Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/03/17 in all areas

  1. 59 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...
  2. 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.
  3. 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...
  4. 32 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. 30 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. 28 points
  7. 25 points
    It is the most delayed piece of flightsim software ever to be announced.
  8. 22 points
    And one from the VC for good measure....
  9. 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!
  10. 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!
  11. 20 points
    A little evening flight.... HGS contains some debug data (like the cross hair flight director) so don't look too closely ;-)
  12. 18 points
    We have a new batch of testers that are checking the plane out as we speak. They are all very excited to fly the bird but as we are in an early alpha state there is a lot to be done. A lot of VC switches must get a clickspot for example and we are finetuning the FBW. There after the VNAV part will get a lot of attention. Functions like ETP, constant Mach, holdings, Step climbs and AOC pages are coming along nicely. The real brunt will be the betatesting that has not yet begun. Oh yeah, did I already say that the FPS are terrific?
  13. 18 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!"
  14. 18 points
    hi all! Here is what I'm working on currently:
  15. 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.
  16. 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...
  17. 15 points
  18. 14 points
    Y Gesendet von meinem Computer ohne lästige Tapatalk Signatur.
  19. 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
  20. 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.
  21. 12 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
  22. 12 points
    Paintkits do not make sense if you have'nt a model!
  23. 11 points
    Aerosoft has a secret hack that uses your computer fans to cool them down. No joke.
  24. 11 points
    Even the real Airbus has problems with the linedrawing, so no, ours will not be perfect there.
  25. 10 points
    We have an update every friday. Maybe people found it a bit too much when asking for another inbetween.
  26. 10 points
    Maybe yes. But only after FSlabs fix theirs. A buggy save state is not desirable.
  27. 10 points
    A little teaser of the groundpoly. taken with p3d. Jetways/Airbridges (some could clarify once how it's call????) are going to be position that weekend. Soon we will publish some photos of the whole project with it's VAS resaults- I think you are going to love what you will see, both quality and performance. Regards.
  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
    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.
  35. 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 ...
  36. 8 points
    Wait for the A320 2017 preview forum to open please. We are only working on the A330 now. Thanks.
  37. 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.
  38. 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!
  39. 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.
  40. 7 points
    Brake Temprature is less of a problem after takeoff than it is before takeoff. Hot brakes have a worse effect on decellerating, so you'll need more runway to stop. Once a certain temprature is reached they can even become almost useless. You woulnd't take off with the brakes above a certain temprature, thus a situation where you need to keep the gear extended for cooling of the brakes after takeoff is rather unlikely. Simple: Wait. That's what most airlines do with the Airbusses anyway, regardless of the actual brake temprature (unless it gets close to melting the fuseplug in the tires). Keep in mind cooling a hot brake imposes a strong thermal stress on the brakes, therefore reducing the lifetime of the brakes a lot. Also, once in use, the brakefans cool the outer part of the brakes first. This is where the temprature sensor is located, so when using the brake fan your actual brake temprature sensed by the system will be cooler than the actual temprature in the inner part of the brake. To prevent a takeoff with the inner part of the brakes still too hot there are temprature limits imposed on the brakes for which you may take off. These limits are 135°C using Brakefans in the A320 and 270° (actual values could differ by some 10 or 20 degrees, I'm not 100% sure of them and don't have an FCOM here right now) if you did not use the Fans! This is a BIG difference! If you did not need to brake really harsh, then you wil likely be fine with the braketemratures after a "normal" turnaround time and will not need to use the Brake Fans at all. Also remember that if you have carbon brakes your brake fans will blow carbon dust into the air, which can cause cancer. The groundcrew will thank you if you leave your brakefans off unless they are really required to make your turnaround!
  41. 7 points
    Or if you want you can get a small fan from those dollar stores and glue it to the gear.
  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
    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.
  44. 7 points
    We all did that once in our lifetime!
  45. 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.
  46. 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.
