Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/25/17 in all areas

  1. 55 points
    Another test flight finished. This time I made a short hop from EDDF to EDDM to test the new step climb feature and holding entries that the A330 will have. Be aware that this is early alpha and there is still room for improvement.
  2. 39 points
    Time for the friday update! This week was focused on creating the geometry for the cargo hold and the corresponding door interiors. Also all the guides and clamps for the containers you can witness on the entries. Also all three doors are available, including the bulk cargo section. Texturing has to wait again here like with the gearbay, as primarily now all the final geometry has to be done. The last large part will be the galleys and pax doors, which have been already started today. Once this is in place, all the final painting begins...
  3. 35 points
    Small friday update: Work on the galley detailing advances nicely. Galley1 almost complete (Still needs trolleys and casing of the kitches painted). Other galleys follow detailing...
  4. 30 points
    We will try to survive without your purchase jetkid. I'll make this forum section invisible for your account as it clearly serves no purpose for you.
  5. 27 points
    Short update. As you noticed we expanded the beta testing program recently. Calling it beta is a bit confusing as there are parts that are not completed but we need to have the sections that are done checked out right now. We only wanted professionals because we still need a lot of input and advise (the manuals do not tell the complete story rather often and as stated so often we do not simulate the aircraft but the job of the crew). What you might like to know is how our test team is build up. We got: Seven pilots Four engineers (mostly performance and propulsion specialists One rampy One flight attendant Two representatives of VATSIM and IVAO Several friends who are always willing to listen to our moaning We use a rather advanced project management systems (Zendesk Zoho) to share information, manage progress and to handle bug reports. Here you see how the testers can insert bugs: These bugs end up in the bug database and the responsible developer is notified. When he inserts a fix to our file versioning system it is automatically shared with the testers and the bug status is update to 'to be tested' status. My task as project manager is to make sure we have the right resources for each section and to make sure all parts are more or less finished at the same time.
  6. 25 points
    It is the most delayed piece of flightsim software ever to be announced.
  7. 23 points
  8. 22 points
    Some small update: No, for Lufthansa it is still to early "sk5645". Among other things the modeling, unwrapping and animation on the three galleys were finished this week. The door mechanic was to model rather near the real thing, even the guide arm cover on the top of the doors, as elsewise they hit the doors inner surface. So the designers at Airbus had to made this cover movable. Check the movie... Monday is then start of the galley texturing, the Lufthansa variant mainly was taken as blueprint. The galleys can differ strongly between the airlines; they even can have bars with cool neon lights which can take it up with every premium hotel bar!
  9. 21 points
    Yes. As you have no idea what has been done in that time and you clearly do not have a clue how much time it takes to model an animation like that, I find your post not very respectful towards one of my people. And many people know I am very protective of them. You got yourself a temporary ban!
  10. 19 points
    A small update from my side. Hans is now finishing up on some small details that were more or less on hold for SP1. We now have a sh*t load of EICAS messages and STAB TRIM, MACH TRIM and YD push buttons/EICAS msgs are also implemented. What is left now is doing a lot of test flights to get some LNAV stuff sorted.
  11. 19 points
    This is something that has been thought about for a long time. While we agree that such a feature looks really neat we also did some testing. Here are two screenshots I took from PMDGs latest beauty, the 747v3, which has a tremendous virtual cabin: Looks absolutely beautiful, don't you agree? And it looks just as good in the cabin! Really a very well done model, both on the outside, as well as on the inside. I really mean it! Now tell me: How much of the inside do you see on the outside shots? Not a lot you say? You are probably right with that. And that's the point. On a study level simulation class of product I really see the point for - and like - such features. How often do you actually walk through that cabin? Surely once or twice if you just got the bird! I also like exploring (and finding the Pogo Stick!). How often did you use, or even see, the cabin afterwards? Maybe once or twice when panning around with the views searching for a good perspective for some screenshots? That's what the average customer sees from the cabin, while he definately has to pay the price in terms of reduced performance and increased VAS usage. Let's do another test: Next time you visit your local airport have a close look at how much of the cabin you can actually see from the visitors places. It'll not be a lot because of the different lighting levels between the outside and in inside. This is very well reflected in the above shots of PMDGs 747. PMDG really nailed it on their model! While we really understand the benefits of a cabin model we believe it is not worth the price you pay in terms of performance and memory usage for the actual additions you get to your flight.
