Leaderboard

Sorry for the delays but things were a but hectic all over. We are now making new builds that will need a few days of testing before being send out. As there are over 400 files changed we decided to make full new builds only (we believe this will be the last time this is needed). Changelogs: A330 Improvement: Pacs logic improvement Improvement: Engine start logic improvement Improvement: FF and Brake indications better Improvement: Added SID and Arrival to CFD sync Improvement: Changes MCDU menu Improvement: Fuel calculation Improvement: LOW FUEL message added to ECAM Improvement: Conditions to show rising runway Improvement: Copilot now also adjusts FO BARO settings Improvement: Timing start DESCENT PREP CL changed (starts 5 NM earlier) Improvement: GSX-Pushback – Good Engine Start PF call added and call modified (no GSX confirmation necessary anymore) Improvement: parking – Dome lights are automatically switched on, Cones are set and GPU-unit connected Improvement: Breaks between various checks / settings added when aircraft is moving – during those breaks the standard VC view is called (looking outside) Improvement: Timing Seatbelt Announcement CLIMB: Adapted to OVHD switch setting Improvement: Aircraft.cfg – Views added and adapted to CL/ViewFocus Improvement: ViewFocus now also works for ChasePlane users Improvement: Cabin Crew Announcements - Cabin lights call during climb - Now also considers position of OVH light switch Improvement: After GO-AROUND checklist now proceeds (CLIMB or NEW APPROACH) Improvement: GSX2 implementation updated Improvement: Mavigraph chart support added Improvement: Minor changes to printout position and texture Improvement: Changed default bag weight to 25 Kg Improvement: Avoiding issues with 3rd party replacement of default files (ohhh please, never do that....) Improvement: Changes to fuel planner so users can edit amount and CG Bug fix: Small issues in CORTE selection and WIND pages Bug fix: Spoiler imbalance issue solved Bug fix: QNH decrepancy when inHg was selected solved Bug fix: MCDU freeze issue solved Bug fix: Auto trim now suits animations Bug fix: Fixes in FPLN page on landing phase Bug fix: Further fixes in DES page predictions A318/319/320/321 New Feature: EFB with NDP and Navigraph support Improvements: Engine start logic Improvement Improvements: Pacs logic Improvement Improvements: Added SID and Arrival to CFD sync Improvements: Changes MCDU menu Improvements: Conditions to show rising runway Improvements: GSX2 implementation updated Improvements: Cabin Crew Announcements - Cabin lights call during climb - Now also considers position of OVH light switch Improvements: Minor changes to printout position Improvements: Avoiding issues with 3rd party replacement of default files (ohhh please, never do that....) Improvements: Changed default bag weight to 25 Kg Improvements: Changes to fuel planner so users can edit amount and CG Improvements: After GO-AROUND checklist now proceeds (CLIMB or NEW APPROACH) Bug fix: Fuel display now correctly colored Bug fix: Small issues in CORTE selection and WIND pages Bug fix: QNH decrepancy when inHg was selected solved Bug fix: MCDU freeze issue solved Bug fix: Resetting of APU state avoided Bug Fix: Landing call memo now triggered correctly Bug fix: Fixes in FPLN page on landing phase Bug fix: Further fixes in DES page predictions

