Leaderboard

Attached to this post is a free copy of the Aerosoft Flight Calculator. It is an ideal small tool to help you navigate your route and perform all the calculations a pilot of a small aircraft will have to do. It is based on the Jeppesen flight calculator that has been used by tens of thousand of pilots. It is NOT freeware and you are NOT allowed to share this with any other person. It is a gift from Aerosoft to the registered users of this forum. TIME / SPEED / DISTANCE Calculate Speed Calculate Distance Calculate Time Enroute Calculate Fuel Endurance Calculate Fuel Flow Calculate Fuel Needed ALTITUDE / AISRPEED Calculate Calibrated Airspeed Calculate True Airspeed Calculate Density Altitude Calculate Mach WIND Calculate Wind Direction, Wind Speed Calculate Ground Speed and Heading Calculate Wind Correction, Cross Wind Component, Tail Wind Component Calculate Runway Crosswind Calculate Magnetic Variation WEIGHT & BALANCE Calculate Center of Gravity Calculate Weight Shift Calculate Percentage Mean Cord CONVERSIONS TIMER, STOPWATCH Volume: LTR, GAL, IPG Weight: KG, LB Weather: °C, °F, MB, HP, IHG, MHG Distance: MTR, YRD, KM, FT, IN, NM, SM Local time / GMT time shown Calculate time enroute Calculate departure time Calculate arrival time Count up timer Count down timer Runway / Descent Landing Runway Length Needed Takeoff Runway Length Needed Tailwind Landing Runway Descent Profile Descent Rate Begin Descent Point Connection with FS Aerosoft Flight Calculator can be linked to FS to retrieve data that you would otherwise have to enter manually. Doing it automatically saves you time and ensures the data is accurate. To connect to FS FSUIPC is used, this means that the Flight Calculator can be run on a separate computer if WideFS is used. A license for FSUIPC is included in the product so you will not have to buy a separate license for FSUIPC. Please note that FSUIPC is NOT installed with this product. We choose to do so as most users will already have it installed. Features: Stand alone application, NOT a gauge to be installed in aircrafts (this also holds the limitation that the calculator can not be started from within FS and on most systems will not run on top of a full screen (FSX / FS2004). Works with all aircraft, from ultralights to Airliners. Eight memory locations, stored between sessions. Gets all data from FS via FSUIPC, saving you entering the data manually. Extreme low system requirements. Skinnable (6 skins provided). Runs on top of FS in semi transparent mode. CalculatorTutorial.pdf Flight Calculator_201.zip

Dear forum user, 2011 was a good year for Aerosoft. We think, no let me correct that, we KNOW, this is because of the customers we got. You see, we never try to sell one product; we try to get a customer who likes us and wants to buy more than one product. And to do so we got to sell good products for a good price and above all support them as good as possible. We also need to communicate with customers and our forums are a very important medium for that. Our forums have grown fast, right now we have around 1,5 million page views every month. They are lively, friendly and informative. And that’s because of the people who participate. As a way of thanking them we will offer all registered users a free copy of the Aerosoft Flight Calculator. Every pilot knows that flying means doing a lot of calculations, wind angles, ground speed etc. And most pilots will use a special calculator for that. The Aerosoft Flight Calculator is a detailed simulator of such a device. It will connect to FS (FS2004 and FSX) to make it easier to input the required information. It’s a true gift, no strings attached. Just a way to show we appreciate the people who make our forum what it is. We wish you a superb 2012. Liebe Forum-User, 2011 war ein sehr positives Jahr für Aerosoft. Wir denken - nein lasst es mich so sagen - wir wissen dies ist nur durch euch möglich. Wir versuchen nicht unsere Produkte zu verkaufen, wir möchten eine Bindung zu unseren Kunden aufbauen um Sie in Ihrem Hobby zu unterstützen. Diese Strategie erlaubt es uns unsere Produkte an euch zu einem fairen Preis und ausgezeichneten Support weiterzugeben. Auch ist es für uns wichtig mit unseren Kunden in Kontakt zu bleiben, hierfür nutzen wir unter anderem unser Forum, unsere Support Hotline und auch den direkten Kontakt auf Messen und in unserem Shop. In letzter Zeit können wir ein großes Interesse an unserem Forum feststellen, derzeit haben wir über 1,5 Millionen „Page views“ im Monat, auch hierfür danken wir euch. Natürlich sind unsere Dankenden Worte nicht alles, wir möchten uns bedanken indem wir jedem Mitglied des Forums die Vollversion von „Flight Calculator“ bereitstellen. Jeder Pilot weiß, dass vor dem Start viele Dinge erledigt werden müssen, so auch Berechnungen. Genau hierbei hilft der „Flight Calculator“, dieser wird mit dem FS2004 oder FSX verbunden und hilft bei wichtigen Berechnungen in allen Flugphasen. Hiermit möchten wir, das Team von Aerosoft uns noch einmal bedanken und wir wünschen Ihnen ein gutes neues Jahr 2012