  12. 18 points
    hi all! Here is what I'm working on currently:
  13. 18 points
    I'll have a preliminary paintkit for download this week.
  14. 17 points
    Close to be finished. The problem is that Madeira scenery uses (I guess) all possible workarounds for flight sim limitations that every developer could imagine. Beside, you need to be compatible with GSX, ORBX and other addons. Let me give you an example for ground vehicles (GSX). You need fs concrete material under our custom ground polygons to have them moving correctly. But wait! You have pillars and slopes all around the airport. Ok then, when you deal with this you realize that to move fsx road traffic you need platforms all around the airport. But you used another to keep the aircraft on the runway (platform must me rectangle object) and traffic goes through the runway. Not a good idea when you want to land there with an airplane... Anyway 2 weeks later (I guess this was when my head became bold) when runway lights were ready I discovered that there's small transparency problem. You see an ocean and default ground through them... Let's go back! Runway should be physically connected to FS mesh. Ok! We can flatten, but wait... There are pillars there... Really, I could write a book about this.
  15. 16 points
    the 3D printed model is actually a nice idea. I imagine a golden CRJ900 statue with a plaque reading "For Hans, the slowest developer of all times!"
  16. 15 points
    So far I got 77 mails but only 8 of people who are professionals. This beta is about getting things right in the code, not about getting things running okay on all systems. So please only people who really know the A330 professionally. And I had three people who said they were pilots but when I asked more details they turned out to be 16 and 19 and somebody who worked construction according to his facebook profile. For the people who are able to help, thanks, might be Monday before I answer. Really need one day off.
  17. 15 points
    I don't think there are many (if at all) R-W A333's with crew rest area. With the limited range of the 333, it is normally not required. If there's a 3 man crew on a flight, typically a business class seat is reserved for the crew rest. To simulate the real-life crew rest experience, may I suggest the following: - find an uncomfortable reclining chair - wrap yourself in a blanket - put on an eye mask and ear plugs - try to sleep like that for 2-3 hours, then go back to the cockpit For increased realism, ask someone to have their dinner next to you, while you are trying to sleep. For ultimate experience, perhaps once every 3-4 flights, arrange for a baby to cry over your head for the whole duration of your rest... If, on the other hand, you want to simulate the A332-style crew rest compartment - try sleeping in your closet. Sorry, couldn't resist...
  18. 15 points
  19. 15 points
    Not sure if some new shots will help you waiting, but I think it may be good to post something. Last shot is with GSX working.
  20. 14 points
    Y Gesendet von meinem Computer ohne lästige Tapatalk Signatur.
  21. 13 points
    Gents I just invited some new people to our A330 beta project. But I can use a few more. BUT, at this moment we will only insert professionals. So pilots, maintenance people etc. And to avoid people pretending to be one of those we will be forced to ask for some proof. If you like to help, drop me a mail at mathijs.kok@aerosoft.com
  22. 13 points
    I am not here tomorrow, one day break. But if you read the last friday post more detailed, you will see that the galley modeling (incl. door interior) is underway now. 70% done already. This must be to optimally distribute the geometry to the textures.
  23. 12 points
    A little evening flight.... HGS contains some debug data (like the cross hair flight director) so don't look too closely ;-)
  24. 12 points
    Paintkits do not make sense if you have'nt a model!
  25. 12 points
    I'm sorry but the night lightning will be included as 'Madeira Night' extension for ~20$. Ok, I'm joking. It's already there, finished. With flashing strobe lights too.
  26. 12 points
    Small friday update: Gearbay have now been integrated into the fuselage with a basic coloring, details come later. Next task is to create the final cargo hold geometry...
