J van E

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by J van E

  1. J van E

    Junkers Ju52/3M for Aerofly FS 2...?

    Ok, thanks!
  2. Shortly after it was announced that the Junkers Ju52/3M would be released for Aerofly FS 2 first, the topic was locked. I wonder why? Has the project been cancelled? I, and a lot of other Aerofly FS 2 fans, were really looking forward to the first ever 3rd party plane addon for AFS2 ever...!
  3. Since this is a preview topic: do you have any new and recent preview video's that can show us for instance a few of the new features? Even though that may be a video made in P3D 4.2 I'd like to see some more of what's to come. Afaik it's been a while since there has been a video. And since you are just waiting for 4.3 and the work is mostly done maybe you might find some time to create some sort of trailer? That would make this a genuine preview topic again! If not, some fancy new screenshots will do, just to get us all in the mood. That's what a preview topic is for, isn't it?!
  4. So... that seems to say that 4.3 comes with significant performance improvements...!?
  5. J van E

    Junkers Ju52/3M

    It's been a while since I logged in here but I just have to say this new caught my attention and made me very happy! So there will be a 3rd party plane in AFS2 after all...! Which begs the question: is Aerosoft working on more planes for AFS2...? AFS2 needs 3rd party support badly and planes from Aerosoft could be a game changer. (Or well, a sim changer. ) It's a shame though that progress seems to be quite slow... AFS2 could do with some addons the coming months! Anyway, that Junker isn't my kind of plane at all but well, if it is a good and 'deep' simulation I will probably get it anyway! AFS2 can do with some more depth also!
  6. Nice. And good to know about the release being pushed to 2018: now I can stop waiting for a while.
  7. I don't envy your job, Tom... I respect how you stay so calm, cool and collected.
  8. Well, yes, 'more in-depth' doesn't equal 'best product'. There is a lot that comes into play when choosing between similar addons (similar meaning the same kind of plane). Cost, performance, what is actually simulated, what is actually used, etc. I think I can safely say that not only a lot of users are considering the Aerosoft Airbus to be the better product for them but that most users do so. The market for the Aerosoft version simply is larger. Which is exactly why Aerosoft is making specific choices. And rightly so. It works both ways. BTW I am still on the fence and will wait with my decision until the AS Airbus has been released.
  9. Come to think of it... If I am not mistaken you can enable a co-pilot with the Airbus to make the job a bit easier, right? Question 1: will that virtual co-pilot be using that indepentent right hand stuff? Or is the option to use those things indivudually only meant for shared cockpits? Question 2: you as a player (or simmer...) are the pilot in command (or whatever you call him) and you either also do the co-pilot's job OR you let the virtual co-pilot do that. Does that co-pilot help you in a totally realistic way or is it just helping out on a few things to make simming on your own easier? In other words: are the duties divided between the player and the co-pilot in a realistic way or is it a 'sim-only aid'? Question 3: what about a mode where you play the co-pilot and let the computer be the pilot in command? Just thinking out loud here. I think it could be fun to sit in the right seat every now and then (without using a shared cockpit, that is) and only do the things a co-piot does. Would be nice to see things from a different perspective. But I suppose that won't be possible...
  10. No, the sim itself has to be 64 bit in order to run the 64 bit Airbus. The fact that Windows itself is 64 makes no difference. FSX (and every version there is of it) is 32 bit so you would have to wait for the 32 bit version. And no need to say sorry because I am sure there are a lot of people who are confused by all this 62 vs 32 bit stuff.
  11. I am also sure I've read that but I am getting a bit older and remembering posts done in June is becoming a bit problematic. But seriously, good to know AS will look into this. I obviously didn't expect them to do so right away: the plane hasn't even been released yet! In the meantime I've heard the rain effect doesn't look too good so... maybe AS should have a REAL good look at it before they decide.
  12. Just read in the previous topic about raindrops on the windows and that P3D 4.1 would probably not give us that yet so this wouldn't be a feature of the new bus. 4.1 has been released today and guess what, it has raindrops on the windows (applied to some 10 default aircrafts). So, will the upcoming Airbus take advantage of this new feature?
