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

Ahhh descent planning. This could be a 50 page thread by itself, lol. For now I'll just hit on what you asked. Our typical decent profile is .77 to 320kts, then 250kts below 10,000. As you can imagine, going into the major airports, we rarely are able to stick with that profile because of altitude/speed restraints on the arrival, or ATC assigned altitudes and speeds. An idle descent where you don't add power until final approach would be the most efficient in any jet, however, this pretty much never happens, once again, because of the restrictions of the arrival or ATC. So the thrust settings are just whatever you need to comply with that you've been assigned. The vast majority of people descend in V/S mode, and just adjust it to maintain the speed that you want to hold. Going into places like Chicago, they typically assign you speeds to hold all the way down to the final appraoch fix (Maintain 300kts....maintain 250kts....maintain 210kts....maintain 180 kts....maintain 170kts until *Insert final approach fix here*). There are times where I don't feel like riding the V/S knob the whole way down the descent so instead I'll just slow to the assigned speed and use SPEED mode to come down. There are no specific thrust settings I use when I do this. If I want a shallow descent, I pull them back a little. The more steep of a descent I want, the more I pull the thrust levers back. As with any descent in the CRJ, make sure you get that power back in once you level off!) A little trick you can do for those times where ATC leaves you way high and dry and you need to get down quickly. 320-330kts (250kts below 10), SPEED mode, thrust idle, speedbrakes full out, then hold on tight (lol). (Again...make sure you stow the speedbrakes and get the power back in on the level off! Otherwise you will experience CRJ fun times!) I'm sure we'll get more questions about descent planning as this goes on and we'll cover more of this, but hopefully this gives you a good start.

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

I am still considering if it makes sense to continue the way we did things up till now (be as open and honest as possible) because as you have seen it makes us highly vulnerable to abuse. Perhaps we should just do as other companies do and say it will be released when it is done and that questions will have to wait until things are close to releasing. However I did make some new images. These are VERY much work in progress and absolutely nothing should be considered as final, not modeling, not shading, not texturing, nothing...

I am happy to announce it is now 90% certain we'll have a simplified EFB in the A330 that will initially be used to show the geo-referenced charts. Both the Jeppesen (Navigraph) and LIDO (NavDataPro) should be supported. As soon as more information is available we'll share that of course.

My fellow pilots, Time to state something here. I am about and will proceed to finalize Innsbruck somewhere in autumn this year. We are trying to deliver a high-performing scenery with an adequate coverage of the sourroundings which perfectly fits to the upcoming ATPX (photoreal) scenery issued by "flugwerk-design". I saw the two products and at least one them is impressing. But as stated in other posts: the market is free and I as a developer have to accept from time to time that the business has it's own rules. So I do not blame anybody for anything from a pure fact-based point of view. It is another story that the current design-industry is changing since a couple of years and that 'old-fashined' approaches for design come under pressure (saying this I mean that developers who are working more or less 'for fun' in parallel to their main-job increasingly are getting into troubles). When I did LOWK and LOWS in the FS2004 times and then LOWI for FSX I did it because I loved it. Personally speaking this is my main motivation. And I see no reason to change this approach to scenery design. Time is too precious and life is too short to waist these resources by fighting and moaning.

Mega Airport Singapore X (by Antti Haka), It's still some way off but we thought it would be nice to share some first images!