We had hidden two small hints in the last screenshots of Oslo. No one had found it well; one clue was also difficult to discover the next mega airport will be none other than the largest German airport - EDDF Frankfurt. Under the direction of Jo Erlend and Lukas (Head of the internal airport dev team), we have been working with a team of 7 on the MSFS implementation for several months. Here are a few impressions from the ongoing development.

It's simple: While you are asking me to give you more information, other developers get hell from their community because they can't keep announced release dates (for whatever reason. I'm not judging them because I know the work that is involved. If it takes longer, it takes longer. It won't kill anyone). I don't want this. Just look at what happens in the Fenix Discord right now (after they announced the delay of their Block 2 update) and you will understand why I'm going with "It's done when it's done". I'm not a friend of creating hypes or posting WIP screenshots every other day. Expect to see screenshots and more detailed feature information when we're well into beta testing. I promise you that there will be a CRJ update, although it will likely not be released before the end of the year, that it will be a major one, that it will include the much awaited LNAV/VNAV fixes as well as Simbrief, Navigraph Charts, an updated model with a detailed cabin and more.

Dear SimWings team, first of all I would like to say thank you - thank you for not losing sight of MUC, and for this update - even free of charge! That is not a matter of course, so thank you for that! I had already noted some inconsistencies in the P3D version, which I have now found again in the "new" version, and a few more points. I would like to share these with you in the hope that the MUC will be improved again. Many who don't know the MUC in real life might say that you can't see these little things. But that is not the case. If little things are missing on the land side, then you can overlook them. But in some places - especially on the airside, which you see any time you're flying in and out of MUC - there are big mistakes. I already have a whole list, so I would now like to try to list everything in a more structured way: Starting in the East, Terminal 2 and also Terminal 2 Satellite: 1. Unfortunately, the colour of the glass surfaces at Terminal 2 is still not right. The glass surfaces are very characteristically greenish. It depends on the incidence of light, but they ALWAYS have a greenish shimmer. With the P3D, I was tempted to say that the P3D couldn't display it properly at all. But the MSFS should be able to do that. Here's how it looks like: ... and what it should look like in different light conditions: 2. The O2-Advertisments on the Jetways are gone since a few months: 3. Even if it's not quite trivial: the jetways also have the stand number on them, which is completely missing! vs. Real: 4. North of stand 213 the exhaust air stacks are completely missing! 5. The sunshades are shown as a white grid in the scenery, but in reality they are grey and not a simple grid. 6. Terminal 2 itself lacks many, many details such as doors, windows, rolling doors, entrances, etc. 7. Many small details such as canopies are completely missing. 8. With the many "M" on the facade, the "/" stroke slowly but steadily changes colour. In the scenery it is simply shown in white, which doesn't really fit at all. Either coloured, or the colour changes through. 9. In my opinion, the biggest mistake in the scenery: The south and north sides of Terminal 2 have NOTHING to do with reality. 