  47. 7 points
    Ok, I've done some post regardin Madeira troubleshooting for many products. Some of them are similar to those experienced in the previous product, common thing is that they're mostly caused by 3-rd party addons. If having mesh/coastline issues please check: 1) If the default files were excluded correctly In FSX/P3D main/scenery/0502/scenery check if you have those files disabled/removed APX43200.bgl CVX4320.bgl If not move them or change extension to .bgx 2) For those using MESH addons: FSGlobal 2010 FSGX2010\AFR\scenery\DX043020.bgl FSGX2010\LocalMeshes\scenery\cvxLPMA.BGL FSGlobal Ultimate FSGUX\AFR\scenery N32W017.bgl N32W018.bgl N33W017.bgl FSGUX\LocalMeshes\scenery\cvxLPMA.BGL FSGlobal Ultimate Next Generation FSGU_NG\AFR\scenery\DX043020.bgl FreeMeshX FreeMeshX - Europe\scenery\N30W020.bgl Remove the file (make backup!) or change extension to .bgx 3) MyTraffic users Go to MyTraffic/Scenery/BR2_LPMA.BGL and MyTraffic/Scenery/BR2_LPPS.BGL and remove/change file extension to BR2_LPMA.bgx and BR2_LPPS.bgx 4) In case if you have ORBIX installed too: Two airports should be disabled in the configuration tool. This will disable some BGLs: ***FOR LPMA*** ORBX/FTX VECTOR/FTX VECTOR APT/ FILES ABP_LPMA.BGL and ABP_LPMA_Default.bgl and APT_LPMA.bgl MUST BE REMOVED or changed extention to .INACTIVE ORBX/FTX VECTOR/FTX VECTOR AEC/ AEC_LPMA.BGL MUST BE REMOVED or RENAMED to extention .inactive ***FOR LPPS*** ORBX/FTX VECTOR/FTX VECTOR APT/ FILES ABP_LPPS.BGL and ABP_LPPS_Default.bgl and APT_LPPS.bgl MUST BE REMOVED or changed extention to .INACTIVE ORBX/FTX VECTOR/FTX VECTOR AEC/ AEC_LPPS.BGL MUST BE REMOVED or RENAMED to extention .inactive What we observed running FTX configurator doesn't solve the problem as two files ABP_LPMA_Default.bgl and ABP_LPPS_Default.bgl remain unchanged after using the program. So it's required to remove it manually every time you use FTX configurator (!). For coastline problems: Go to ORBX/FTX_VECTOR/FTX_VECTOR_CVX/scenery and change all file extensions beginning with 4320 (there should be 17 files) to .bgx or remove them (make backup first!). 5) Mesh displaying wrong/our of 3 models Make sure Mesh Resolution in the flight sim options is set to 1m. 6) If having some problems with missing ground polygons in P3D check if you use the last version. v3.4 and higher are supported. ou can find instruction here: http://www.prepar3d.com/Prepar3D_Download_and_Install_Instructions_v3.pdf And more detalied one: http://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/495199-updating-prepar3d-v3-using-the-update-component-installers/ 7) If runway lights are not present/ground polygons missing Please run the scenery, check Madeira at night for the lights, close the sim. Then post as attachment SODE log from: C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\log. In the meantime I recommend checking these directories for files: C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\SimObjects for MKSTUDIOS_MADEIRA folder C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml for MKSTUDIOS_MADEIRA .xml If present Download last sode 1.4.2 from http://sode.12bpilot.ch/?page_id=9 Run the file and use repair option. At the end Sode Platform manager will run. Unregister and deactivate SODE then Register and activate it again. Finish installation and check the SIM again. 8) If having some weird object display issues I recommend to restart your pc/flight sim. If none of above helps you may try to reinstall the scenery. Install it with right click "run as admin" option. Hope this helps.
  48. 7 points
    We still have to complete a lot of things. That is is more or less flyable does not mean it is ready for serious testing.
  49. 7 points
    True! and their exterior model doesn't look so good either.
  50. 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.