very Highly Recommended. As a retired real world pilot that spends most of the day with flight sims I have now found the best of the best. Sure, it is still growing and has a long ways to go but, for now, nothing else does what Aerofly FS 2 does for me.

I have two full hardware setups. My original triple monitor / Saitek hardware 6th gen rig that I have used for the last 12 months and a Volair Flight Sim cockpit with a brand new Alienware 8th gen Intel processor with a 1080 Ti card. This was purchased during the Christmas holidays along with a Oculus Rift VR.

I didn’t even bother to load up my FSX:SE, P3D, or FSW on this new PC. This will be dedicated to strictly Aerofly FS2 VR while sitting in a physical cockpit. A buttkicker will be added soon for sound effects.

I spent the last 5 years or so writing reviews at Avsim.com for flight sim add ons – both hardware and aircraft – but have now retitred from that so I can spend more time flying the sim.

A year ago I wrote the Avsim.com review of Aerofly FS 2 while it was still in beta or Early Access. I noticed recently that review has now topped 18,000 reads and still climbing. I’m not here to knock or discredit FSX, FSW, P3D, or XP11, I am just simply stating that I spent time with all of them, some more than others, but now it is Aerofly FS 2 that is my one choice.

Why? you may ask. There are many reasons, but mostly it is about smoothness and speed of loading along with the quality of what I see inside and outside the aircraft. My all time favorite is the Learjet 45 which is still in development, as are all the Aerofly aircraft. Recently I have spend time in the Cessna 172 SP while tuning my new PC for VR. This is because the Volair Cockpit is configured with the Cessna Yoke, Pedals, Large Trim and Throttle Quadrant along with the TPM panel.

I have maybe 3,000 + logged hours in small Cessnas and I can remember the look and feel of practically every movement. Aerofly FS 2 captures these movements better than any of my flight sims.

I occassionly take one of the biplanes up for a spin or grab the Extra for some advanced flying but I tend you come back to the smoothness of the Learjet 45 and the basic Cessna 172 SP.

Do I miss having ATC, advanced weather, and ai movements? Absolutley, but I have faith that when they arrive in due time, they will be of Aerofly quality so I will wait along with the many other users. Do I miss having real water? I do, and I also look forward to the day we can splash a seaplane in the lakes and rivers. Do I miss having a helicopter? I really do because the Aerofly FS 2 scenery just screams for up close and personal flying.

Do I miss having the entire world and 25,000 airports? No, not really. What I am enjoying recently is the new Orbx airports like LOWI, KMRY and Meigs Field. btw, I wrote the Steam review for Meigs for FSX:SE about 2 years ago. The DLC areas (very high quality scenery areas with greatly improved airports) will keep you occupied while more are being addeed along with all those other neat things that are yet to come. All of Switzerland, the heart of New York City, most of California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Colorado. Some of free, some cost about the same as 3 cups of Starbucks.

Many of the cities and major airports in these DLC areas rival payware level add ons. Actully, many of them are even higher quality than a lot of the older FSX payware airports.

You can add your own airports, and your own scenery using free downloads and provided tutorials and the quality will be better than anything you have ever seen with the exception of dedicated payware airports from Orbx and competitors.
Be sure to check out the "cultivation" and "GeoConverter" tutorials – you will be amazed at the results.

A recent additon to Aerofly FS 2 are the Free Flight Tutorials. These are as good as any you may have seen and are suitable for both beginners and seasoned flight simmers.

The interface is somewhat simplified at first glance, but what I have discovered is that it is very well thought out and very deep behind the scenes. Aerofly FS 2 has taken the click and select to a whole new level and it is so easy to change your settings or configuration when adding or changing flight sticks, panels, etc.

Finally, you can forget about trying to figure out hardware configurations, adding the latest tweaks, searching for updates, conflicts, running out of memory and all those time consuming things that took time away from flying in the older sims. This one really is Load and Go. Captain Kirk would have been proud of the warp speed of this flight sim. Most things can be measured in "seconds" not minutes.

If you have some time on your hands, go to Avsim.com and find my review (it is very long) of Aerofly FS 2 in its early days and compare that to what you see now. It has only been 12 months but, you will be amazed at the progress that has been achieved this last year.

With absolutely no reservations, I highly recommmend you give Aerofly FS 2 a test flight or two or three.



Posted: January 17, 2018
Aerofly FS 2 is the future of PC flight simulation – built on a modern, 64-bit native engine, with photo-real scenery and VR functionality built-in. The framerates are super-high and the sense of immersion is great. The developers are constantly evolving and expanding the product, with free DLC covering wider-and-wider geographical areas and more-and-more aircraft.