Friends, let me explain what we are planning in 2020 for the Airbus (and CRJ) series. First of all, let me say how incredibly lucky we are with so many simulators that are simply very good. Laminar (X-Plane), Lockheed (P3D) and Microsoft (FS) will all be superb simulators in their own right in 2020, while for many people FSX remains a viable (but unfortunately not any longer commercially viable) simulator platform. We are spoiled for choice and that is amazing. With these choices come the fact we need to make decisions. As we do not know what the biggest platform will be late this year, these decisions have to be made with some flexibility in mind. To be perfectly honest, we were very enthusiastic about P3D V4 in the beginning but as many parts of the graphical engine were left half done this enthusiasm slowly evaporated. Doing the modeling of the CRJ and A330 using the latest standards was a royal pain in the behind to be honest. The fact there are almost no aircraft add-on devs who do fully blown P3D V4 models (95% has only partial PBR for example) speaks volumes and our worries were shared by other developers in non public forums. So clearly we are not looking forward to redoing the A318/319/320 and 321 to the latest standards. It will mean many many months of work (as we do not just want to drop some {BBR textures but do it as it should be done) and will bring in almost no new sales. Asking an update fee for this is not really our style. At the same time Microsoft is showing us what a simulator can look like in this day and age. As you might know Asobo was so kind to invite me a few times to their offices (as I live close to them) and when we saw the sim for the first time running, the sound you heard was jaws hitting the floor. What we all thought were rendered demo video's turned out to be real in game footage, not even on a crazy hardware system. I follow up visits we learned a lot about the platform, what can be done, how things should be done and above anything, how determined Microsoft and Asobo are to assist developers. If we have a question, we call them and get answers. Let me tell you, that's bloody amazing. (BTW, Lockheed was also very approachable for us for a very long time). As you know Aerosoft loves all simulators. we sell add-ons for FSX, P3D, X-Plane and AFS2 . And we'll continue to do so, Flight Simulator will just be another platform. But one that we believe very strongly in. So at this moment we decided not to work on full new builds of the smaller busses for P3D V4. We do expect P3D v5 somewhere this year and are sure a lot of the issue we now have will be solved. We decided that because we feel the current versions are pretty strong and can stand the competition in the same price range. What will come very soon is a smaller update that adds the Electronic Flight Bag to the smaller busses. This will be at the same time as we can include Navigraph support for those device. After that we'll still work on open issues and if there is time we'll also complete CPDLC that is partly developed at this moment. At the same time we will start working on the Airbusses and CRJs for Flight Simulator. How much of those will be 'ports' and how much will be done to the new standards remains to be seen. As there is no SDK yet it is impossible to say what can be done and what not. For sure the old idea you will not pay again for code you already bought will remain intact, so depending on much how will be new, you will get a substantial discount if you own the current versions. The same is true for our scenery products and tools. A smooth transition is the key. There will be enough problems and new things to deal with. Depending on the manpower we have available (we are expanding our development staff) we will also being as soon as possible on a project that is fully based on the new standard. Most likely that will in the form of the Twin Otter that seems ideally suited to explore the new world of Flight Simulator. I hope this clears up some of the questions. If you like to tell me that we are bonkers and P3D will remain the platform of choice, feel free to do so in reply! As I said, there are a lot of uncertain factors and your opinion is always welcome.

Sven hat eine Collage der neuen Fassaden gemacht:

Friends, unfortunately we have been informed that some AV software sees the A330 configurator, and possible the same for other products, as a potential problem. This is mainly because it contains code that alters other files ('cause that is what a configurator does). Other then reporting this to the AV companies there is very little that we can do about it. Normally when we send these reports we don't even get a receipt message, most AV companies simply do not care a lot about the damage they do to others. Only Microsoft is a kind company that send us replies and solves the issues. You have no idea how pissed off I am about these things. The worst thing is that some AV software does not even warn the use but simply removes the file, others pop up a quick message (often hidden behind other screens). This leads the customer to believe our installers do not install some files, angry customers etc etc. The only way to prevent this from happening is to let your AV software know the file is safe. How that is done depends on the software. In some it is easy, in some very hard. The file in question is YourAddonFolder\Aerosoft A330 Professional\Configurator\Aerosoft.A3XX.Configurator.exe. It is absolutely safe. Do your research before you pick a AV software. False positives are a major pain in the neck. Also make damned sure you click the right buttons while installing because as we have seen this week some AV companies sell on your data. And that's serious data, an AV scanner has access to your whole drive, all your files. AVAST shame on you.

Not really. Unfortunately you need to save the livery section of the aircraft.cfg and the folders. There is a livery manager that is very close to release that will handle that for you. It is actually pretty amazing, just drag and drop any zipped livery on it and it will install it in the correct aircraft, DC8, CRJ, airbus etc...

Nee, das weiß ich nicht, ich habe nur eine neue Version der vegetation am Start und versuche die noch reinzuschieben. So sieht's nun aus (Farboption Ortho4xp):

Dauert nimmer lange dann geht die 4.2 online, wenn ich alles schaffe dann schon an diesem Wochenende. 😊

We love big aircraft but we also love small aircraft. Even very very small aircraft. Like the Mitchelwing U2. It may not be the easiest aircraft to fly and makes a noise that scares A380's away but it is so much fun to fly. And here you have one, for free. No strings attached. A gift from dave Rowberry to all our friends. Download the aircraft here: http://freeware.aerosoft.com/forum/downloads/AS_MITCHELL-WING-U2_P3DV4_V1000.zip

I would be careful in your comments here such as 'Me thinks you doth protest too much my friend' with comments such as this I feel Aerosoft is brushing away the concerns of a large group of customers, who likely do not bother posting here. Having to wait quite a long time (and what ever Aerosoft says about dev time, it was a long time) for the A330 and having the A320 series with things missing, such as the much wanted but continuously missing popout ND display and being up to the A330 standard now being told this and being told we protest too much! sorry but I think Aerosoft needs to re-think their approach! Not developing other versions of the A330 is a choice for Aerosoft however I agree the the poster it a very disapointing one. And continuously saying the amount of time and effort and man hours and cost etc it takes to make these is not our concern! that is a business issue for Aerosoft, if it cost so much charge for it! People will not think less of you if you offer a product and charge for your efforts, not wanting to charge for updates is I think silly. Anyway this post will of course not be allowed to be posted but as a long time and loyal AS customer I hope you might consider taking this on board. Respectfully AL

All versions (A318/A319, A320/A32, A330) will only be updated by full new installs. As said I do not like it but it is the best option. After this we should never be forced to full new builds.