General disclaimer, I am going to be talking about how we do a "descend via" arrival in the United States. This is an arrival with a sequence of waypoints often with airspeed and altitude restrictions. The complicated part of this is that they are not all just "Cross FIX at ALT", rather they are "Cross FIX between ALT1 and ALT2, at 290kts". So how do we do that in the CRJ? Well, it is a bit more complicated than a Boeing or Airbus product. The CRJ series technically doesn't have VNAV (I am lying, but I will qualify that in a second though). We have advisory VNAV which is a very basic descent profile that the FMS generates based on entered crossing restrictions. I want to explain a bit of how it does this. To illustrate, lets go look at an arrival. http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1708/00253VANZE.PDF This is the VANZE1 RNAV arrival into Memphis, TN. Imagine you are the FMS. You have a desired descent angle which is 3.0 degrees. This is of course editable in the VNAV page 3/3 of the FMS. 3.0 works fairly well though and unless there is a massive tailwind will allow you to descend at near idle thrust maintaining profiled speeds. The way that the FMS builds the descent path goes as follows. Start at the end of the arrival with the first hard altitude (which is to say a restriction that isn't "at or above/below/between). On the VANZE arrival, that is HEXIN. Now, the FMS will draw backwards up the arrival a path of 3.0 degrees. At each waypoint it logic checks to see if you meet whatever restriction is entered in the LEGS page (it is important to note, before you fly any arrival like this you must manually verify each altitude at each fix is correct by cross referencing the chart). Now, if it fails this logic check and the 3.0 degree angle doesn't meet the proceeding restriction, then it will adjust the angle such that it does. So the result is you may see any angle of 2.8 or 3.2 on the LEGS page between waypoints to signify you will need an adjusted descent rate for that section of the arrival. The physical manifestation of all this is the white snowflake which appears on the PFD where the glideslope appears for the ILS. Following the snowflake will keep you within all restrictions of the arrival. If you are still with me, good job. That isn't the hardest part though. We need to now mention a few things about our friend, the snowflake. 1. It doesn't build deceleration stages like the 737 or A320. All it is concerned about it altitudes. So if the arrival requires you to decelerate to, say, 210KTS, then you must plan that into your descent on your own. 2. It doesn't account for your TAS changing as you descend. Hence, while one VS may have been working at a higher altitude, you will need a lower one as the descent progresses. Remember, we are attaching a VS to an angle. We are still doing a 3.0 degree descent, but much like the VS of a CRJ on a 3.0 ILS will be greater than that of a C172 doing the same approach because of the speed difference, the higher true airspeed for a given indicated airspeed at altitude will require a greater VS. *aerodynamics side note (skip if you want): a swept wing high altitude jet like the CRJ makes a lot of drag at higher altitudes going fast (drag = speed^2), so the higher vertical speed required for a 3.0 degree descent out of FL340 actually compliments this aerodynamic principal quite well. In my experience, the CRJ can easily do 3000FPM out of the high flight levels without accelerating, but below 20,000 often times it is hard to descend at more than 2,000FPM. 3. You cannot couple the autopilot to our friend the snowflake. The snowflake is a function of an angle. No where can we select a 3.0 flight path angle on FCP. 10/10 engineering. Even worse, the CRJ doesn't share with you what VS its currently using to compute the snowflakes rate of descent. I have to imagine this number totally exists somewhere within the Rockwell Collins avionics, but they decided to not tell us. So this can lead to you just chasing it with the VS wheel in hopes you are ballparking it correctly. There is however, a better way. *side note number 2: there are a few CRJs flying that actually have a VNAV button on the FCP. Guess what it does. It couples the snowflake to the autopilot. They're lucky. None of my companies airplanes have this button though, and I don't think that the AS CRJ7/9 has it either. So as near as I can tell, it doesn't exist. If you've been reading this up till now, I need to issue an apology. Everything we just talked about it kind of irrelevant because we don't actually use the snowflake in day to day operations. At least, most of us don't. I would consider it secondary descent profile information. Enough theory then, how do we actually do this? Good old airmenship and the DIR INTC page. The DIR INTC page is extremely useful for a singular reason. It will tell you the VS required to cross FIX at ALT, based on what you put on the LEGS page. A simple example to start, shall we. http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1708/00264SKETR.PDF Let's say ATC instructs us to cross SHONN at 11,000ft. We will enter that restriction into the LEGS page (because this is an EXPECT altitude, it will not have loaded when we load the arrival). Now, execute the change and switch over to the DIR INTC page. You will see the SHONN, an arrow pointing down, and a vertical speed. 11,000 should be in small font right above the VS. That is the VS required to cross SHONN at 11,000 based on your current altitude. There will also be your current angle from present position directly to SHONN. To cross SHONN at 11,000, dial in 11,000 into the FCP, wait for the angle to read 3.0 (or less, I like to descend a 2.5 sometimes just to make the ride a bit smoother and give me more options with a bit of power in on the descent), and start descending at the VS shown on the SHONN line of the DIR INTC page. I should note, if you do what I do and start down at an angle <3.0, you will never see the snowflake because you have never intercepted the 3.0 degree path created by the FMS which the snowflake obviously represents. Same situation, same arrival, same crossing restriction at SHONN, but now ATC asks you to cross SHONN at 250kts. Now you must slow down and go down. This is not one of the strong suits of the CRJ. In level flight, the thing will decelerate quite rapidly. It won't while descending though and in all honesty, the flight spoilers aren't too stellar slowing the bird down. Remember how I said that the snowflake doesn't build in deceleration legs, thats on you, the pilot! The only difference in our descent planning we will need to make is that we are going to need a level segment in order to decelerate. As we approach a 3.0 degree descent towards SHONN using the DIR INTC page, start down a bit early. Maybe at 2.8, however, add approximately 100 or 200FPM to the required rate of descent. This will ensure that we get to 11,000 a bit before SHONN and have enough time to decelerate to 250kts. The reason I wanted us to go through that example is so that we can now go to a more complicated one. Lets go back to the VANZE arrival into MEM that I linked to earlier, back at the top of this increasingly long essay. Pretend we are cleared for this arrival and we are starting it at the TALLO transition, landing South (18L/C/R). The restrictions are all in the LEGS page and ATC clears us to descend via the arrival. Great. The first crossing restriction is FASON at or above FL240. That is pretty easy. The next one is CRAMM at or below FL230, and VANZE has the same restriction. So what should we do? The honest answer is make it up as you go. You need a mental picture of what the entire arrival looks like in terms of vertical profile, but in reality you can't keep track of every set of restrictions in your head. There are way too many! So just worry about the next four, or so. FASON FL240A dist 37 CRAMM FL230B dist 10 VANZE FL230B dist 9 MASHH 16000/14000 Hypothetically, we cross both CRAMM and VANZE at FL230, are we going to be able to go from VANZE to MASHH and descend to 16,000ft to make the top of the gate? Probably not. Here it what I would do. Go look at your DIR INTC page. Look at the VS required for each waypoint. I am not sure exactly which altitude it will show for MASHH on the DIR INTC page, but it'll either be 16 or 14,000. It will sometimes change based on the arrival and profile and that is wayyy beyond what we are talking about here today. We have done enough pseudo coding of the airplane's avionics today. We need to now pick a vertical speed that will hit all the restrictions. Ideally you want something less than the VS to cross FASON, and greater than the VS to cross CRAMM. This will ensure you can cross FASON above 240, and CRAMM below 230. More than likely, that VS required to cross MASHH at 16,000. So that is probably the one you want to use. Wait until you are 3.0 degrees from MASHH and start down at that VS, assuming that VS is less than the VS for FASON and greater than that for CRAMM. If it doesn't meet those requirements, then you'll need to adjust it until it does. Lets say we cross FASON above 240 successfully. We can now start thinking about the waypoint after MASHH. CRAMM FL230B dist 10 VANZE FL230B dist 9 MASHH 16000/14000 dist 22 (skip w/ turn at HLI, no crossing restriction there) LARUE 12000/10000 Run the same algorithm in your head. You need to select a VS that will comply with all of the above. Rinse, repeat, until you hit the bottom of the arrival. And make sure you are complying with speed restrictions too. If that example was a little hard to follow I understand. The summary to all this: if you are flying an arrival with multiple crossing restrictions to hit, use the DIR INTC and your brain to select a descent rate that will comply with as much restrictions as you can. Look forward and ensure to not box yourself in a corner where you have to do an impossible rate of descent to make a restriction. Constantly be monitoring and adjusting. The snowflake is a good piece of supplementary information and if you're doing the above procedure correctly, you'll end up following it all the way down usually. It is important to understand the limitation of the system, such as no accounting for speed restrictions. For this, there is no substitute for human interaction and mental processing during these procedures. There is no simple way either, rather just practicing and engaging your brain. This is a huge pain. The CRJ avionics suite was built in the early 90s, well before any of these complicated RNAV procedures. We are using 25 year old tools to solve a modern day problem. This is genuinely the hardest thing to do in the CRJ and will make you feel like you've done some mental gymnastics. And once you get good at it, its very satisfying. Jumping back into the NGX or Airbus after this will make life seem pathetically easy. If any of that needs clarification, I will be happy to help.