10. The connectors between jetway and terminal should be made of glass 11. There are no pillars on the jetways, which are mounted on Terminal 2 without a connector. That's the big things about T2 for now. Let's Continue... Terminal 1 (i.e. the "old" part) is also missing several details, as can be seen here: The jetways that are "built into" the scenery at Terminal 1 have unfortunately not existed for many years. At least the O2-Advertisments are ok, but the front part of the jetway is much more angular and a "M" with the stand number is on it. The glass surfaces at Terminal 1 also have a slight green sheen, but this is nowhere near as prominent as at Terminal 2: Inside the Airport: The Advertisment in the Munich Airport Center (The one with the A380...) is already since 5 years replaced with a different one (To be honest, I was in the MAC just last week, but I can't tell off the top of my head which advertisements are on it at the moment). In general: Even if it is not that important to me personally, it has become standard for sceneries in this price range that the interior is modelled properly. MUC is such a beautiful airport - also from the inside - it would be a pity if there were no improvements. To stay in the MAC: The MAC as a whole seems very, very loveless. On the west side, the buildings are also much, much, much too far apart. In real life, they are much closer together: Coming to the Tower: The tower is also missing many details, especially the ladders in the north: Also, what doesn't fit at the Tower either: At night, only "individual windows" are illuminated - not entire "rings". Unfortunately, the main fire station also lacks a lot of detail, even though you always taxi past it with the plane. Hangar area: The Audi driving training area is clearly separated from the apron by barriers with AUDI advertising and fences. These are completely missing. Even though it's nice to have some cargo standing around at the cargo terminal - there could be a lot more, and not so neatly lined up. It looks very sterile. Well, unfortunately there is a lot missing at the fuel depot. Ladders at the tanks, distribution system, station, overhead lines, in real life there is ALWAYS a tanker train on the tracks, in the background there is a large truck car park... Everything is simply missing here. Around both runways you will find trees and large bushes everywhere that don't belong there! This has become a real no-go. In the last picture you can also see how one measuring station is completely missing! While we're at it: The lamp posts on the Turnpads are orange and white striped! In general, it would be nice if de-icing vehicles were also parked at the pads in winter! The topic of taxiways: The taxiway edge lights only pop up in the dark when rolling onto a taxiway bridge. This should be corrected. In places the taxiways are not displayed correctly: In general about the runway/taxiway/apron textures: The textures don't look quite right. Both colour and structure just don't seem right. Unfortunately, it's just very difficult to describe, it's just the impression when you know the airport and see the scenery in comparison. It just doesn't seem right. To the grassy areas: The "grass colours" look very, very dry and desaturated. This may be appropriate in September - but most of the year the grass looks completely different. Either more yellow/brownish in winter, or really rich green in spring/summer. Even if it's not quite easy, would it be possible to implement 2/3 seasons here? The last item on my list for now: Could the parking codes in AFCAD be adapted? It makes your toenails curl when Emirates, Condor or Air France park at Terminal 2 and Lufthansa planes at Terminal 1. So much for now - but there may be more to come. As I said at the beginning - it is not my intention to make the scenery look bad, but to constructively help to make the scenery look better, so that it looks more like MUC, and not like a European airport thrown together. I know that the scenery is based on MisterX's models for the XPlane, then converted for P3D and now brought into the MSFS, so it is quite limited. But at the same time it has to be said that for a scenery in this price range (24,95 €) you can expect the best quality in MSFS. Unfortunately, this does not quite fit together yet. I myself have been a plane spotter at MUC for many years and have many thousands of photos on my PC (well, of the planes of course, but you can also see something of MUC in the background...). If you need pictures, please contact me! If necessary, I can also go to the airport to take pictures. I wish you all another beautiful Sunday!

We plan to build it in the finished state (plans can always change). we work with Fraport and are getting a lot of information from them. should there be a deviation after completion, we will of cause update it.

