• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

372 Excellent

1 Follower

About FWAviation

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2035 profile views
  1. Mathijs, as I explained, I took the time to read your sticky post. The problem is that this is a topic for both the A320 family and the A330 releases, which makes it confusing sometimes whether information refer to both aircraft families or only to one. And in the old topic, your sticky post still mentioned a 32-bit version of the A330 - while you stated that of the A320 family, there will be only a 64-bit version (at least initially). So if this now applies to the A330 as well, this is indeed a new information. And a surprising one, since you started developing it for 32-bit and I thought that development for it was pretty advanced at this stage. It's also surprising since Tom A320 confirmed in the old topic only a few days ago that the A330 will be released in a 32-bit version as well:
  2. I second that. I had some difficulties to keep my hands away from the competitor's product in the recent sale, so I'm still waiting for sim-wings but also hoping for some kind of status update.
  3. And while I fully understand the reasoning for P3Dv4 (and I plan to make the switch on the long run, too), I am always surprised to read that large parts of the FS community (allegedly) have made the switch already. I mean, P3Dv4 is on the market only since last May, and I wouldn't have assumed that so many flightsimmers already have sufficient hardware. So either I'm one of only a few people who do not have suitable hardware, enough money or time yet - or the sale numbers don't tell the whole story. I'm currently not buying any further 32-bit add-ons from Aerosoft either - but not because I left FSX behind, but because I have pretty much bought every add-on already that I was interested in. But before I get off-topic any further: In the old topic, it was mentioned in Mathijs' sticky post that the A330 will be published in both a 32- and 64-bit version. This isn't stated as explicitly in the new sticky post anymore. But there will still be a 32-bit version of the A330 (released simultaneously with the 64-bit version), right?
  4. You expect apologies, @Qseries, where sim-wings and Aerosoft have no reason to apologise. As it has been pointed out several times, sim-wings had announced already months and years ago that they intend to update all their airports. Even the prospect of a new Tenerife South airport was floating around these forums years ago. And as you say, they have a big portfolio of airports - and as a two-man team, updating all of them sure can't be a quick and easy task. What other developers do is a wholly different thing, and I think it's inappropriate to blame sim-wings for the decisions of other developers. Should there be better communication between developers? Maybe. But are we the ones who get harmed most by the multiple versions of one airport - or the developers themselves, since the market might get overcrowded? This is why I find it so inappropriate to complain. We, the customers, have the freedom to decide. In terms of sim-wings, it was planned anyway to update TFS, so it's not even the case that any neglected airports remain untouched because of their decision to do that airport. So how serious is the harm done to us? Not very serious, if you ask me. And by the way: sim-wings never claimed that the Canary Islands are "their own". They only stated that they did them in the past and planned to update them. What other developers did, is - again - a wholly different matter.
  5. And before we forget this: Until only a few days ago, Tenerife South was largely an untouched destination. Or did you all have the Simbreeze version installed? I didn't, because for me, it didn't match modern quality standards in scenery design. So maybe we should be grateful that that airport finally gets developed by modern standards instead of instantly complaining that it is developed by too many people at once.
  6. While I am puzzled, too, that airports get done by three (or as in this case, four) developers at the same time, I find it intolerable how some of the users here reacted. Are there no more serious problems in the world than that you have to choose between three different versions of a particular airport scenery? Yes, other airports are left untouched, but if you are informed about how difficult it can be to get proper photo material and access to the respective airports (just take a look into the Johannesburg topic), then you should refrain from any reproaches towards developers. In the end, if you all know it so much better than the professionals, why don't you start scenery development yourself?
  7. Talk to the management? Here's your chance...

    Thanks a lot for the heads up and the kind offer, @Mathijs Kok!
  8. Talk to the management? Here's your chance...

    Thank YOU for your quick help, @DaveCT2003!
  9. Talk to the management? Here's your chance...

    Are there currently any problems with your ticket system or the support in general? I opened a ticket one week ago because I didn't get a functioning coupon code when buying a new PFPX server subscription, but never got a reply. I even e-mailed to your support address yesterday, still no response. Any help would be much appreciated.
  10. Köln/Bonn airport preview

    Fantastic news, including the fact that FSX will be supported as well! And it's also great that you, Jo, expand your great work to Germany! If I could wish for another German airport to get the @Jo Erlend treatment, it would be Munich. It's in dire need of an update and of someone who treats every destination with a great eye for details and lots of love. But for a start, I will be perfectly happy with Cologne/Bonn. ;-) By the way, @Mathijs Kok: I suppose the people of Bonn (at least those who come by this forum) will be eternally grateful if you add the city to the forum title. As a former German capital, I guess they are happy if they are not forgotten in the name of their joint airport with Cologne.
  11. Of course not. But for me personally (and, as I know, for many other flightsimmers) it is a lot more fun to fly real world routes, and sometimes even simultaneously with the real-world flights. It adds a significant bit more realism to the simulation. And it's simply not the same fun when I fly, let's say, a Qantas Boeing 747 on the Cologne/Bonn-Frankfurt route (which doesn't even have any real world flights anymore). But to everyone his own.
  12. True, but Eurowings occasionally operates its A330s on short-haul routes in the summer months, including the Mallorca routes. Here's an article about it: http://www.aerotelegraph.com/mit-airbus-a330-nach-mallorca-eurowings-macht-auf-ltu For the non-German speaking readers: The article (published in March 2017) says that between the end of April and the end of June 2017, Eurowings planned to operate more than 150 additional flights from Cologne/Bonn, Düsseldorf and Stuttgart to Mallorca with their A330s on days where the demand for Mallorca tickets is particularly high. The article's headline translates to "Eurowings copies LTU" - reminding that LTU was the first German airline which operated the A330 also on short- and medium-haul flights to holiday destinations on the Canary Islands and around the Mediterranean Sea.
  13. Sadly, I still have the same problems with GSX. I have build 1.0.1 installed and used the GSX files that were provided with that build. I put them in the Virtuali Airplanes folder (as recommended in the manual): GSX still doesn't recognise that the aft cargo door is open already. After I read in one of the other GSX threads here that one can also put the GSX.cfg files in the respective airplane folders (I believe that this means the SimObjects\Airplanes\Aerosoft CRJ... folders), I tried that as well: Still no success. But it seems to me as if other users were able to run GSX properly already with their CRJs. So what am I doing wrong? Can someone please take me step by step through how he/she achieved to run GSX properly?
  14. I see that you renamed the A330 preview topic in order to include also the A320 "remake". Why so, since Tom A320 or anyone of the other moderators said that a separate topic was planned for the A320? I ask because I find it quite confusing that this topic contains both projects now (I know that much of the code used for the A320 will find its place in the A330 as well, but still...) instead of news and comments regarding solely the A330. Or do you do this in order to bring this topic to 350+ pages, now that the old record-breaking CRJ preview topic is closed?
  15. Thanks, @Hans Hartmann for the info regarding GSX! I didn't make the experience that the ground friction depends on the scenery involved. I noticed the (temporary) friction problem when I taxied at Paderborn Lippstadt airport. The problem didn't return, even not when I taxied at EDLP again. And thank you, @Driver8, for the interesting explanations! Let's see whether FSDT and/or Hans and/or Aerosoft will find the solution there.