Welcome to the annoying world of CRJ, haha. If it makes you feel any better, there is RARELY a flight where we can just set the power in cruise and it stays locked on the speed we want. In reality, we do have to make small inputs and corrections over the duration of the flight to maintain a certain speed. Once you get up there, though, the power changes needed shouldn't be drastic, just minor corrections. We do not do RNP approaches at my airline but for RNAV you nailed it. We track the course in NAV and use V/S for the descent. In the real plane (not sure if it's modeled in the aerosoft or not), if the RNAV approach is loaded in the FMS, you will get a white "snowflake" on the right of your attitude indicator. This is essentially your "rnav glideslode", and you treat the exact same as you would an ILS glideslope. Also, we have the vertical guidance on the top right of our MFD that tells us the exact FPM to descend to stay on the calculated glideslope. So if the Vertical guidance says 800fpm, we dial in an 800fpm descent with the V/S knob. If it then switches to 900fpm, we dial in the V/S knob to 900fpm. This typically isn't a set it an forget it type thing. It's constantly changing about +-100 FPM to hold the glidepath. Also, if you don't want to use all the fancy stuff, you can go old school and use the Groundspeed/Descent rate chart on the approach plate. BONUS: There are many times where we will use the NAV and V/S method for an ILS as well (as opposed to just using APPR mode). Going into major airports like Chicago, ATC likes to keep the spacing as tight as possible to get as many planes in and out as they can. There have been many times where we've encountered the wake turbulence of a bigger jet in front of us. If we know they are putting us behind one of these planes on the approach, we'll typically want to stay one dot high on the glideslope so we avoid the wake. Since APPR mode can only track the glideslope dead on, we will use V/S mode and keep adjusting it to keep ourselves one dot above the glidepath. No clue. It's silly to me too, lol.