This day AES is available for 5 years now, the time goes always faster in my feelings. I want involve you to the next steps of AES on the way to a new generation of AES. First same organisational things, before I explain the new version in details: The official released version of AES is still AES 2.14 and will be the available version at the Shops of Aerosoft and Simmarket. Who wants to stay on that version can do that until a new official release is available. Version 2.20 is full compatible to all Airports released in AES 2.14, all this Airports and all Credits and assignments will be supported by AES 2.20. No new airports are part of this release, AESHelp, AESConfig and AES Remote has not been changed. Why is his not an official released Version and only available via the Aerosoft Forum, could be a good question: Even, when this Version does most things like the version before, there are significant internal changes and the new vehicle models are much more complex, so I want first get some feedback about performance and handling, before it can switch to the “standard” update process. Anyway, this version is not a „Beta“, it has all functions of the version before and should be usable same as older versions. There are only some smaller limitations in the variations of the models, like: • Only two different bus models are finished at the moment • There is only one type of under floor Fuel Truck included yet • The Deicing will not simulate the fluid steam Let me now explain the new parts and features of this version: 1.) New detailed vehicle models All vehicle models simulated by AES are new replaced by more detailed and complex animated models. At the moment, they all have a neutral texture, but repaint-kits will follow later, when we are know, that the models not need any changes. The code is prepared already to support the selection of service different service provider deliveries per Airport or global. There are also more different variations (like US stile Trucks) planed for the future. The Catering Trucks are already available in 4 different Types inclusive the upperdeck support for the Airbus A380. The door will be calculated based on the door 2L, like the jetways connect. With a good Model the door should fit were well. 2.) Changed ramp agent movements and pushback process In the past, the ramp agent gets sometimes in conflict with the jetways or stairs, when he keeps his position beside the nose wheel. Now he will be move to the other side of the aircraft to monitor the loading process, until the pushback preparation starts. This is a temporary solution, until a more complex animation of human stuff is possible. While tow bar push processes he will handle the Connect and Disconnect process. 3.) More realistic driving animations of the vehicles The animation of the driving process of the vehicles in now more realistic, the wheels are rotation, the steering is simulated and all the related signs are included. So far the short overview for the new features, i think it is better to check it your self, then reading long text. Ok, as normally all is more interesting, what you not have, here some words about the next steps There are many new features on my list, for example the support of cargo airplanes, simulation of the load process and better animations of human stuff. But, all needs to be in the correct order, as for some parts, first more parameter of the airplane are needed to be able to handle the movements on the limited space around the airplane. Therefore the aircraft configuration is one of the next steps. If you have Feedback or Comments, please post them here: AES 2.20: Feedback or Comments For Bugreports use this one: AES 2.20: Bugreports An now, the most important Link: AES 2.20d Installer download only here Here some Screenshot of AES 2.20 (many thanks to Rainer Duda)

My my, what a load of post and what negative comments. Mind you were are used to that by now, if you try to be open and honest and most certainly if you try to include potential customers into projects most will like it and participate, some will expect more then you can show/tell or are willing to show/tell and will be pissed off. We see exactly the same pattern for any project we handle that way. But it's okay. Now honestly and without any derogatory idea behind it, I got no idea what you mean. Could be we got a language issue here, "stuffing around" is not something I am familiar with. If you mean that we tell people that we are seriously thinking about a new simulator and like to discus that with our customer? Well sure, that's how like it. I mean if you don't like it, simply don't read it! It's not like telling people a new simulator is coming helps us sell what we are doing right now, right? Let me update you as much as I can. This is a multimillion dollar project and without signed contracts and the marketing girls having done what the like to do my hands are tight. But we made great steps. Money is strangely enough not a major issue, we got some, Aerosoft is a very healthy company. We also got the partner we wanted, if you are going to bump heads with Mama Microsoft you better have some muscle. We also think we know what you, the customer, want. A simulator that is fast, open (fully documented) and above all a solid base for further developments. Currently we are in the stage of going from paper to coding and for a project of this size that's always a major step. Contracts need to be signed, people got to change jobs, move country etc. Are we going to do a new simulator? Personally I think so, my CEO pays me to push it. Is it going to happen? Yeah sure it is, but now you know why I say that. Lol. Things look good but that's all I can say. Is it going fast enough? Hell no, we are calling it AFS2013 already. Now on to samples shown and links given. We know all those and we smiled a lot about the three days. See we actually USE these kinds of files for the US cities series. Just check Google Earth Building Maker and you got a good idea how these things work. We got similar but professional tools that we use for professional projects. But they are far from anything that could be used in a flight simulator that we need. Believe me we look at all these things, all these engines. all these demos. But when we ask these companies to show something on a round earth, with sight lines of 100 miles, using DX11 and not using more then 30% of resources (we also got to do flight modeling, weather, user interface, online stuff etc etc) you will get a lot less enthusiastic responses. If at all. We spend a whopping lot of money on trying to find what we need and so far it seems it just does not exist (professional sims most certainly can't). So we got to adapt something. I am sorry you feel 'stuffed around'. But that's all I am willing to say right now.