  27. 11 points
    Let me try to explain why I raised this issue. What we are talking about here, is the ability to read various instruments, that have small characters with ease, and without having to strain the eyes. It does-not matter about shading and colours, or that it is an unnatural angle to view a panel, or being a contortionist. It is about the ability to select an instrument, or panel to be able to read or monitor various functions of the aircraft with ease. We expect, with a mouse click, to be able to see an enlarged (for example) engine start sequence, or ND, or PFD, and then to have the enlarged panel return to its normal size, with another mouse click. I can not find any other developer who does not see this. Products from the likes of PMDG, FSL, Majestic, Carenado, Wilco etc all have aircraft flightdecks that have 2D mouse click pop up panels. When you fly on a 17 inch gaming laptop, it is an eye straining job to be able to see properly, (for example) the Radio Altimeter read out when on finals. There are many more examples. I think that when we purchase a product from a developer of the quality of Aerosoft, that they have considered this and have built this into their product. We are not asking for something extra, but only what other developers provide. As I have previously stated, the AS A320 product is the best on the market, EXCEPT for this missing feature. We are talking here, after all about a computer game/simulation. Please take these comments as a positive, because they would make a good product into a brilliant one. Regards to all.
  28. 10 points
    Lol I remember being so exited to get my hands on this plane... 2 years later still no plane.
  29. 10 points
    So when it is finally released, you will refuse to purchase it? Suit yourself, but it seems rather self-defeating.
  30. 10 points
    Not ready yet, but here is the changelog. MA Frankfurt 2.10 changelog all gate positions at the terminals now have one animated jetway (CTRL-J). The number of animated jetways per gate position is limited by the FS engine The AFCAD file has been replaced by a “hightec” AFCAD Optimized roll off and taxi behavior after landing The user can now request RWY18 for take-offs from the FS ATC as an alternative runway (Note: RWY36 can also be requested, this can´t be avoided due to the FS Engine limit. AI Traffic can´t use the RWY18!) RWY 07C/25C can now be requested for an approach, though AI Traffic will not land here, just like in reality. All approaches and STAR´s are now included (AIRAC 1703) allowing a request for a transition point from enroute to approach from the FS ATC when using a GPS or RNAV approach. The default Garmin will now show these approaches. Note: In the standard AFCAD file of the Microsoft FS, ILS approaches are limited to VOR/NDB systems and do not show waypoints as entry points. Optimized 3D runway lighting, now also for P3D All runways in P3D now have 3D masts and lights Strobes (rabbit lights) and REIL strobes added In FSX with SP2/ACC and the Intelliscene Module the runway lights will turn on automatically when visibility is poor during the day In FSX:SE and P3D the user can switch on the runway lights via the NAV2=108.00 frequency if the aircraft uses the internal NAV2 frequency variable.
  31. 10 points
  32. 10 points
    What you need to know to understand Frank's little prank is, that in the Aerosoft internal Skype group these people (and some others as well) are bashing each other all day long. They obviously don't need to work like others do... (and mistake the forums with the chat group from time to time)  
  33. 10 points
    Fslabs have much to learn on how VC texture should look like. Very very nice job Aerosoft !
  34. 9 points
    Hard to imagine... coming home from work and actually having the evening off. But the day will hopefully come soon I won't buy it either! You're the former CRJ pilot. You gave me all the info on how weird this plane is. I'll send them all to you
  35. 9 points
    Hi Patrick! To that issue there is a relativly easy answer: The calculation of the visible result on your monitor happens after formulas which mimic the reality, but are far away from what mother nature is doing there. All what your eyes can see is based on electro magnetical radiation. An incredible number of little "particles" called photons come in from the sun, hit surfaces and are changed in that event. On black surfaces they get mostly absorbed and their high movement energy is radiated out as heat, others get some part of their energy absorbed only and come back in different "colors". Even at moon night, the sunlight first hit the surface of the moon which bounces it back to us. Btw. only 16% of that energy come back, moon is rather dark and we often get a wrong feeling for it. Basily its almost black as coal when we see it under earthy conditions. Such bright is the sun light and of course the dark background does the rest. But how much processing time you think would it take for a computer to re-generate all this in realtime, at 60 FPS? And we speak here not only of billions and billions of particles with multiple interactions in the same moment. So simple algorithms were invented to come near the natural result. The pro is the fast calculation, the con that it is still rather far away from natural result. The artist simply cannot control the visual apperance in the FSX generation of simulator. You get only ONE optimal look for a certain time of day, to which you can calibrate. But more modern variants of realtime render engines go a step further and can adapt nicely to different times a day. We hope that in future editions of flightsims those achievments are made accessible to us visual artists, as we of course aim also for the best looks for all flight simmers.
  36. 9 points
    Video is done and I have to say ... when I started making video's for Aerosoft this scenery was pretty much one of the first I did so it's fun to see this being done again nearly 6 years later ...