It is a long time since I written one of my Friday evening chats where I try to explain what is happening with our projects while drinking a glass of wine. Well, it is Wednesday but after 1700 so I got my glass, the new album of Joe Jackson (yes I am that old) on the stereo and some information to share. Basically, it was very hard to keep you fully in the loop because there were a lot of things I could not speak about, and there are still a few I can't, but today we had a big meeting to align all eyes and it's time to explain some things. First of all, we do not have new images of the A330 because modeler Stefan is working on another project. That's one of the things I am not at liberty to speak about. It might come to your sims, but it just as well might not, time will tell. In the timing, it all does not matter a lot as I will explain. The 'not to be named project' is a big deal for us, both in growth for Aerosoft in new ways and also financially. The developers Baylan, Frank and Robert were still basically working on the A320 platform. Now, this is a fuzzy statement because 95% of the code they are doing for the A320 series is part of the A330. But apart from some issues, I will discuss later, the issues they were working on were getting smaller and smaller. Bugs with the chrono starting at every startup tweaks to the many printouts we now have etc. All stuff we like to close but not things that spoil the flights. So today we decided to switch the focus fully on the A330. When Frank installs the chrono in the A330 he will solve the open issue. So all these smaller issues will all be picked up and solved in the ongoing process. We have a solid bug tracker that has over 500 issues we like to look at. When these fixes are done they are automatically exported to our A320 series. Almost all of our code is built so it works for A318 all the way to A330 exactly the same and uses config files to set different parameters (just as Airbus Industries does it). When they are more than just a tweak we'll send them to you. For example, the moment the PFD we want to rewrite for many reasons is done you'll get it. This means the idea of a fixed SP1 is gone. I much rather send out what we have and not keep it on our systems until it is all done. For example, Connected Flight Deck, one of our core developments, has started performance testing today ( we need to know how many servers we need worldwide), the moment PMDG open up their server for Global Flight Operations we will have the client and share it, etc. You will hear a lot about Connected Flight Deck btw, not just from us. So what does this mean for 'the schedule'? Well in my calendar it means we are fully on track but my calendar is rather fluid, it has to be. What it means for you, customers is that you will see a rather steady flow of new features added to the busses, slowly a lot of smallish issues solved and hopefully some large issues solved soon. Because for some issues we have not changed focus. We are slowly getting a better idea on the causes of the big issues that happen to some people and we are hard at work trying to think up ways to solve them. These are mainly related to the vertical path following at this moment. We now can recreate most of these issues so we finally can get serious about them. These issues are not moved to the A330 development path, they are on the front burners now. In my experience, a post like this will make almost nobody happy. I don't give a date for the A330 and the bug you find almost impossible to live with seems to be shifted forwards. We know that if you take off from a high alt airport, at high temps at the southern hemisphere things are not as they should be. But if there is one thing we learned in this looong development it is that a real Airbus is not the near perfect machine many simmers seem to think it is. You know what pilots do when the aircraft does not slow down as it should at a waypoint (could be a database error or a logic error)? They switch off the AP and AT and fly the aircraft. Show me any Airbus pilot who thinks the computers can fly better then he/she can and I show you a pilot who needs more experience. We have hundreds of photographs of ECAM pages that are just whacky or ND displays that show a path not even an F35 would be able to fly. Now please, do not ask for a release date of the A330 because I have no idea. Honestly, no idea. We release when I feel comfortable and when my CEO does not kill me and my devs do not tell me I am out of my freaking mind. At least you now know as much as I am able to share. If you have questions you think I can answer, please ask! My answers will be as open and honest as possible. Just not about a date, week, month, quarter, year, decade ok?

Time to give this one it's own topic (I'll make one for the A320/A321 as well but for some reason that won't load at this moment). As explained while the graphical work on the A330 is progressing nicely we want to have the A320/A321 out first and have the A318/A319 on the same system status (SP1) as well. So we are not thinking about dates. But so many of the systems have been done already and so many others are the same as in the smaller busses we do not see major issues at this moment. It's just a lot of work, not a lot of unexpected surprises. As you can see from the images, the modeling standard is VERY high, on the same level as the A318/A319 Virtual Cockpit. You can see what the advantage of doing an aircraft directly for 64 bits is, If we would work with a 32 bit model we would never dream of this level of detail and in P3d V4.3, compiled with the very latest compilers the framerates are simply fine. It's a new dawn for the simulator if you start fresh! The images that follow are renders from the 3d tools. in the sim that rendering engine smooth things out a bit and generally makes it look better. Keep that in mind. The prices have not been fully set but should be in the same ballpark as the A318/A319/A320/A321 and there will be a modest discount for people who own any of the current busses because we reuse some parts from the current project (and you know we never ask you to pay more then one time for a file).

Today I had an installer made so we could make it a bit easier for the external testers to get the files in the right location. Of course, we told them serious testing really should be done on the A318 platform (we use that for all systems that are the same on the Airbus platform) but that did not stop them taking the big bus up for a spin. So why not share some of the images they shared on the beta skype group. Please do not read the fact there is an installer as a sign of an imminent release. As explained there is one other project that has partially priority at this moment. But things are moving smoothly. Over 200 hours testing on the Connected Flight Deck server the last few weeks and we are learning a lot about how it could affect framerates etc. I am sorry that this topic remains closed for comments at this moment. But if you see that my post about the EFB that could not possibly offend anybody still managed to get three downvotes it is clear, an open discussion will still lead to problems. I am simply not willing to spend time on managing that kind of behavior.