But could it not be that a lot of that investment will be replaced by a sim that has a lot of what you now need to buy as add-on comes as standard? I mean, not a bad word about OrbX but if you compare what MS has shared from the new sim with P3D with all OrbX add-ons I think MSFS will win hands down. They just have far more databases and servers to prepare the regions. Without a joke, I seen my own house in the new sim and it even has the bloody trees around it correct. In P3D, no matter what add-on I buy, the house simply does not exist, let alone individual trees. What room is there for a weather tool when MS is able to get seriously good real time weather input and a weather engine that is not limited as the one on P3D or X-plane? What AI Traffic tool do you need if MSFS is using real time, real traffic?

Ja, das stimmt, und bei manchen wurden auch dicke Klötze erzeugt, wie in Zürich. Oder wie @bluegolf24 in Braunschweig beobachtete. All das wird in der v4.2 behoben sein, dann sieht es in Zürich so aus (die grün markierten wurden bisher nicht erzeugt und waren hohe Klötze): und z.B. ist in Bamberg der Dom auch wieder da:

Is there any news on the upcoming update? Its been delayed for some time now

Wir haben die österreichischen internationalen Flughäfen LOWG Graz Thalerhof LOWI Innsbruck Kranebitten LOWK Klagenfurt LOWL Linz LOWS W.A. Mozart Salzburg LOWW Wien Schwechat um SAM-Season erweitert. Damit ist es jetzt möglich, je nach Jahreszeit auf einem schneebedeckten Flughafen zu landen. Runways und Taxiways sind natürlich gut geräumt, so dass keiner ins Schleudern kommen sollte. Um diese Funktion zu nutzen muss SAM-Season: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/56152-sam-extension-seasons-library/ installiert sein. Dank der Hilfe von FlyAgi (Danke dafür) konnten wir dies über eine "library.txt" und "Decals" lösen, so daß der Speicherbedarf der Szeerien nahezu identisch geblieben ist. Zu finden sind die 6 Flughäfen auf: www.x-plane.at. Bei Fragen, Problemen, oder wenn Du "Deinen" Flugplatz in Österreich auch bei Schneelage anfliegen willst, schreib einfach an oe3gsu@x-plane.at.

Yeah, I know it's disappointing. I have a project that has been tremendously negatively effected by the development and update schedule so I too am disappointed, but not with the team. They are dealing with some issues (not of their making), but doing excellent work. Plus, yours truly found a handful of new issues which came out of nowhere, and you didn't want the 1.0.0.8 version that we were testing for release, people would have gone ballistic over that and rightfully so. These were completely new, to my knowledge never seen before issues and one of them that we're still tracking down may well have been created by another developer that most flight sim airline drivers use. Right now all of them have been fixes except one (the worst of the bunch) and we're working very hard to track down the cause and effect (well, we darned sure know the effect and it wasn't good). On the good side... there are many more fixes that can be added to the upcoming update that wouldn't have made it into the release, and that's a great thing! Anyway, it's not like our team is sitting on their hands and holding the update. We want it out as badly as you guys do!

Uploaded all four of my cargo birds to Avsim just waiting on approval. Link is in my signature. Might be a UPS bird coming, not exactly sure though. Thats more of Steves thing. If you find anything wrong with the paints please let me know so I can fix them.