Friends/customers/potential customers (almost the same!), I decided to spend this day getting the Lotus ready for the track so I can continue my impressive series of disappointing race results. But seeing the posts just now it's obviously I can't leave you people alone for one day, hahahaha... loads of posts of people that do not read about a product and we seem to have a lot of moderators around all of sudden. Loads of posts about posts and not about the topic. Not a huge problem but I still got to install a new fuel tank and I don't have time now to order and answer. (if you see a large fire ball in south-western France things did not work out as planned.) So here is what I will do. I'll lock this topic now. Tomorrow morning I will answer all questions here, give a few comments and delete a bunch of messages and we'll get a fresh start. Okay?

Small off topic comment. There was one kind reader (and yes we know who) that felt it needed to give my post a -1 vote. Now for the love of God, why would anybody have a problem with what I wrote? We even showed images of this aircraft in professional sims! If you feel I written something that I should not have written or that was stupid, do vote me down. I do mess up like everybody. But that post was most certainly not one of those. From this moment on we'll simple remove people who do such things from our forum and block the IP. The voting system is a great way to let each other know what you think of a post. But a few people can mess up the whole system and we'll simply not accept that. Vote posts up when you think they help the discussion, ask good questions or when you see somebody helping another person. Be careful with voting down, it should only be used when a post asks for something hat has been answered a few times, or somebody who is just a pain in the ass. You know it as well as I know it and there is a wide margin of interpretation that we will not mess with. Most certainly vote something up when you see a negative vote that is not right.

Hello everyone, here is a short status update.....yes, we have worked with Fraport in the past and we still do. We are currently working on how we can implement the new terminal. Thanks to many people who work on the apron, among other things, we already have a very good source for details. Jo and Lukas will be in Frankfurt next week and will take photos from the airport again so that we really have every angle. We also have some new screenshots that we will show you soon. There will also be a landing page for Frankfurt like for the Airbus.

We are currently working on enhancing the Airbus X to what will become Airbus X V2. NOTE!! We are in the very very early stage of developement. The following screenshots are what they are, simply work in progress. Don't start to post about the garbled ext on the right side, font sizes or what so ever. What we plan to add/enhance: - Totally new MCDU with SID/STAR etc. - New Autopilot to go with the new MCDU, including correct VNAV simulation - New custom coded FBW system - Misc. bug fixes as found by the community The MCDU will become a large step ahead of the current MCDU. Images of new MCDU: Best Finn

Oh dear, oh dear. If you were English you'd understand the question "did you get out of the wrong side of the bed?" Regardless, for the sake of your stress levels, maybe going off somewhere quiet without an internet connection and reading a good book would be best for now