What is the actual status of the current product? You spoke a lot about some of the odd bugs, but where is the project at? I feel like it's been done 'from the ground up' numerous times. There appeared to be a functional aircraft many years ago according to YouTube videos posted by a beta tester. The actual status is 'in development', often people ask for a percentage and I always say 77.5%. It has never been done from the ground up and indeed we have had 'something' flying for a long time. But that was all A320 code in a different jacket. I heard rumours that multiple developers had left the project. Any truth in that? If yes, how has this impacted development? Total and utter nonsense. Nobody left, we only added people. Have you considered hiring more developers if having only 3 people on the project will continue to delay the development further? I did add more people, it's a team of six and not three. Adding more makes no sense. would not speed up things at all. I appreciate that the project Stefan has been pulled on is of importance to Aerosoft, but does that mean the A330 isn't as important? Who made that decision? Doesn't feel very community orientated. (P.S. I understand that things happen and priorities shift...) I am not sure what you mean with community orientated. Our staff works for Aerosoft, not for the community. While it is of course none of your business, the decision was made by me as the project manager. Service Pack 1 was promised "weeks" after the original release of the A320 Family. Now you're saying that it's not going to happen but instead have sporadic updates. What progress was made on SP1 in the first place and why haven't they been issued already before announcing this type of statement. (https://i.imgur.com/snG0C8V.png) Will you be issuing any kind of refund or apology to those expecting to see the updates previously promised? We have added a lot of what was intended for the SP1 and a lot more will come soon. I did not say sporadic updates. The choice was to keep it all on our disks or to release it the moment if was ready. We decided the latter. You have previously mentioned in the past that PBR will come but at a cost to the consumer. How do you respond to that when other aircraft developers are releasing PBR content free of charge? Leading on from the previous question - PBR is being treated by other developers as enhancements, not whole new paid for packages. It concerns me that we'll start seeing the aforementioned updates charged for in the future. How do you respond to that? A lot of the PBR released I have seen does not impress me at all. If and when and under what conditions we'll add PBR to existing projects is something we will discuss internally. If a 'config' file is all you need to change, why haven't we seen the A330 released at the same time as the 320 Family and then you issue updates as mentioned? Or you inferring there are still over 500 bugs in the A320 series as well? Because for example it does not look the same? And indeed a lot of the issues are in the A320 series. These are more things we like to fix and not su much bugs that have been reported by customers (90% of them has NOT been reported). Do you think that Aerosoft's reputation as a reliable aircraft developer will be impacted by the continued delays and still unfixed issues with the aircraft? Actually no, sales are fine and we feel the issues are being dealt with. As the project manager, what are your KPIs / goals for delivering projects in a timely fashion? To satisfy my CEO first of all and to make customers happy. How I actually do that is our business. I am not sure what you actually mean with being accountable. Nobody paid for the A330 yet and I am not accountable to anybody except my CEO. I am not sure why you feel entitled to information that we conder internal. And to cust things short these are the last comments I make in this kind of posts. If somebody wants to know about the product I am more than willing to reply (as always). If people wanty to know how I run the over 30 projects I am running I am afraid that's not public. So follow up discussion in this line will be deleted. And you will probably see that as unacceptable, but that is something I will live with.

Thanks for the kind words hunteral. You are welcome! Also time for a small friday update. Lufthansa satcom fairing has been done and so also the rest of the livery. Wasn´t that easy to get info on that pieces. The next one will be a VirginAtlantic A330, WHICH ISN´T COMPLETELY PAINTED YET on the images posted. Also those its seems have been fitted with some kind of internet antenna fairing. As i not found detailed info on that, you are free to help and document from what company that maybe and pictures of it would be even better! Sadly any airline seems to use its own system or at least fairing...

Time for a small friday update: Works on the A330 continue and I am currently doing addtional liveries. The first one is the first A330 with the new Lufthansa paint, D-AIKO. Note that the works are still underway at this paint: Work is just done on the EMER DOOR3, which is much more narrow than on DragonAir aircrafts. So there we got the first option already. Additionally with that another window layout comes, which is also added next week. The most prominent change will be addition the FLYNET fairing at the aft section of the aircraft. Collecting data was needed, to be able to model that first. They differ from the ones used with A320 aircraft, so its sadly not only "copy and paste"-job here. Images are taken out of the 3dsoftware. The looks in the sim will be better with all the lighting, reflections and shadows there...

Hey guys. I am a real world CRJ driver for a US Airline. I've been an avid flight simmer since I was young, and though I don't really fire up the sim anymore, it has helped me tremendously in my flight training and throughout my flying career. The biggest thing I remember is flying the study level sims, and wondering if this is how they do it in the real airplane. It was difficult to find real world tips and techniques on how to fly the planes. So I'm taking the opportunity to give back a little to a community that has helped me out a ton. So with that said... If you guys have any questions about CRJ techniques (Do they do it like this in the real world? Best way to ______, etc), ask them here and I will get back here periodically to answer as many of them as best I can. DISCLAIMER...I do not own this product so I obviously can't offer support for the product and I have no idea what all is and isn't modeled in the sim. I will just do my best to explain how the real plane does it and my personal tips and tricks that I've picked up. And if there are other real world CRJ pilots on here, please chime in and offer your tips and tricks as well! Looking forward to your questions!

Maybe they destroyed our national airport and the subway in Brussels, but they are never going to destroy our way of living and thoughts.... It was a very sad day today and I was privileged that I could help some of the victims in the hospital where I work! Sorry for this off-topic post...