  13. Oh boy... after reading almost the entire topic I am certain someone will now post he or she won't buy this plane because this isn't modeled...
  14. I hardly dare to say this but well.... Those screenshots from the cockpit are looking great but er... so did the previous version of the Airbus. What exactly is different? It's been a small year or so since I flew the Airbus so maybe that's why I can't immediatley see what the improvements are...?
  15. Hi all! It's been a while since I've been here. After using a few other flightsims I am using P3D v4 now and am eagerly awaiting the Airbus 320. Or to put it more precise: I am eagerly awaiting any Airbus 320. I've been keeping an eye on another Airbus out there, which is also being worked on, but frankly... I know myself and I know that in the end I'd only use the options a pilot would use on a regular daily bases... and so all the options the other Airbus will offer are probably wasted on me. Not to mention the waste of money. I simply think the Aerosoft Airbus is more my kind of plane. It was my absolute favorite airliner ever in FSX and later P3D so I am sure this one will become my favorite airliner ever too. Presuming it comes with all the options the previous version had (like the audio checklist stuff and so on). I suppose that will be the case. I did actually read almost the entire topic but I did so spread over a few days so I may have forgotten a few things already. Anyway, just wanted to say I am back here and looking forward to what Aerosoft will come up with! Can't wait! But I will.
  16. Ah, ok, thanks for taking the time to check this out and clearing it up. Much appreciated! That could well be it indeed. Good to know there is nothing wrong with my Airbus.
  17. A while ago I learned that you could select a transition without first having to select a runway. You have to go to the ARRIVAL page, where you will see all available approaches, and then you have to click on the right arrow and you will see all available transitions. Click on that right arrow once more and you will see all via's. This worked for a while but now suddenly it doesn't. Whenever I go to the page with transtitions it is completely empty. Just as the via's page is. So the only way to select a transition is to first select the runway. Now I use ProATC and it only tells you the transition at one certain point and I have to select it or things may go wrong. It only says which runway to use later on. Now I know how to get the information for the expected runway and all but that's not my point: I simply would like being able to select a transtition directly on the transition page without having to select a runway first. This DID work a while ago so I wonder what has happened and how I can get this option back.
  18. Example, well, today I flew into ENBR and ATC told me the STAR to use is LUNUR2N. So I go to the arrival page, I see all various runways I can choose but click on the arrow right to go directly to the STAR page and it is empty. That's it. I should be able to see all available transitions on that page but there are none. I can only access the STARs if I first select an approach like ILS RWY17.
  19. My other topic is locked (no problem with that, the 'problem' was solved) but I received an answer on the ProATC forum to the question itself and I thought it would be handy to post that here anyway in case someone else comes here with a similar question, sees my topic and discovers the actual question isn't really answered. Most of you will probably know this but since, to my surprise, the actual answer wasn't given, here it is: Can I enter a STAR directly into the MCDU? Yes, you can: 1 - Press LSK 6L adjacent to destination airport 2 - Press LSK1R - ARRIVAL 3 - Press the right arrow button on the MCDU keypad [-->] 4 - Choose your STAR (and Transition if you want to) This completely solved my 'problem' with ProATC (although in the meantime I changed my procedures anyway). Thanks to the guys at ProATC.
  20. J van E

    Pitch Trim 1.31 Hangs...

    Whatever is meant to be: the best thing is to do what I do: when I program the MCDU and enter the flaps plus trim setting (which can be found on the right MCDU load page) I immediately also set the trim manually (set the ECAM to the F/CTL page so you can see the actual trim setting). By the time the checklist gets to that point it will proceed without any problems. Problem solved.
  21. Just curious: I noticed the TL/TA for departure is automatically correct. Does the Airbus get that information from the AIRAC...? I also noticed the TA for the destination is the same as used for departure unless you enter the correct alt into the MCDU. Is this realistic or some sort of limitation?