Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/25/16 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Friends, on behalf of everybody at Aerosoft and the Deputy Sheriffs on the forum I wish you the best possible Christmas (or Hanukkah!). May it be white, fluffy and spend with family and friends. If it is not fluffy and white put on some Christmas music and pretend it is snowing outside, you simmer for crying out loud, you should be used to make-believe! But please keep in mind what Aerosoft is selling and how silly it actually is. We sell entertainment software, the ultimate in luxury in a world where millions feel that the next meal is a luxury. Aerosoft has been a sponsor of humanitarian project in Ethiopia in cooperation with the Peckelsheim-based organization "Patenschaften von Mensch zu Mensch". They aim their efforts at children mainly. It's low key and small scale, with very small overhead. We make serious yearly donation as many other companies do. But you can help as well. On the checkout page of your order you are given the option to do a donation. To make you feel a little better and to make some kids in Ethiopia a whole lot better, click that button. Every cent will go to the organisation.
  2. 3 points
    Mathijs, thank you for the reminder on the Ethiopia project. It's easy to skip over that part of the payment page when we're excited to be buying the latest add-on. Your comment will make me took for it each time I buy a product. On a related question, is it possible to contribute to the project without buying a product?
  3. 2 points
    Welcome. Rule #1. Read. Rule #2. Use the search box. Rule #3. Don't mind the dislikes.
  4. 2 points
    It's rare that I correct The Dude... but I am doing it now because he did not know our plans changed today, lol. Our Airbus line-up for 2017 will be (actual names might change): Aerosoft Airbus A330 (2017 edition) Aerosoft Airbus A318/A319 (2017 edition) Aerosoft Airbus A320/A321 (2017 edition) Aerosoft Airbus Axxx (hopefully 2017 edition) We dropped the idea of doing something called SP4 because it made little sense. All our Airbus systems, from APU to FBW are redone and 'standardized' so it just needs a config file to make then suit the aircraft. It took us 6 years to learn what Airbus Industries learned a lot earlier, blame the project manager, not the developers. So we see all releases in 2017 as 'new' releases. But as before we will ONLY ask you to pay for the value of the new files and for this development (as for the CRJ development) you pay for the code and can decide yourself if you use it in FSX:SP2 / FSX:STEAM or P3D V3. One payment for all three sims. This also means that if you own the current busses you will get a discount when you buy the A330 for the simple reason it shares code with our current busses. The basic principle will remain that if you only pay for something one time. If it is on your disk it is yours. On as many computers as you want (as long as they are yours), No online activation that makes things hard for paying customers. We are not willing to comment on versions for X-Plane 11 or the new Dovetails simulator, But fact is that all our development is more and more 'standardized'. Most certainly the developments are aimed at a wider 'audience'. We sold many educational licenses of our Airbus developments and you might have seen the modeling in other simulators, advertisement and even in movies.
  5. 1 point
    Hi all Just wondered if someone would be interested in creating a PFPX Profile for the new release? Or if anybody is interested in explaining how to create aircraft profiles for PFPX, I'd be very grateful! Thanks!