At Aerosoft we are all too aware that everything we do depends on the customers. Though we got a fine professional department, the majority of money we make comes from you, the customer. It keeps us in business, it pays our rents and lets us do what we do. So it is actually not more then normal we say thanks in the best way we can think of, with a gift. Bei Aerosoft sind wir uns nur allzu bewusst, dass alles, was wir tun, von unseren Kunden abhängt. Wir sind zwar eine professionelle Firma, haben auch professionelle Auftraggeber, aber der Großteil unseres Umsatzes kommt von unseren privaten Kunden. Von Euch! Ihr haltet uns "auf Trab" und haltet uns im Geschäft. Ihr tragt dazu bei, dass wir "unsere Miete" zahlen können und unseren Lebensunterhalt mit allem, was dazu gehört. Deshalb halten wir es für selbstverständlich, daß wir uns bei Euch bedanken. Mit der Sache, die wir am besten können: Mit einem Addon als Geschenk. This time we got a superb little aircraft for you. It's a Mitchell Wing U2 and you will have so much fun flying it. It is designed for FSX and it has not been tested in FS2004. This is NOT a freeware aircraft, it is copyrighted by Dave Rowberry who has donated it to us to give to our registered forum users. Anybody can download it, you just have to make an account.If you want to get an ultra light that is even better (we think it is BY FAR the best ultra light for FS ever done) check out the Falcon Ultralight. Even Chuck Yeager owned one. Just imagine, for a few bucks you can be as cool as Chuck! Dieses Mal haben wir an ein kleines Flugzeug gedacht. Es ist ein sogenannter "Nur Flügler": Mitchell Wing U2. Es macht sehr viel Spaß, ihn zu fliegen. Das Addon ist für den FSX programmiert worden und wurde nicht im FS2004 getestet. Es ist KEIN Freeware-Flugzeug, sondern es wurde von Dave Rowberry zu dem Zweck gespendet, es unseren registrierten Benutzern des Forums zu überlassen. Das Addon ist aber trotzdem urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jeder kann es herunterladen wenn er/sie einen Account im Forum besitzt. Wenn ihr ein Ultraleicht fliegen wollt, welches NOCH besser ist (wir meinen, es wäre bei Weitem das beste Ultralight für den FS), dann ist es die Falcon Ultralight. Chuck Yeager ist im Besitz so eines Flugzeugs. Man stelle sich vor, für ein paar Euro besitzt man auch so ein Gerät!! You can download this file from two locations. From Europe select this: http://www.aerosoft2.de/downloads/AS_MITCHELL-WING-U2_V101.exe From the rest of the world select this: http://www.aerosoft4.com/downloads/AS_MITCHELL-WING-U2_V101.exe Happy flying! Ihr könnt Euch die Mitchell Wing U2 von zwei Servern herunterladen: Für Europa: http://www.aerosoft2.de/downloads/AS_MITCHELL-WING-U2_V101.exe Für den Rest der Welt: http://www.aerosoft4.com/downloads/AS_MITCHELL-WING-U2_V101.exe Guten Flug!

In addition to Tom's instructions with pictures showing you where to go on this site, if you're still struggling to find what you're looking for...you can do a Google® search. Try typing "Aerosoft repaints" as see what you come up with. The top hit was the correct one when I tried it....and took less than .38 seconds (It took me longer to open the page and type in the search) I remember in 7th grade I had to do a report on the sulton of butan...I had to go to the library, break out the Encyclopedia Britannica, etc. Took me HOURS and hours to find a few tidbits of info on the subject. As you can see below, I got six million, four hundred and thirty thousand results on the subject in a half a second. I even spelled Sultan and Bhutan wrong above (on purpose) just to point out that I didn't even have to know how to spell it and this wonderful machine in front of me instantly knew what I was looking for....and didn't even make me break out a paper dictionary to get the proper spelling (anyone remember those?) Anyway.....just trying to point out that Google search is your friend when looking for anything if you don't like to explore within the vendor's website specifically, and it is uncanny how fast and accurate it can be. Yeah....it might take you a few MINUTES to find exactly what you're looking for on a slow day...but imagine if you had to go to a library to find the same info like my example? Here.....I can even give you a one-click solution if you're in a hurry and seconds count: Click here to get the Google search for Aerosoft repaints Amazing technology. This whole post took less time to compose than it took me to ride my bike to the library that day looking for info on the Sultan. Perspective.

Lukla Mount Everest has always been one of our most popular sceneries. Reason enough to give the aged product a complete overhaul. We'll re-do the whole scenery from scratch! Early development shots: Non finalized list of features: * Detailed rendition of Lukla airport with its famous sloped runway. * Syangboche and Phaplu airstrips nearby * Detailed rendition of Mt. Everest * Customized VFR objects in the area, including monasteries, scientist camps, Mt. Everest camps... * New aerial and satellite imagery covering a larger area (including some of Tibet) * Detailed mesh terrain * ...and other cool stuff 🙂

ICAO: KSEA NAME: KSEA - Seattle International Airport TYPE: Payware FS: FSX DESIGNER: Taxi2Gate LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/taxi2gate-ksea-seattle-tacoma-international-airport-fsx.phtml AES 2.39

We will consider the issue. Today I completed the Lufthansa PBR paintjob that will join the default liveries coming with the A330 product...

And the second post...

ICAO: VHHH NAME: Hong Kong International Airport TYPE: Payware FS: FSX DESIGNER: Taxi2Gate LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/taxi2gate-hong-kong-international-airport-vhhh-fsx-p3d.phtml AES 2.38

As I explained, Stefan is back on A330 as 'the project we are not able to discuss' is delivered. The first thing I asked him was a complete export of one model to the latest P3D (released version) to show why a model that has PBR included from the start looks better then a model where it is added as a layer. You end up with a very realistic surface.