(Okay, I have a few minutes away from developing while I wait for something to show up, and I just caught up on this thread, so....) I'm genuinely not sure why anyone would want to be left in the dark over these kinds of "expected date" things? Seems to me that complete openness is *inherently* better for the average person, no? The only bit suggesting otherwise, and which I can kinda understand, seems to go something like, "we're so excited to get this product, and therefore SO disappointed about any delays in it, that we really just cannot stand the agony of it all, so don't tell us!" Fair paraphrasing?? No sarcasm there -- I've been anxious for products too! Is it that people fear developers give artificially early dates in order to "hook" interest, then lead customers on, etc... a fear of being decieved by the developer, I guess? I can guarantee you that with this project, every time a date was mentioned, it was because we the developers thought it could be done by that time, really thought that, and that's what we told the only person qualified to give those kinds of "big picture" answers on here. (The guy taking the flak so often now. ;-) But then... well, anyone who programs anything knows... things just *happen.* (You can't predict the unpredictable, or what percentage of possible unpredictables will manifest, or their magnitudes... 'cause they're unpredictable(!!). And it's not even necessarily *mistakes* that become the stick in the spokes in a project... usually instead just something like absolutely completely unpredictable interactions. Or often it's just the idea that, if we're going to do feature A like we must, well I guess we really should do B too... and if B, C would be a great complement to that... and so on. All of you out there waiting so patiently are definitely getting more than was originally planned. By a big margin. (Please do not forget, some main parameters of this project changed not all that long ago. *Fundamental* aspects. Major feature enhancements. For example, it was decided to go *much* more in depth in the MCDU, to add the Navigraph database, and 10x more expansive flight-planning capabilities. It was only... (hmmm, I guess 3 or maybe 4 months back??)... that the MCDU was going to comprise merely a flight-plan info display page, radios page, speed page, and a few other basic pages. Then it was decided to give more. And it is SO MUCH more now. And just plain very cool. You can fly perfectly fine without ever touching that beheamoth, and those who prefer to mess with it now have the option. But the new plan has had far-reaching (and yes, some unpredictable) implications.) Oh, and what the A320 series does with its FBW system, the low speed protections, things like that... truly amazing! I had no idea before being this involved. If you wanna have some fun while waiting, take a look at things as "basic" as what the real A32x does to try to eliminate the possibility of stalling the aircraft. (And FSX REALLY does not provide easy means to simulate that, as Finn has said. But it's really done very well now. He deserves applause.) But there's lots of interesting debate on the web about all the automation in the real aircraft, the philosophy behind it (with interesting personal dramas intertwined!), the problems that surfaced w/ the engineers when trying to implement 1 person's complex vision of safety features... plus there's plenty of great debate on whether so much automated "protection" as in the Bus is a good thing, or instead just takes needed control ("at the edges") away from the pilots. Maybe it would be fun to lose yourself in that kind of stuff for awhile, to blunt the trauma of this wait? Heheh. I've found it all extremely interesting reading when I've had a few hours here and there. And I will tell you... each time I have the luxury to actually FLY this product without worry for a bit, to take half an hour and back up from the developing, I'm amazed at how different it is from anything else I've seen out there for MSFS -- just the intangible "feeling" of the controls and how differently the plane reacts than we're all used to. I can't imagine the real engineering challenges there. But some simmers will be very surprised by what they'll get with this. Most very pleasantly, but probably some who will be sure that "this can't be right!" But we've got GREAT beta testers, who know. Back to the dates and what's best WRT predicting them... as one of the developers, I can assure you that every time a date was mentioned, going back months now, it was because that's what we the developers REALLY TRULY thought at the time, and of course what we told the project lead. Then the "stuff happens" moments arise, and... we're forced to say "we really should add to this," and then "well, we've just GOTTA change this now," or "crap, the autopilot needs to do something the sim just doesn't want to allow," or (what has been my personal little nightmare) "geeze, these speed tapes are much more complicated than imagined given the sim limitations, and getting it only 'mostly right' in flight situation X leads to absurd behavior in situation Y"... and we've all got pride, and a name, and just CAN'T feel good about putting it out there with that feature in *that* condition. So consider all of that... and then there are things that happen in team-members' personal lives... and the fact that with a team comprised of detail-freaks, each now having to reign himself in to being a necessarily *selective* detail freak... that cabn be a little rough. ;-) But maybe you can see how predicting the unpredictable is obviously and inherently impossible? I'm just very certain that the things causing delay are things you'll be glad were added, and maybe would've been upset about had we not added them. And though Mathijs DEFINITELY does not need my help defending(!!), he really is very confined by what we the developers have predicted for him. Not an easy task for anyone.