  6. 1 point
    Also es ist etwas übertrieben so viel X-Aviation in die Schuhe schieben zu wollen. SkyMaxx Pro hat durchaus Stärken, allerdings läuft es teilweise X-Plane 11 ins offene Messer, denn in seinem Rendering gibt es noch einige Klinken (so zeigt es Wolken außerhalb seiner Sichtweite einfach nicht an). xEnviro mogelt sich daran vorbei indem sie sowieso auf Art Controls zurückgreifen, vor deren Verwendung Laminar warnt, weil sie jederzeit und ohne Warnung verändert und gestrichen werden können. Wenn es also eine andere Sichtweite haben will, trägt es diese einfach ein. Auch der Entwickler von xEnviro hat sich über die merkwürdigen Darstellungen von X-Plane 11 aufgeregt, nur er übersteuert, während SkyMaxx Pro Bugreports an Laminar schreibt. Was ist besser? SkyMaxx Pro versucht sich im Gegenteil an die Schnittstellen zu halten. Warum sie es bislang aber noch nicht fertig gebracht haben sich einfach mal mit den Herstellern von FSGRW zusammen zu setzen ist eine Frage. Ursprünglich waren sie ja nur Austausch-Wolken. Nach und nach haben sie mehr Features eingebaut. Doch jetzt haben sie das Problem das reine Metar Daten alleine nicht helfen. Das verrückte ist, inzwischen hätten sie auch durchaus das entsprechende Fachwissen im Team. Bei xEnviro ist eines der Probleme immer noch die sehr starke Verwendung von 2D Wolken. Für Jets sehr gut, für VFR nicht so gut. Und wenn andere Programme auf Wetterangaben angewiesen sind, wird es ein Problem. Ein echtes Problem von SkyMaxx Pro v4 ist, dass sie teilweise viel zu häufig in SkyMaxx Pro 3 Darstellungen zurück fallen. Hier und da schimmern neue Ansätze durch. IMHO hat man sich durch xEnviro zu einer übereilten Veröffentlichung treiben lassen. Ehrlich gesagt ist es Wahnsinn im Moment eine Klassifizierung vorzunehmen. Sowohl X-Plane 11, wie auch SkyMaxx Pro v4 und xEnviro sind alles Betas, die vor sich her stolpern.Ich fürchte es wird schwer sein eine klare Beurteilung abzugeben, bevor X-Plane 11.1 (!!) final wird.Und ich kann mir auch durchaus vorstellen, dass die endgültigen Lösungen aus anderen Richtungen kommen. So wird immer wieder darüber herum getobt, dass sie nur 3 Wolkenschichten unterstützen. Das witzige ist: Über ihre Schnittstellen können sie nicht mehr als 3 Wolkenschichten bekommen und diese haben maximal eine Höhe von 10.000 Fuß. Wieso soll ich mir mehr Werte notieren, als ich bekommen kann? Und ob wirklich die zusätzlich eingefügten Schichten des Rätsels Lösung sind, oder zum Beispiel die Idee von Austin Dynamik zu integrieren.
  7. 1 point
    I will stick my neck out on Aerosoft's behalf here, and say we probably won't get it before Christmas. Looking at what they have done up til now, a couple of months. There is a lot of work to be done once completed, packaging and download etc etc. I doubt that they have a date fixed yet. What I would like to know is whether there will be a damn great package with all the Airbuses in? Put my name down for that one!
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    Vielleicht daran, dass XP11 noch beta ist und X-Life nur für XP10 ab v10.45 ist?
  10. 1 point
    I am no dev or program manager but I would say the outside model and the VC would take as long as the A330. The problems start at getting hold of an A350/380 IRL to get the measurements for the VC. (We do not have the luxery to just "copy" large parts from somebody else). The next problem would be the performance data and stuff like FWC software etc. As long as we do not have those resources such AS aircraft would be largely fictional. With that data I would guess atleast a year or so pending on how large the team is that works on it. Just see how long an CRJ takes with just one person. Now the good part of the story is that there is an RW A320NEO pilot on the team, among other Airbus pilots, that also happens to transition to the 330/340/350 next year.
  11. 1 point
  12. 1 point
    Technically there is no problem for us, we can attach sounds to any effect. What is more important is that the sound recordings (that we made) we have these sounds hardly audible. Check back in this topic and you see I discuss sounds a few times and show (okay try to show) that with sounds realism is only moderately important. What is important is what the customeers expect, what they think it will be. I am oldfart, I come from the time when you could get a jumpseat right if you asked nicely and I done many in preparation for aircraft products. But how many customers have ever been in a airliner cockpit on landing? Yet they all have a very strong idea on how it should sound (NOTHING like it sounds from the cabin). So perhaps we have indeed to add some of these sounds even if it does not serve realism. I draw the line at flaps though, lol.