  37. 9 points
    It was bound to happen as soon as the post moved from the last page - which is all that many people ever read. Oh, those poor, lonely posts on pages 1 through 154... I feel bad, even sad for them (weep). Many of them were so good, but now they're in a place sort of like the Island of Misfit Toys and nobody will ever want them!
  38. 8 points
    Wait for the A320 2017 preview forum to open please. We are only working on the A330 now. Thanks.
  39. 8 points
    Landing rate is indeed something overrated in flight simulation. In real life there are many situations where a landing of about 300-400 feet per minute is very appropriate. Some pilots even say no landing with less than 200-300fpm is a good landing. BUT: Since you have no real feedback about your landing in a flight simulator (it doens't require you to visit the orthopaedist if you screw up) I can fully understand why people want such a feedback. Expecially in larger aircraft like the A330, 777 or 747 you can hardly judge your landing just by looking out of the window or by instrument readings. There are a lot of nice tools available that can measure your landing rate already, so we do not see the need to include such a feature in our A330.
  40. 8 points
    I fully agree with you Kiosutra, a well done crash detection is a vital element, most certainly in a learning environment like actual 'real' simulators. It is extremly important for flight students to learn about the consequences of their actions. What happens if you descide to take the shortcut over grass between taxiways, what will happen if you do not follow the taxiway centerline, heck, what will even happen if you do not follow TCAS instruction, hit a bird, blow a tire, what kind of damage may appear at a tailstrike with its consequences, what effect exceeding the airframes structural limitations has. In a study simulation this kind of things should not be missing! Unfortunately what our flight simulator offers as 'crash detection' has nothing to do with the above. It simply pauses your flight indefinately when it senses you have done something wrong. Does that add anything to realism? Does it give you the chance to analyse what your mistake was in order to learn for the future? Even Flight Simulator itself has invisible walls on its default airports. You see nothing coming, because there is nothing, and all of the sudden your flight ends. We can not recommend using such a system causing more issues than doing anything good. The moment Lockheed or Dovetail implement a proper crash detection system you can be sure a whole new attitude towards it will find its place in our community!
  41. 8 points
    Sorry Kiorustra, I hope you are more professional in you job as instructor, as in you post here. Crashdetection in the FS is a simple Box around an Object generated by the Compiler based on the meshes borders inside the Object. It has nothing to do with the complex structure of the object itself. So, you will get the crash, when the crashbox around your aircraft, which also has nothing to do with the structure of your plane, will hit the box around the object. This technical limitation will result in the fact, that 95% (maybe more) developers will use all available features in the SDK to prevent the generation of crashboxes (swithes in xtomdl tool or xml tags in Bglcomp), so that no crash can generated by the sim. The only fault done by MK Studios is not to do this with all there Objects, as other (maybe all) developer will do it or they simple miss one. When this is for you a point to recommand not to buy there products, you should not buy any addon anymore (scenery or aircrafts) as all will not fullfill your "most important" feature.
  42. 7 points
    Time for a serious response! I think Mathijs already said this a couple hundred pages earlier, but it's time to say it again: The CRJ is neither a Boeing or an Airbus. Thought it seems to be a simpler aircraft (no Autothrottle, only advisory VNAV), its avionics system's complexity beyond Boeing and sometimes even close to Airbus. You can choose between all kinds of navigation sources and use the cross-side (CPT side uses F/O side) data - choose the wrong setting on the NAV Source knob and you'll end up flying somewhere... but not where you want to go. Another example: if you're on an FMS flight want to intercept an ILS, you have to change the NAV source from FMS to VOR/LOC or the autopilot's APP mode will not capture anything. So yes, I fully except tons of questions and alleged bugs pretty much immediately after release. But then, that's what we have The Dude for
  43. 7 points
    Mega Airport Frankfurt has been updated to 2.10 HISTORY 2.06 Release Version 2.08 Positionsschild A25 AFCAD (Boden und ILS) Crash beim Rollen zur Startbahn 25C 2.10 CTRL+J Jetways added New AFCAD with - optimized AI Traffic roll of Runway and Taxi to Gate handling - Runway 18 requestable from FS ATC for depature by User (AI Traffic not use it, limit by FS Engine) - Runway 07C/25C optional requestable for Landing for the User (AI Traffic only use 07L/25R and 07R/25L for Landing) - Approaches for GPS/RNAV requestable from ATC based on Airdac Cylce 1703 (ILS limited by FSEngine to VOR/NDB Startpoints) Runway- and Approachlights now 3D in P3D too Strobles and REILs added. Runway- and Approachlights can be switch on at Daytime by setting NAV2=108.00 (not working with all Addon Aircrafts) Minor Bug fixes, like "flying" Stopbars at the southend of RW18 Autogen Bridges removed in the airport area
  44. 7 points
    I wished everyone would stop with all the talk about how Aerosoft doesn't know how to release a product on time. Developing addons take time if they're going to be worth anything and that is exactly what Aerosoft is doing. Aerosoft announces the day they are starting a project (or close to), but who knows how long it took PMDG to develope the 747? For all we know they may have started 5 years ago and just not told anyone. Aerosoft is open and I feel as though some people take it as they are almost finished when they post it and they are not. They are taking some time, but be thankful that they are creating a great product that is going to work and not be buggy in the end. So stop asking for release dates, and stop pestering the AS team about not being able to release a product on time and just be patient, it will come.
