PAPI not identifiable in bright environment

Can you tell this is 2 red indication?

No, the lightning is bad. Tbh I am glad PAPI lights even exist…

1 Like

Yeah, but this is kinda safety critical…

That’s exactly why I call Infinite Flight a game :) Hopefully this will change with Project Metal, though

1 Like

Well, bad lighting does not define the definition of game and simulator @tunamkol


No lightning does for me

1 Like

If extreme landings had good lighting would it be a simulator?


PM, please

1 Like

Fortunately, all of our models have ILS/GS indicators in the HUD :)

However, lighting improvements are one of those things that will be made possible with the optimizations etc that comes with Project Metal (which is not a specific release or a feature pack etc). Because yeah, it’s not our brightest thing right now (lighting in general)


I understand the technical difficulty. But this runway doesn’t have ILS…

1 Like

I mean sure, but the passengers aren’t really real so… Also this is why HUD is in the game. HUD is a very useful landing tool

1 Like

Because IF is a so called “Simulator” aren’t we supposed to Simulate safety procedures as well 😉

1 Like

Yes, but this isn’t like a test that will get you into the airlines. This is different. 🤔 (I hate thinking about the differences between sims and normal games)

I know there’s HUD and I use it all the time as well. But this is approach for KPHX 25R, there isn’t any published ILS/LOC procedure. Actually, it doesn’t have to be this complicated. There’s distance to waypoint shown on HUD, which can be used as a reference for visual approach.

What I want to say in this post is that, if I rely on PAPI, I get confused and crashed, and that’s not good whether you think this is a simulation or a game.


Pun intended? 😜


Not trying to be one of those guys but, I’m pretty sure HUD works when hand flying. Like there is a circle where it shows, “If you keep flying this angle you will end up here” I use that and I always land in the touchdown zone. (Not centerline though lol)

Yea it is hard to see the papi lights

Is this meant to be in compliment to, or do you mean this as a solution? If this is the “solution” then we are just accepting that visual approaches are only feasible when lighting is within specific bounds? If so then that means a whole lot of small airports are just by the seat of your pants, and many more situations aren’t realistically able to be simulated. I know everyone here likes to fly the big metal with FPVs, HUDs, and precision approaches but that’s only a portion of the flying in the real world. I understand the limitations of the lighting model, though I hope that within those bounds the papi lights are a priority because I agree they can become very difficult and they are arguably the most flight critical part of the lighting model. Perhaps aside from nav lights for VFR traffic and basic runway lighting the others are mostly eye candy.


This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.