  13. 1 point
    Hey everyone, These last 6 months has been very hectic in my personal life so I apologize for not being all the way on top. KDM Entertainment is however fully up and running more than ever and we are in the very very final stages of Pisa X! We sadly can't catch a before-Christmas release, but it will be a not too long after-Christmas release. Along with Pisa, there are also other projects we are working on, which we look forward to share more about in the near future. Also thought i'd mention now that the jetway is animated with the use of SODE. Here's a screenshot of that: I wish everyone happy holidays and thanks a lot for the excitement regarding this project - we are really on the final sprint for this one now Kind regards, Joakim
  14. 1 point
  15. 1 point
  16. 1 point
  17. 1 point
    Hello, After reading this thread I decided to reply officially. About two weeks ago we found a small number of 3D objects in the update of the FSL Airbus. So we contacted Lefteris and found him really surprised. I talked to him on the phone as we didn't want to do anything without having talked and I found out that he didn't knew about it before we told him. So the files may be used by accident (honestly it was a mistake by comparing some objects between the two airbusses and some wrong objects were deleted) "The good coments were really a nice compliment to our 3D artist Stefan" ;-) We decided together not to make a big deal out of this and FSL has solved the problem with a new update."Shit happens" ;-) I am sure FSL doesn't need to use Aerosoft objects in an update because they have the capacity to do them by themself. So for everybody, for me this is no longer an issue. We have a good relationship to FSL since many year and no reason to change it. Btw.: I was surprised that this thread was opened anonymously. I don't like this kind a usage of forums because it is cowardly. I wish you and all our customers a contemplative Christmas season and a Happy New Year. Kind regards Winfried Diekmann Aerosoft, CEO
  18. 1 point
  19. 1 point
    Just like KingMusjo said: Our planes are frameratefriendly because of the way we design them. Sure we could add virtual cabins, etc., but then again read up a little on what Mathijs just said. It is not our target to limit your simulator to one ultimate addon, but it is the combination of addons that makes simming great these days.
  20. 1 point
    I have written a new eBook, available now from the Kindle store. You can read a sample and check out the table of contents by clicking the pic below. (Make sure you go to your country's Kindle store if you want to purchase!) US Kindle store. UK Kindle store.
  21. 1 point
    You can now also buy this as a paperback! Click here to check it out (Amazon UK).
  22. 1 point
    Rhodes LGRP Chania LGSA Calgary CYYC Beijing Capital ZBAA New Delhi VIDP Mumbai VABB Shannon EINN Malta LMML Tel Aviv (updated) LLBG Kiev Boryspil UKBB Perth YPPH Auckland NZAA Cape town FACT Johannesburg FAOR Atlanta KATL
  23. 1 point

    Version

    1873 downloads

    File Size: 36.02MB . hosted at : http://www.lockonfiles.com/files/file/2683-aerosoft-twinotter-extended-british-airways-3b-p/ 2 sets of skins, one "Normal" without mipmaps and one "x4096" with mipmaps, mipmaps are better for zooming but in some GPU end up blurring the skin each set contains 1 skin for the 3 Blades Passenger version paste the Aerosoft_DHC6_300_WHEEL in the Airplanes folder, found in the SimObjects folder Microsoft Games\Microsoft Flight Simulator X\SimObjects\Airplanes
  24. -1 points
    The quality of the final textures on the plane depends a lot on the skill of the developers. The pure number/size of the files does not matter a lot. For example you can achieve a better quality with less files/resolution if you manage to get a better order in the objects contained in the texture files and thus get more objects painted on the same files. We have seen some developers doing 4096x4096 textures, but then only placing very few objects on them keeping lots of space free which wasts a lot of resources.
  25. -7 points
    Soooooo ... what's the release date? 2016 is almost over.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up