The software is only just out of early access and, compared to the other well-established simulators (P3D, FSX, both of which have been around for generations), there is less "coverage" and less features, but the IPACS forum is very active, with daily input from the IPACS team, 3rd party developers as well as users. New features and scenery areas are constantly being added with major projects such as ATC and a weather engine slated for future upgrades.

Recently we’ve seen both OrbX and Aerosoft release or commit to significant development in support of AFS2 and so the future looks brighter than ever.

As someone who has been involved in flight simulation for years and as a real-world pilot, I highly recommend this to anyone interested in experiencing the best in PC flight simulation. Sure, it’s still early days, but get in now and there’s a real sense that your input can help to influence its future direction. P3D and FSX are great and detailed simulations, but they aren’t the future.

We Win Gracie

Posted: May 29, 2016
Early Access Review

Anyone that would not recommend this sim is nuts. To think that this sim is just getting started makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside! The hundreds of dollars that I’ve spent on FSX Addons still cannot compare to this sim, it is absolutely stunning.

The Good:
Flight Dynamics
Default Aircrafts
Smooth Operation

Still needing improvement (prob already on its way):
Ground Traffic (airport and on the roads)
FMC would be cool but isn’t a must as long as you can plan flights (which you can).

I can’t wait to see what the updates hold, but I think we finally found our replacement to FSX and the rest!


Posted: October 14, 2016
Early Access Review

OK…let’s see…I’ve been playing MS Flight Simulator for…err….25 years? I’m also a real pilot – a former airline pilot who currently owns an aerobatic biplane. I’m also a former triple-A videogame developer who now works for a big software company doing a bunch of 3D and VR design work. I also (briefly) worked on the Microsoft Flight Simulator team a few years ago (before it was shut down for good by the bumbling MS Game Studio management team). It killed me that MS Flight Sim was put out to pasture. It has a reliable audience who spend money on add-ons. Anyhow, I’m so excited that someone is making a modern flight simulator. Aerofly 2 looks FANTASTIC…it blows FSX out of the water, even with all of FSX’s upgrades and add-ons. Aerofly also performs much better that FSX. The aircraft look amazing. The flying dynamics are FAR more believable than FSX (I fly aerobatics for real all the time…I know what I’m talking about here). The VR implementation is amazing in Aerofly (HTC Vive). The only complaint I have so far is that the avionics/aircraft systems part of the sim is lagging far, far behind FSX. I understand Aerofly is still in development, but I hope the developers realize that some of us use PC flight sims as practice for doing instrument procedures. I’d love to see a Garmin G1000 or G2000 in here with a functional database of navaids, airports, approaches, SIDs and STARs. Every airplane doesn’t have to have fully functioning avionics, but a few of them should. If one of each: airliner, a corporate jet and a light GA aircraft had deep avionics simulations, that would be a great start. Also, this begs the question – will Aerofly be open to external development teams? That is the thing that has kept FSX going for so long. All the super realistic aircraft add-ons were created by third part developers. This seems to be essential to a GA flight simulation. If this stuff happens, this will be the gold standard for modern, non-combat flight simulation. Oh yeah – also, what is the build-out plan for more regions of the world? Flying between airports is something that a lot of people like to do in a non-combat simulator. Anyhow, keep up the great work with Aerofly 2, I highly recommend it.

404 Jesus Not Found

Posted: May 19, 2016
Early Access Review

Just not ready yet. At least not for the price.

If you want to fly daytime VFR in the southwest USA in uncontrolled airspace without following any procedures then this might appeal to you. Just about anything else sim wise is off the table in Aerofly FS 2 right now.


  • Beautiful textures
  • Cool landmarks
  • Smooth performance
  • Good looking aircraft and cockpits
  • Flight models feel good

  • UI makes it obvious that this is based on a mobile game

  • No ATC
  • No weather (no precipitation or real weather data)
  • No AI traffic
  • Everything is static and flat. No cars, no other aircraft, nothing at all moves except for you. Outside of major landmarks and airports there are no buildings or roads, just flat textures of buildings and roads.
  • No multiplayer
  • No airframe stress
  • No engine management (mixture, fuel, or even on and off)
  • No aircraft systems or procedures at all
  • No FMC for airliners (although this is said to be in development)
  • Cloud draw distance is very low
  • No lights at night, everything is dark except for airports and small sections of metro areas
  • No roadmap for the future (yet)

Aerofly FS 2 seems like it cannot decide whether it wants to be a simulator or a game. In its current state it feels more like game than simulator. The fact that it is an adaptation of a mobile game shows in its UI and its lack of depth. Maybe that will change in the future, but the developers so far have not made their intentions clear.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here