Are you out of your freaking mind? You are using the Aerosoft forum to admit you pirated Aerosoft copyrighted material? And you ask us not to ban you? I'll certainly ban you, I'll did even more, I just handed over all inform we have on you to our legal representative. He'll now look into a possible procedure against you. Think we got at least one rat! I always knew that people who steal software can't be too clever, but you just made the top ten of most stupid. p.s. now let's close this topic, too much work to do to waste it on low lives like this.

Oh, oh, oh, at least please try to behave respectful on this forum. Please don´t forget that this is a forum of aerosoft and THEIR products and you are a guest. Nobody forces you to read this forum or join the discussions. If you like the upcoming aerosoft Airbus, you are welcome to bring in your thoughts, questions and ideas, but there is no space and no need for discredit... Timo

The project is clearly positioned between the default Airbus and the far more complex (and more expensive) models from other development teams. Like the real Airbus usability and transparent, easy to use systems were the main focus, all packaged is some of the best modeling ever shown in an FSX addon. As it is easy on framerates and not overly complex, it is ideal for online flights where workload can be high. FSX only (no FS2004 version possible)Very high end modeling and texturing (we think it is the most detailed airliner to date)As much as possible default FSX functions so external products and hardware can use it A320 and A321 models, 8 liveries (for sure Air Berlin, Air France, Alitalia, Iberia etc, many more available as free downloads) CFM and IAE engines (though the flight model and displays are based on the CFM)Highly detailed VC with extended animations and soundsFull FSX external sound set (sound cones etc)Easy on FPSDesigned to simulate the work of the pilot, not the aircraft. So no maintenance mode, virtual cabin etc. Very focused on the left seat.All systems that are highly automated in the Airbus (like hydraulic, APU, electric etc) and do not need a lot of crew actions are highly accurate without making the aircraft more complex to use for the less advanced user.Full animation of all doors, cargo hatches, flight surfaces, even the engine slowly rotate in the wind (speed and direction depending on wind!)External objects like chocks, traffic cones, GPSU (all compatible with AES of course)Possible to save the state of EVERY system in the aircraft, not just the default systems (over 400 items saved!)Fully support FSX failure, time acceleration modes and shared cockpitHighly extensive, innovative lighting system (really lights up the scenery, so you can taxi in the dark) that includes runway turn-off lights etc)Very advanced paint kitExtended manuals with step by step guideSpecial support forumRelease May 2010 in download, few weeks later for the boxExpected price around 32 Euro plus VAT when applicable. We are not yet giving a full list of features for the systems as we don't know all of it at this moment. But let me give out some things. The systems are modeled in such a way that the full experience of flying a highly automated aircraft is achievable for pilots with limited time or experience. PFD and ND are very realistic (most likely not with terrain display as that kills FPS like little else and no weather radar as it is never realistic)Full TCAS system includedEngine display is very realistic (CFM engine simulated)Systems display is near perfectly simulated within normal operationEverything on the glareshield is solidly simulatedFADEC and FBW systems are better then we expected, rather good actually (so you won't be using the throttle a lot)All normal Flight Control Laws are used and will prevent any out of control flight (High AOA Protection, Load Factor Limitation, Pitch Attitude Protection, High Speed Protection, Flight Augmentation (Yaw), Bank Angle Protection)Engines are very realistic (apart from the nagging fuel burn issues when you fly at very low or very high cost settings, we don't care a lot actually about that)GPWS is very goodStartup from a fully cold aircraft fully realisticFully updatable nav database (navigraph)Full option to do the flight planning (airport, waypoints, cruise altitude) on the MCDU and the option to change these things in flightRadio page, Aircraft page, Selected Nav page, INS page, GPS page etc.Lateral Flight planning (allowing to enter flight plan, airport, waypoints, cruise alt, SIDs & STARs and airways not supported)Simple Performance pageSimple vertical navigation It is likely this project will be extended to a more complex version (in systems) summer 2010. The extended version will include more complex versions of the systems we left out of this product that has ease of use as it's main goal. We can not give any details on this extended version at this moment. This extended version will come as a simple low cost update to the main package.