I know. And I got to be a bit careful here because I can't share too much of our plans and I have seen on FSelite that some folks read the most strange things already in what I posted, lol. Aerosoft has been in business for close to 30 years. We have been through the change to a new MSFS simplatform 5 (6?) times. It's always a bit traumatic, when the new sim is announced a lot of people are reluctant to buy more add-ons for a platform that is going to be replaced. We have to make sure we get new add-ons ready for a new platform that does not have a lot of users. It's above anything a very expensive transition for us and for many developers. You got nothing new to sell and the old stuff sells badly. These are the moments when you see shops, developers and publishers go bankrupt (or avoid that by closing shop). It is the main reason we decided around 6 years ago to support ANY new platform. That's why we are now the biggest publisher of X-Plane add-ons and why we make AFS2 add-ons. We needed to diversify to create some stability. Look up 'pig cycle' on Google, it describes perfectly the issue we had to solve. Aerosoft did manage to handle the transitions. We are larger than ever, we have grown every single year of our existence. We now have more staff than ever. We now cover more product ranges than ever. And one of the main reasons is that we learned the hard way to work on what customers want in 10 months time. That's where the sales are. And we need a whopping lot of sales to keep doing what we do. Our overhead costs is not the what a company like PMDG has. We got warehouses, marketing departments, legal staff, people who only do server maintenance, we got offices in three countries. That's why we can't aim for the focussed markets that other can aim for. We need to sell a lot more of each product and you only can do so when you aim for a larger audience. And those are not in the over $100 market. They are in the $30 market. That's where you sell the real numbers. Back to MSFS... We do market research every few months to see how our customers demands change. And even at this moment we still know there is a massive amount of FSX users. I am not spilling beans to help other companies but it is big, huge, substantial. But commercially it means very little because they are not willing to buy add-ons. I do not blame them, compared to what we can do in P3D at this moment a high end FSX product will look seriously outdated most of the time. We just do not have the memory, CPU cores and GPU power to make it look modern. If we would do a FSX version of our A330 we would need to lose 50% of textures and 65% of the polygons. It would look like ..... uhhhhh.... a 2012 product. And does not sell and that is the trap we need to avoid by all means. We have to take some risk and look at what will sell around Christmas this year. Now it is no secret that the relation between Microsoft/Asobo and Aerosoft is pretty good. We have the experience of 5 (6?) new versions of the MSFS sim and 2 new versions of X-Plane (as you know we are deeply involved with X-Plane as well, handling it on Steam etc. We think we know what we are doing. We love what MS is doing, we love the fact they are so open and responsive, we love the fact they see it as a platform and not a product. It is a far cry from the Microsoft of a few years back. Working with them is pleasure. And that trust, above anything else, is why we are betting so heavy on the new platform. There are some very nice things to come for P3D and we hope that Lockheed will bring new goodies in P3D V5 (if the choose to to a new version) we can use so we can do new cool stuff. At Aerosoft we love all sims. We always have. We still love FS2004. But we need to make sure we have products to sell and sometimes that means making choices that are not easy to explain. Will not stop me from trying to do so.

We've finished modelling the new vehicles. That's how it looks inside the simulator. We've also started working on all the lights system that we need to make this airport realistic, we have real video reference of the lights system we'll provide us everything we need.

Any news on the new installers? Dont want to install the old busses if the new installers are ready.

Ich habe in den vergangenen Tagen soviel es geht XP-Deutschland und das angrenzende Ausland bereist, habe dabei ungefähr 5 Millionen Fehler entdeckt die ich hier jetzt nicht besprechen will, schon weil sie der Freude über den verbesserten Gesamteindruck und die verbesserten Objekte, Facades, Landmarks und Vegetation keinen Abbruch tun. Da ich gerade auf Head Mounted Displays umgestiegen bin kam diese Version natürlich genau rechtzeitig um unser Land zum ungefähr fünfmillionsten mal zu überfliegen und dabei einen deutlich gesteigerten Spass zu verspüren, der zudem von einem wohlig-warmen Gefühl untermauert wurde, was sich später aber nur als das nun als Zuheizer fungierende Computersystem herausstellte. Dabei habe ich fleissig den Recorder laufen lassen (damit ich gleich Belege für die Flugsicherheit bedrohende Bushaltestellen usw. habe), lauter Dinge aufgenommen die kein Schwein interessieren und das ganze auch noch völlig sinnlos zusammengeschnitten: https://youtu.be/jXCPPk0nR40 Mal ganz im Ernst, man muss sich ab und zu mal vergegenwärtigen wie gut wir es im Vergleich zu X-Plane-Benutzern in anderen Ländern haben. Es fängt schon damit an dass kaum eine Gegend OSM-mässig so gut erfasst ist wie Zentraleuropa, dann haben wir X-Europe, dass diese Daten jedes Jahr besser visualisiert und unsere Ort- und Landschaften sehr realistisch aussehen lässt und obendrauf noch die ganzen Landmarks und Städteszenerien von Günther (die nun aber in Auszügen auch in X-Europe enthalten sind), sowie die Add-ons von XP-Flieger, Agnes und ein paar anderen, die obendrauf nochmal viele Kleinigkeiten perfektionieren. So eine umfangreiche und detaillierte Szenerieversorgung gab es vor und nach 2018 (<Hust> TE <Hust>) nirgendwo anders, schon gar nicht für lau oder eine Spende. Als Mr. V. von dieser australischen Szeneriefabrik seine hiesigen User vor ein paar Jahren fragte, ob es Interesse an einer Deutschland-Szenerie für XP gäbe war die Antwort offenbar "Nö". Das ist auch kein Wunder, in keiner anderen Gegend dieser Welt kann man so flächendeckend realistisch VFR fliegen, die Landschaft geniessen und regelrechtes Sightseeing auch auf dem Lande betreiben. Das hat inzwischen ein Niveau erreicht, auf dem uns auf einmal Dinge als Fehler auffallen, die vor ein paar Jahren nur verstörte Blicke und Kopfschütteln erregt hätten, wie "mein Haus hat ein Stockwerk zu viel". Ich bin natürlich sehr dafür daran zu arbeiten diese Dinge weiter zu verbessern aber ab und zu könnte man auch den Perfektionismus beiseite schieben und einfach mal 1-2 Wochen am Stück zufrieden sein. Wir haben jedenfalls allen Grund dazu. Vielen Dank für X-EU 4.2!