Why in the world would you think that? Guys, I never like to drop the hammer, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to insist on a few things in this thread to prevent it's closure again. This is the A330 Preview thread for P3Dv4+. It's not a thread to ask about release dates, try to pry information from us about potential release time frames because you desperately need a the aircraft for some future event or your life will not be worth living (grin/wink), or complain to us many individuals in the flight sim community have moved from FSX (we don't control that guys). This thread is purely for us to show progress with this project when there is something new to show you, and for future customers to ask questions about the P3Dv4+ A330. I'd like to remind each of you that we had to close this thread for several months because people didn't respect that, and I'm leaning really strongly towards seeing this thread closed again if we can't curb this. All this speculation isn't healthy for you or for Aerosoft, so please, just wait until the Boss (Mathijs) provides updates and you yourself can gauge the status of the A330 Project as those updates are shown. But as for an actual release date, I'm betting that Mathijs will let us all know about one or two weeks before product launch, and rightfully so. If you want to know more about why release dates are no longer forecast, please read my thread BY CLICKING HERE. Believe me when I tell you that everyone on the team knows full well that the A330 is one of of the most anticipated flight sim products in our community. Two weeks ago I spoke with Calum at FSElite, someone who sees upcoming products for many developers, and he told me that he's dying to see the A330 Pro released as well! Can I share a secret with you guys? I'm probably more excited that any of you, as are many on the team! There is a terrific team working on the Airbus Professional Series, including the A330 Professional, and they are working hard to provide the community with a terrific A330! With every click of the mouse or press of a key on their keyboard, they know how badly people want the A330 Pro and we are all very, VERY grateful to each of you for that! The team takes their work very seriously, and I have no doubt that our customers will be enormously happy with the A330 Pro when it's released. In the near future we hope to stream some flights in the A330 for you, but please remember that most systems will be in various Beta states and a couple may be Alpha as we get this going. Such streams are to show you PROGRESS in the development, not the end product, and I want to make sure that everyone REALLY understands that. Moreover they will be LIVE streams, rather than a recorded flight that is edited and uploaded as some others do, and you guys know that live broadcasts are unscripted and anything can happen so keep that in mind as well. Let's try to remember that Aerosoft has many devoted flight simmers on the team, and we're flight simmers first just like you guys are! We know what you want, and we do our absolute best to provide it to you, and to ourselves! My very best wishes.

Keep in mind that there was a bit more history between FSL and Aerosoft that explains that. Sections of our VC modeling were stolen by FSL and only after we complained very loudly for some time replaced by their own modeling. This issue was solved to our satisfaction between Aerosoft and FSL without legal actions. Next to the other notable events (illegally including malware, threatening Reddit etc) nobody should be surprised this created little love towards FSL. Personally I find the actions of FSL to be highly irresponsible, damaging to the whole small FS add-on scene and offensive. They do a fine Airbus, no doubt about that. We do not share their basic idea of what an add-on should be but my problem was never with the product but with the company. And this concludes this line of discussion.

Auch wenn Du mit T2G schon im Kontakt stehst für Istanbul requeste ich es dennoch:-) ICAO: LTBA NAME: Istanbul Atatürk TYPE: Payware FS: FSX, FS9 maybe DESIGNER: taxi2Gate http://secure.simmarket.com/taxi2gate-istanbul-atatuerk-airport-ltba-fsx-(de_8266).phtml AES 2.35

Today the CathayPacific livery was finished. I added one nice Lufthansa view too again for your viewing pleasure...

ICAO: ZGGG NAME: Guangzhou Bayun TYPE: Payware FS: FSX DESIGNER: Bridge LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/bridge-guangzhou-baiyun-airport-zggg_fsx-p3d-(de_9406).phtml AES 2.45

Prague was already posted, but this is a new version! The fingers should now work... ICAO: LKPR NAME: Praga Ruzyne LKPR TYPE: freeware FS: FS9/FSX DESIGNER: Jindrich Machalinek LINK: http://www.avsim.su/f/fs2004-scenarii-44/scenariy-aeroporta-goroda-pragi-praha-ruzyne-lkpr-1230-v1-0-dlya-fs9-i-fsx-46149.html

ICAO UUDD NAME Moscow Domodedovo International Airport TYPE Payware FS FSX DESIGNER MDesign !!!NEW VERSION: Moscow Domodedovo 1.1!!! LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/mdesign-moscow-domodedovo-airport-uudd-fsxp3dv1.phtml ...finally the famous Domodedovo Airport in high quality!!!! ;-) AES 2.37 (Version 1.1 of Scenery needed)

ICAO: EGLL NAME: London Heathrow V3 FS: FS9/FSX Type: Payware Designer: UK2000 Gary Summons Link: http://www.uk2000scenery.org/forum/index.php?topic=7462.45 AES 2.35