I've followed this discussion for quite some time now, and thought I'd give my thoughts on the matter. What you are saying is simply not true. I fly the a320, and I hardly ever fly a star procedure direct from the FMC. Simply because ATC will not let us. The same for autoland, we never use it,under normal circumstances, company policy. My son got me to follow this forum, because he started asking questions about wingflex and sids. Something I like, being a proud father and hoping he will be the next generation to take the left seat. And ever since the various topics make me smile. If you want it to be as real as it gets let the wingflex go, it's hardly noticeable. Strictly speaking don't fly any commercial aircraft at all, because it is not realistic. For realism stick to a c172. My son uses it to prepare for his ppl. Excelent to practise principles of flight and navigation. I have tried various aircraft and most say it is quite fun, but lets not make it more the it actually is.

Hello, another major airport in the works, this time by David Rosenfeld. First shots of a work in progress.

in case you missed the update on the landing page EDDF_preview_video_001.mp4

I am sorry, but as an active Air Traffic Controller I cannot let this one go by. I would estimate that 90% of IFR transport category movements that can fly a STAR do so. For example here in CYYZ we have RNAV STARs. examples are the YOUTH2, WTRLO2, MANS1 etc. Almost all of our inbound traffic files the STAR and will follow the RNAV legs pretty much onto the downwind leg where the Arrival guys will turn them base and final to fit into the sequence. Similarly we see departing traffic to the US will almost always file a STAR, this is part of the clearance issued by clearance delivery at the point of departure and does not need to be reiterated by the controller down the line because the airplane already has it from its ATC clearance. Everything I see on a daily basis going to a major US airport has a STAR filed, the WYNDE arrival into KORD, SHAFF and HELON into KEWR, IGN into KJFK, FLCON into KATL, SPICA into KDTW, GDM into KBOS, NOBBI into KLGA and on and on. Aircraft will follow the STAR almost until they are into downwind for the most part until tactical vectoring becomes necessary. STARs allow pilots and controllers to know what to expect and makes airspace utlisation much better. Also because of the significant sectorisation of airspace around busy airports it is often needed to ensure the aircraft miss certain sectors laterally or vertically. I was a controller in the United Kingdom previously too and almost everything inbound to airports in the London TMA (where I worked) was on a STAR. STARs in the UK are slightly different as they terminate at the holding fix rather than follow transitions almost to final as they often do in North America. SIDs and STARs are an utterly essential means of managing airspace and traffic for Air Traffic Control and without them the job would be almost impossible in busy airspace. I'm not going to comment one way or the other about the functionality in the Airbus product, but I simply had to respond to the suggestion that in the real World nobody flies SIDs or STARs, because the complete opposite is the case.

The wing on the A321 does flex, in fact you can move it around a foot by hand, and it'll flex even more in flight. In fact, the A321 wing flexes the most out of the entire family due to the greater wing loading. Aerosoft has choosen not to replicate the wing flex on the basis of performance, and they have not hidden the fact - and I am more than happy because overall the package looks excellent. Now, for those touting the fact that the pilot doesn't see the wing flex as a reason it was not modelled, please think about it. If that were really the case, then what is the point of modelling any of the exterior of the aircraft? Or the Houchin? Or the chocks? My post isn't intended to be inflammatory, honest. *Expecting my post to be marked negatively :|

Yeah this is really one of these 'shit happens' moments. One of the beta testers or one of the people we invited to repaint send the beta to the places where the low life of the internet hangs out. The files are useless as they are for sure not flyable, they just give a nice impression of the good looks of this project. What bugs me is that one of the persons I trusted screwed me. One of the people I talk with is a rat. What bugs me as well is that there is a good chance we'll raise the retail price of the product because of this. People who want it will buy it, but when it is available on the pirate nets we loose the low end of the market and might as well raise the price. And no, this is not new, this happened with two of our project (Catalina for example) and at least 4 projects of friends. In the end it means little. A Euro more means nothing to the person who wants this and we'll be okay. Somewhere there's a rat that probable feels good about what he done and who does not care about that Euro YOU paid. See piracy does not hurt us a lot, customers pay for it. Until they let thieves (pirates) know what rats there are it will happen.