Hello Mathijs, So and ... the decision is .... ? Best Regards Marc

Da hätte man aber massig Zeit gehabt das mal vorher zu melden. Jetzt ist die Szenerie erst einmal für eine Weile "aktuell".

Eher andersrum... 🙂

Thank you. Do me a favor and take a look at the bottom of your Aircraft.cfg file?

Seems quiet in the forums, no new upgrades (except CRJ Professional by Hans), no new flight-sim products, and no communication from Mathijs, Kroswynd and Dave. Everyone must be Alpha-testing the new MS2020 and yes I know you can't say anything due to the NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) Btw, the monthly screenshot contest has not judged for December and January and the February theme has not even been released. If you need a new judge/moderator for the screenshot, pictures and video forum, I'll do it for free (retired and bored).

Just did another run to check the fuel system and this time the trim tank transfer worked well, both aft and fwd. Idk why it didnt work last time, my apologies. But the transfer rate, both ways with trim tank and outer tank, is very slow. Rate should be much faster, my rough guess, double. I had no idea the 25kHz spacing was limitation of P3D @becas eheh true. Airplane is very sweet to fly, is actually pretty good. All this are mostly picky stuff. Thank you for everything @masterhawk and @DaveCT2003 Wish you all a great week ahead!

Die Szenerien muss man nicht mikromanagen, damit es richtig läuft. Eigentlich müssen nur die meshes nach unten, die Global Airports darüber und die Flughäfen über die Global Airports. Auch zu beachten: Die diversen Anleitungen zur Scenery_packs.ini sind teilweise nicht ganz zutreffend (Stichwort 'Libraries nach unten') und berücksichtigen auch besonderheiten einzelner Szenerien nicht. Meshes nach unten Global Airports darüber Flughäfen über Global Airports Handbücher lesen Ganz wichtig für Szenerien, die mehrere Layers haben, wie Thessaloniki, aber auch vielen anderen: Niemals die Layers auseinander reißen, lediglich das Mesh nach unten schieben, falls vorhanden. Die verschiedenen layers sind in der Regel vom Designer so gebaut, dass sie sich, wenn sie direkt in der richtigen (siehe Nummerierung) Reihenfolge untereinander stehen, wie eine einzelne Ebene verhalten, der Block sollte also behandelt werden als wäre es eine einzige Zeile in der Scenery_Packs.ini. Und, wen man mit irgendeiner Szenerie ein Problem hat, kann man sie erstmal testweise nach ganz oben in der Scenery_Packs.ini verfrachten, dann überschreibt sie alles andere und muss theoretisch funktionieren - tut sie es nicht, liegt der Fehler wahrscheinlich innerhalb der Szenerie selbst, dann muss man weiter schauen.

Hello, guys. After spending 4 months and hundreds of hours, I've made the Simplified Chinese User Manual based on PFPX v2.03. I hope this manual would be useful to Chinese people and those who speek Mandarin. Cheers. PFPX v2.0 Simplified Chinese User Manual 简体中文用户手册.pdf

There are new desktop clients available that solve most of the open issues. We advise you to remove the previous version first! Download the desktop client for Windows and macOS here: https://navdatapro.aerosoft.com/ndp-charts-standalone/ Access the web client here: https://navdatapro.aerosoft.com/ ------------- At this moment work is being done on a Linux desktop client, android and iOS versions. Also the flight following module should be available soon. This will show your position on geo-referenced charts.