The landing gears in the recent images are in transition state, they just go into upward position. The mechanics of the mainlanding gear, so levers and joints, are extremly near the original and we work also on a correct physical behaviour of that system. Regarding the PBR shaders i can say that they make quite some more work than they old shading system, but they also bring a lot of advantages, mostly visually with them. The FSX shading system consisted of the so called Phong-Blinn system. Phong and Blinn are names of real people. Mr. Phong, a vietnamese exilant, created the Phong-shading algorithm in the mid 1975. This was a very important event in computer generated imagery, as on his work relied much of CGI in the coming 2, almost 3 decades. The new thing introduced was the reaction of polygon surfaces on simulated light, as before polygon were only simply filled with a single color. This needed also in the 1980s high performance computer to generate, like SiliconGraphics provided them in that time. The most famous usage was maybe the movie TRON. The first flight sims used the simple shaded version still til the mid 1990s, when graphics accelerators came into usage for home PC systems. Then this model ruled the "gaming" industry as efficient way to generate very acceptable realtime 3d output. But the demands in visual fidelity grow all the time and so all disadvantages become visible: The phong/blinn shading works best in a single lighting situation only and in our flight simming environment we have usually quite fast changes of daytimes. Especially in midday FSX produced pretty suboptimal results resulting in much to bright reflections, where you often got simply overexposured, featureless surfaces. This could not be controlled by the graphic dev. The physical based shaders go a different way. They not accept that more energy leaves the surface again, than penetrates it in the first way. Then we get features like metalness, which lets us simulate the difference between nonmetals (plastic, wood, rubber) and metals in a much better way. Additionally we get a smoothness parameter which also blurs the environment reflections, adding to the feeling of getting rough structured surfaces. Ontop the icecake we have now also a dynamic behaviours of the diffuse shaded AmbientOcclusion. Those technique creates darker zones in deep edges and cavings of surfaces which almost dominant leads to realistic looking materials, as i lets us prebake pretty complex physical behaviour of light. This reacts now to direct light contact and diminishes there how it does also in reality. This was the leap the game engine graphics was ahead of our flight simming engines before the introduction of PBR shaders in our sectors. But we have still go a certain way, as we still got not the same flexibility a game engine like Unreal got, but that may change with coming new competitors in that field. I am too open for kind surprises there. One guy wrote that our bird looks like "any other PBR bird out there". This is not only logically not coherent, because if this claim would be true, only Aerosoft A330s would be out there or at least only a single type of product which isn´t, already trivially thought, not true. To these people i can only say: Please make constructive claims, not only ventilate your personal frustrations here.

Probably, but is totally against my nature to do so. But it's hard to sit here and see 6 forums users reluctantly click the minus button and not even caring what was written. I know some of them are youngsters and more of the Facebook generation where that's all normal but I am 59 and insist that discussion and being as open and honest as possible is the only way to go. That clashes with people who communicate via up/down votes (how many sim fora have the downvote active?). As I did last week I'll close this topic so things will calm down. If people want to stir up a shitstorm they can do so elsewhere. If they want to win the up/downvotes race here, ahh well.

Time for the friday update: The VirginAtlantic livery has been finalized now. Inspect the winglets please for not being mirrored and freely paintable ;-). Also the images should answer the question if DOOR2L and R are openable. It contains the whole galley there too for the exterior view. At the end comes a little preview for next weeks livery...

After the release of the smaller busses package, now there is more time for me to work on the A330 again: So time for a friday update again!!! To show what has been added to the plane, there will be some "walkaround" the plane. As it is over a dozen images, i will split the image post in the separate items. Images are take out of my 3d software, but the texture content is those, which you will see in the sim later too. Note that all is still work in progress, usage traces are also added later.

ICAO: EPWA NAME: Warsaw Chopin Airport TYPE: Payware FS: FS9/FSX DESIGNER: Drzewiecki Design LINK FS9: http://secure.simmarket.com/drzewiecki-design-epwa-warsaw-chopin-airport-2015-fs2004.phtml LINK FSX: http://secure.simmarket.com/drzewiecki-design-epwa-warsaw-chopin-airport-x-fsx-p3d.phtml AES 2.40

ICAO: ULLI NAME: Pulkovo ST. PETERSBURG TYPE: Payware FS: FS9/FSX DESIGNER: DIGITAL DESIGN LINK: DIGITAL DESIGN - ULLI ST. PETERSBURG X FSX P3D AES 2.41

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)

ICAO: YSSY Name: Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport Type: Payware FS: FSX Designer: FlyTampa Link: http://www.flytampa.org/yssy.html AES 2.39

ICAO: SKBO Name: El Dorado Intl Airport, Bogota, Colombia Type: Payware FS: FSX+P3D; FS2004 Designer: VirtualCol Links FSX+P3D: http://secure.simmarket.com/virtualcol-skbo-bogota-for-fsx-p3d.phtml FS2004: http://secure.simmarket.com/virtualcol-skbo-bogota-for-fs2004.phtml Thanks and regards, Harald AES 2.45

ICAO: OEJN NAME: King Abul Aziz International TYPE: Payware FS: FS9 version DESIGNER: BDOAviation LINK: http://www.bdoaviation.com/scenery/scenery.php?ID=21 Original link to simMarket was correct link but at their end somehow directed to Jennasoft scenery. A situation which still obtains. Apologies on behalf of simMarket. Present link to BDO aviation is for the FSX version but at least it's the right airport. AES 2.43

3 different airports in one single package: New York Airports ICAO: KJFK NAME: John F. Kennedy International Airport ICAO: KEWR NAME: Newark Liberty International Airport ICAO: KLGA NAME: La Guardia Airport TYPE: Payware FS: FSX, P3Dv1, P3Dv2 DESIGNER: Drzewiecki Design LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/drzewiecki-design-new-york-airports-fsx-p3d.phtml

ICAO RPLL NAME Ninoy Aquino International Airport TYPE Payware FS FSX DESIGNER Pacific Islands Simulation !!!FINALLY RELEASED!!! LINK: http://secure.simmarket.com/pis-manila-ninoy-aquino-intl-rpll-fsx-p3dv2-(de_8496).phtml ...Such a stunning paradise and a good destination for a T7 ;-)...! AES 2.36

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.