  45. 7 points
    We all did that once in our lifetime!
  46. 7 points
    Making crash object in Madeira airport that includes: a ) fake floating runway in the air (pillars) that is not supported by FS development tools and the sim itself, b ) lightning, taxiway paths, ai traffic not connected to default FS mesh, c ) papi lights with external working physics (slope etc.), d ) mesh around the airport that isn't fs mesh, it's modeled in 3d, e ) moving vehicles paths that are programmed to move on fs mesh surface (walkaround - it's working of course), f ) ground layering in FSX native material (lot's of tricks done to make it work), g) ground flatten hack, may be a little bit hard. So if there's something that cause crash it may take weeks to track it. Anyway thinking this way I find every Level-D sim being used to train real pilots unrealistic, when you crash a plane there it just stops. Good day.
  47. 7 points
    Please, not on this forum. Most certainly not after the incident where part of our work ended up in there VC. Understand it is a touchy topic.
  48. 7 points
    Adding to Franks post I would like to give you one example of something we count unter "LNAV stuff" what takes quite a bit of time to analyse. I invested quite a bit of time tracking down what causes an issue for me where the CRJ switches from the active inbound waypoint to the next following waypoint too early before reaching the waypoint. Imagine it like you are approaching a turn and it starts turning some 20 or 30NM too early, as if you entered a direct to that next waypoint. Personally I encounter this on each and every flight, however no other tester or Hans himself ever saw this bug. Even if they reproduce my flights using exactly the same data, even with safed files from me, it does not happen to them. But it happens to me. Always. As Hans, or anyone else, can not recreate this it is very, very hard to track down. Even more so because it worked earlier for me and is a bug which was introduced only in the last months. This is the kind of thing that can take days, if not weeks of work to track down and fix. Or at some point someone of us then smashes his head against the desk when finding how stupid we were. In this case it'll probably be me myself who's going to do that. Even then we need to check if this can be fixed though as chances are good that at least a hand full of customers will do the same mistake I did. You know the saying "if a system is designed so that something can be done wrong somebody will do it wrong". Now what is going to happen with this bug? While Hans can not reproduce it he is mainly working on other parts of the CRJ while we testers do more and more flights trying to force the bug on other testers systems (we are through the part where Hans checks his own code to find the issue since a long time already with this one). As these are full flights necessary to reproduce the issue they take time to recreate. As much as 100 flight hours can easily be reached for such an issue if you add all the testers time flown. The good thing is, you can be sure all other systems are extensively checked for reliability in this time. If issues occure they are likely to be found. But then again there will be issues on release which may only be found in a thousand hours flown (which will easily be reached by customers in the first days after release). I hope this gives you some insight into what is happening behind the scenes and even why it is so hard to predict a possible releasetimeframe.
  49. 7 points
    People, please. Can we stop all release related posts now. Thanks
  50. 7 points
    As a guy who works on 737/320/330 everyday. From the outside you can be happy to see a Pax' head tingeling around. But thats the most you'll get. Especially on the A330. From the outside you have too many reflections as the windows structure already consists of 3 panes. So at least >> I << dont care if we do not have a cabin if i get more FPS and just now we are on a very good way with Stefans model in regards to the current status. Greets from HAM