Hello everyone, Meanwhile, update to the latest 1.0.0.7 is done. In fact, during takeoff/initial climb A/THR behaves as expected with speed selected. I was selecting speed right at thr reduction altitude and acceleration for patterns and manouvers. What happens sometimes is, while setting takeoff thrust, the FMA does not engage the SRS mode. Most of times it does, but not always. If I continue takeoff without SRS mode, the A/THR is still armed, engaging as the levers are set to climb, but then selecting speed will not take action. Reseting FDs solves it, so i can either do it at this stage or right at the start of takeoff roll in case of SRS not engaged, is a matter or reseting FDs and everythings fine. Im sorry, PLI stands for Picht limit indicator. It comes on PFD mainly to avoid tailstrike on approach and takeoff. So, this time I started with Cold and Dark. Everything seems great, just 2 small details. Not really important anyway. Crew Supply Oxigen is usually off at this stage, (its also part of securing the aircraft at the end of the day) and all 3 RMPs were turned off when is not really something common for this type of aeroplanes. RMPs are usually left on while powering down/up. Again, just little not significant details. During cockpit prep I noticed that rudder trim gets locked on left position by any input of mousewheel. Reset to zero function uses same logic of setting the trim instead of fixed 3/s. Rudder trim has no effect on nosewheel for taxi(handy tool for taxi with xwind or single engine) While using THS trim I noticed each click of trim represents a big change on the trim wheel(using joystick), but mouseclick is smooth, small changes per click. The database loaded on the FMS is by default the older one. Always need to change to the updated one. Exploring the overhead panel, AC ESS FEED springloaded guard is operated by itself as well as by a few other inactive guards such as L and R INR TK split, PRIM2+3, SEC2 and EVAC Command. PRIM1 and SEC 1 no effect. Overhead ENG panel, both MAN start and N1 mode not working, so i'll wait for future updates to play with it. Cabin pressure panel not working, but I noticed the CPCs work and changeover, so I guess this panel is about to go live. Bulk Temp control is working correctly with mousewheel, but inverted with mouse clicks. ADR and IR pushbuttons not work, but rotary switches work great. ENG and APU fire guard pushbuttons not working. EFIS control panel, ENG option of ND selector not selectable. Pedestal, Ecam and EFIS Switching panels not working yet. Toys for later. ECAM control panel, all buttons are clickable but ALL not cycling, CLR does not clear ecam messages, STS always shows normal and RCL has no effect. Instinctive disconnection pushbuttons not working(sidesticks and thrust levers) From FMS, not sure if is my bug, but at the sim loading(or aircraft loading) it always start with the old database as active instead of having as active the newer version. While setting up FMS, perf climb page Derate climb thrust not avail. SEC FPL, does not allow to insert a point with the same name of the TO WPT of active FPL. Lets say, it during flight i am flying to point AAA and while playing with SEC FPL I want to insert the point AAA nothing happen. for some reason it creates a tmpy fpl on the primary fpl with no change, just turns yellow with the regular options to insert or erase. but once im not flying to that wpt anymore, it allows. While selecting STAR always have the option of NO STAR at the end. For Departure, NO SID is missing. Using the function of Pilot Waypoints dont allow to create waypoints. We can access here the waypoints we created, but these need to be done using the flightplan. GPU(s) While connected to GPU, Ext B only avail if Ext A already Avail. While having both, disconnecting EXT A will also disc EXT B. Sometimes after removing everything, visually the GPU stays connected to the plane during the whole flight. Just visual effect, no impact on anything. After starting ENGs and during flight, sometimes IDG wording always amber, while IDG is connected and pressure and temps normal. HYD panel, all guards and buttons work, leading to proper represantation of pressure drop on HYD SD page as well as loss of actuators on F/CTL and Wheel SD pages. Moving the flaps also change the number of the flap setting on the upper ecam but no actual movement of flaps, slats or other f/ctls, either on the ecam or visual on the airplane model. Yet, no ecam caution or warning is triggered and in fact everything works normal will no HYD power at all on ground and during flight. Similar happen with ADIRUS, turning them off makes PDF and ND data inop, but flight law remains normal and all manage modes remains normal, just invisible. Air/Bleed panel, Turning Bleed 1 off makes the representation of both Bleed valves off(BLEED SD page), but in fact only the bleed 1 goes off while bleed 2 remains normal(as expected). Closing bleed valve 2 has no effect on bleed valve representation but is infact turned off. In both cases, opening the X-bleed valve will supply the opposite side pack but will also bring back the data from the precooler just like its bleed was on(when in fact is off). More practical stuff. FDs representation on FMA when both FDs are on is normal, 1FD2, but when one of the FDs is off should be replaced with a dash(-) like -FD2 or 1FD-. In case of one FMGS fail, then both FDs will be controlled from same FMGS leading to 1FD1 or 2FD2 on FMA. When there is a case where managed speed is below manouvering speed, aircraft is flying below manouvering instead of keeping it, while on managed speed. This is not the concept. While using managed speed the aircraft will never fly below manouvering speed(Green dot, S or F) even if there is a speed constraing below that. Only way to make the aircraft to fly below manouvering speed is by using selected speed, which allow us to fly as low as Vls). Typical case of heavy takeoff with speed constraints on departure. During approach, after selecting Flaps 1, PFD shows 196 as Vfe next instead of 215. In fact, the Vfe for Flaps 2 is 196, but during approach, as we select flaps 1, actual configuration gonna be Slats out, flaps in(Note that config 1 is different from 1+F which is the takeoff config 1) leading to the misleading information on PFD as Vfe next being 215(in respect of 1+F). The pilot need to be careful because, when selecting the next step (flaps 2), will in fact jump the 1+F step directly to Flaps 2. With ENG failure recognised by FMGS the A/THR range remains from IDLE to CLB instead of MCT. Also, FMS does not take into account the ENG OUT ACC altitude for acceleration. Relationship between Thrust Levers, EPR/N1. While advancing the Thrust Levers to half way of its travel we reach half EPR scale, +/-70% N1 which is not very accurate. In reality, thrust lever movement is more related with N1 than EPR. So, half way on the thrust lever range should be +/- equivalent to 50% N1 and 1.1EPR (this case RR Eng. Other eng manufactures have other ratios, for instance PW 50% N1 is 1.05EPR). My feeling is that the travel I do with my thrust lever to have 1.1EPR/50%N1 should be +/- 30% N1. I love the plane and the level of immersion it brings, which I think is the greatest challenge to achieve. The immersion can be sometimes very subjective, but the light/shades, sounds, POV all toguether it really feels the real stuff. Normal operation I think everything is working well and with little fine tunning. Thank you very much for you patience and attention Tiago Goncalves

And iy you want to learn more about the Twotter, watch this video series, made by a Mark Hurst (user here in the forum): The content of thois video is also available on Kindle: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Twin-Otter-Extended-Inside-Out-ebook/dp/B01AZT76MA/

The indicated airspeed (IAS) you fly at sea level for a given weight and flap setting (with everything else such as turbulence constant) is what you use at higher altitude, even Lukla. Indicated stall speed for a given loading and configuration is constant regardless of altitude (density altitude, actually), therefore, so is approach IAS. However, while you'd use the same IAS at Lukla as at sea level, the true airspeed (TAS) is considerably higher. TAS is directly related to ground speed, in fact they're essentially the same in a no-wind situation. So the ground speed and and landing distance required at Lukla is more than at sea level. See the FAA Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge (link here), since you requested a reference. Chapter 11 is the most relevant. You might also find the FAA's Airplane Flying Handbook helpful too (link here). For other handbooks that add to this topic, see the list at this link. IRL, in a transport category aircraft, one might use a different flap setting in an approach with obstacles in the departure path than without, especially in the event of an engine failure, to facilitate a go-around. But that's probably outside what I think you're asking about.

I haven't done this with the checklist but you need to know how the 'window_size' and 'window_pos' values work. This is explained in the SDK, but here are some instructions for a hypothetical gauge installed as Window03 in panel.cfg. You will need to adapt the specifics for your requirements and for the actual size of the checklist gauge. (If these numbers seem arbitrary, they are from instructions I made for installing the HUDCA gauge on my old FSX setup!) I have calculated my sizes assuming the pixel size of my gauge is 768 x 480. You need to express these dimensions as a proportion of the screen width and height. My screen dimensions (in pixels) are 4066 x 1024, so I calculate the values I need like this: Width = 768 / 4066 = 0.189 Height = 480 / 1024 = 0.469 Then the position, also expressed as a proportion of screen dimensions: x = ((4066 - 768) / 2) / 4066 = 0.406 y = 0.125 This centres the gauge horizontally and puts it 1/8 (y=0.125) of the way down from the top of the screen. Now you need to use these calculated values in the Window03 definition: window_size = 0.189, 0.469 window_pos = 0.406, 0.125 If you have a regular 1080p display (1920 x 1080) or any other screen size you can substitute your own values for width and height in place of my dimensions (4066 x 1024). For the 1080p display, the values come out as: window_size = 0.4, 0.44 window_pos = 0.3, 0.125 Perhaps this will help.

lol Dave, thanks for the kind words. Just because I fly professionally that doens't mean I can't be mistaken though. Especially on a type I do not fly

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum PPL!!! Zur Vorbereitung von Flügen zu mir unbekannten Plätzen nutzte ich auch X-Plane, weil damals (2011) das in XP10 wenig mit der Wirklichkeit und den Merkmalen an denen sich VFR-Piloten orientieren zu tun hatte, fing ich an eigene Szenerien zu entwickeln, so fing das alles mit simHeaven an... Mittlerweile haben wir mit X-Europe eine so hohe wirklichkeitsgetreue Darstellung, dass man XP11 getrost für die Schulung einsetzen kann. Meine Fliegerkameraden die jetzt nicht so PC-affin sind, kriegen den Mund vor lauter Staunen nicht mehr zu wenn ich denen Bilder oder Videos zeige!

You don't know how much I agree with you! Anyone who removes their existing flight sim software when the new sim is released... well, I think they'll regret doing so. I'm still buying an enjoying P3D addons. Best wishes.

I expect to fly P3d long after I bought MSFS2020 so hopefully they support that one too. For one, there will be at least 2 years before all my fave airports are converted. Not to mention all Q400/AS/PMDG/QW stuff. FS2Crew is a must too nowadays :).

5850x1080 is a perfectly well setting if you use 3 Monitors with NVIDIA surround and 'bezel correction' as I do (nevertheless I would not use 'wide-view Aspect ratio' with this, but thats OT...). The GTX 1080 is very capable of driving this as long as your CPU is in the same class like 7700K OC or above. Your settings in the 'world' options are a little bit on the high side if you want to stay above the 'hard' 18fps threshold even with resource consuming add-ons like ORBX, ASP4 and AS EGLL or EDDF, but this has nothing to do with your problem... For me this lookes like a 'failed' installation, so have you checked (when you install): - AV scanner is of - reboot after initial instal of A330 - reboot after final update (experimental!) with the updater Another idea is to use DDU in order to get completely rid of the NVIDIA stuff and install this again from scratch without retaining any mods... As said above I have a similar installation with the latest NVIDIA driver and it works perfect ! Best regards, Tom

In a couple of days a new experimental update will be released which includes major changes of the ViewFocus feature. Enabling this feature (MCDU3 OPTIONS / CHECKLIST / VIEWFOCUS = ON) automatically changes (when the CL is running) the VC view and focus on the just relevant part of the VC. The detailed ViewFocus changes are: Various views have been aligned with checklist items If the aircraft is moving in the Checklist now breaks between various checks / settings are implemented. During those breaks the standard VC view is called (looking outside). This enables the user still to steer the aircraft even when the CL is running. ViewFocus now also works if ChasePlane is used. In such a case just also in the MCDU3 OPTIONS / CHECKLIST menu set VF CHASEPLANE additonally to ON. The other changes implemented and released with the new update are: CHECKLIST / COPILOT: Timing start DESCENT PREP CL changed (starts 5 NM earlier) GSX-Pushback – Good Engine Start PF call added and call modified (no GSX confirmation necessary anymore) Parking – Dome lights are automatically switched on, Cones are set and GPU-unit connected Copilot now also sets FO Baro settings CABIN CREW ANNOUNCEMENTS: Timing Seatbelt Announcement CLIMB: Adapted to OVHD switch setting Regards, Rolf

May I give you a recommendation from another customer's standpoint, @greycap? If you behave that aggressively and reproach the Aerosoft team of not checking your problem thoroughly, you can't be sure of getting a reply. As Mathijs and Otto (mopperle) already pointed out, they could not reproduce the problem. Otto even posted a video where he panned around to the corner you meant. They also suggested you to address that problem also to FSDT, since your problems indicate that GSX could be the culprit. Did you do so? In any case, you ask them to do something they already did and although they already said they can't reproduce it and gave you further advice, you react in such a destructive manner. This is not a good idea.

So it seems that you missed the fix that I posted. All one has to do is change the AS Profile, which can be done all too easily and quickly. Takes me about 8 seconds or less which includes restarting ActiveSky. But each to his own my friend. And... This entire issue may well be caused by Prepar3d version 4.4/4.5. The knowledgable flight simmers here will understand why that would affect our airliners and not those of other developers.

I hope that A320/330 promised features as new ND system, pop up displays and a final version of CFD (it's in "very alpha stage" yet) will be accomplished in P3d version and not abandoned with the excuse of the upcoming new MSFS

What version of the A330 are you running? Is your GSX at latest version? That issue was addressed long time ago.

Actually, work on the interior is completed. Some touches remained, very small and closer to the evening the interior will be with a passenger terminal in the simulator.

If it took a lot of work and especially the files are not the same as in the initial version (and with a shortened fuselage for the -200 and different engine shapes and data for the GE and PW engines, there would certainly be quite many new files), I for my part would be perfectly fine with a reasonable upgrade price for new models or engine variants.

It took longer than expected because we had some problems implementing the code. But this week the fine devgs at Navigraph gave us the tools to do so and it seems all to run fine. So expect an update for the A330 and new versions of the smaller busses with the EFB included. All no cost updates of course.

We have already a fix for that. Will be avail with next update.

Are there any plans to build Eastern Russian airports? For example Vladivostok (UHWW), Kamchatka (UHPP) or Sakhalin (UHSS)?

Request for this https://cdn.jetphotos.com/full/6/24645_1571890768.jpg