Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/26/20 in all areas

  1. Dear friends, we are really sorry this message is released later then we hoped. We are excited to announce that the Aerosoft CRJ 550/700 for the Microsoft Flight Simulator will be released on Tuesday March 16, 2021 as the first complex and highly detailed aircraft expansion. The expansion will be available as a download from the Aerosoft Shop and the Microsoft Flight Simulator Marketplace at the same time.
    121 points
  2. Hello everybody and welcome to the first tutorial video about the AS CRJ for MSFS! Volume 3 of the CRJ documentation describes a flight from Paderborn to Munich and in this series we will also perform this flight. You can first read the manual or just check out the videos, or do both ofcourse. We will have one topic in this section for every video. If you have any questions about the safety checks you can ask them here. In this video we will talk about the first thing a flightcrew does when they enter the cockpit; the safety checks: (ps, be sure to watch the video in 4K) And here is the link to Volume 3 of the manuals: https://forum.aerosoft.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=157882
    93 points
  3. I will add my support to Mathijs sentiment here. One of the things we constantly try to snuff out is this popular meme that developers are all in competition with one another like newspaper barkers on a street corner. We aren't. The entire market exists because there are so many developers, and so many shared development relationships in the community. The ecosystem as a whole needs a broad range of products and services in order to attract enough users so that it becomes self sustaining. If things get out of balance and they are dominated by a single developer, then creativity and innovation suffer and soon after community enthusiasm. Behind the scenes developers talk and share information nearly constantly. We help one another with complex problems, we work to resolve difficult problems and we share strategies with other developers who get stuck, or we seek ideas from other developers when we are stuck. Mathijs and I might go for months without talking, but then we might exchange a few dozen email in a week as we bounce an idea, or a problem back and forth. What I think many users don't understand is that I know Mathijs. He is my friend. I look forward to making trips to Europe so that I can see him and spend time. We talk about highly nuanced topics such as how to convince Asobo of the importance of specific functions and then we talk about vacations and travel and the ups-and-downs of politics, cars, airplanes, fish, home improvement projects, dogs and spouses. This is true with many many other developers with whom we share relationships, both at Aerosoft and at other develment houses. To us they become the sorts of friends you greet with a warm embrace, not just a handshake or a waive. The relationships mean something- and to be honest they make the work more worthwhile. We crisscross countries and continents to spend time together socially and one of my favorite days in this career to date was touring Aerosoft's team through the DC-3 after enjoying a holiday lunch of grilled chicken and sausage with them at their office. (We managed to take a few of them flying- but we accidentally took on too much fuel and were heavily weight limited that day... I wish we'd had time to stick around for another day or so, but the schedule was tight... Still it was fun to take Simone with us since it was her birthday- and no amount of convincing would get Winfried on the airplane. 🙂 ) PMDG's journey through MSFS development has been hand-in-glove with Aerosoft's. There are many reasons why ours is taking longer- and it has nothing to do with access (although- the plan of moving half of PMDG's staff to Bordeaux for two months did go up in smoke thanks to Covid) and everything to do with existing development agendas and the constantly moving target that is the current state of MSFS. MSFS is an entirely new platform- and it takes time for all of us to move through that development process. Some may not survive the transition simply because it does take plenty of time- and in business time always means money. But there is not some jealously guarded garden of secrets in which some developers live and others starve outside the fence. We are all in here helping one another learn. (Wow- my first post anywhere outside the PMDG forum in 2020! LOL) Robert S. Randazzo PMDG
    63 points
  4. My sincerest apologies for this situation - it was a couple members of our team who exercised rather poor judgement, and they have been spoken to. I assure you this won't happen again. We have the highest respect for your team and products, and like everyone else here, are eagerly anticipating the CRJ.
    62 points
  5. Your wish, our command.
    57 points
  6. We did all we can. ---------- Mind if I share some thoughts? Well, click away if you do not want to read my ramblings. We just reached a very serious milestone. The code is locked. If anything changes it will be an update or when it is urgent a hotfix. This file set will be sent to the Microsoft mothership. And because we want the release to be 100% identical for the MS Store and our shop (and our affiliated shops) that means that we are 'done'. We are now in that strange limbo state were we have no control. It's now in the hands of the people who make the installers, product pages,, marketing etc. Are we happy? Yeah, damned sure we are! Are we proud? Bet you we are. Are we done? No, certainly not. MSFS is a fantastic simulator that needs to mature. The moment we can add an option we'll do so. It's a good time for me to speak about the people. See this was a very personal project for everybody involved. We have something to proof. So, being sure I will forget some people who will hate me forever... here they are. Hans. The main developer, does all code, from MCDU to animations. Hans is a dear friend of mine for many many years and I dare to say if there was any person who could get this project done, it was him. He has handled new versions of the simulator since 1999. Experience matters here. Stefan. The modeler. I said before that Stefan is the best aircraft modeler in this field and I still stand behind that solidly. He knows how to get the best out of a game engine, makes very clear decisions when he feels what an SDK explains is not the best way (for example, for an aircraft you fly in we did not believe many LOD's make much sense. How often do you see your own aircraft from 10 miles?} His sense for color is unmatched. Alexander. Arguably the most tortured person this project as he was trying to get a flight model done on a platform that is not only partially incomplete but also shifting. Really not easy and it meant a lot of discussions with Asobo. I think however that we ended up with something that is seriously good. If anybody can do better I want to see it. TheDude. From the start I wanted this project to be accessible for the less experienced simmer. I hesitated for a long time to ask TheDude to make the videos. He never made videos before. But that was a positive thing for me. I wanted him to explain the aircraft, not to make sleak video productions. He delivered. I think there are no better video tutorials for FS add-ons. The Testers and Jouka. You have no idea how easy it is to get testers for an aircraft add-on. One forum post and you have 50. And you have no idea how hard it is to get good testers who can supply reliable feedback and who are willing to keep on testing. But we have some. Jouka came in late (when we shut down the P3D airbus projects) but he knows how to manage testers. Our advisory team. Nobody in the development team is a CRJ pilot. And as manuals can only help you so far (the real CRJ manuals are really not the best), we depend heavily in the real pilots who can answer our questions and give comments. From show things should fly to how things should sound. Microsoft and Asobo. From the start of this project we had fantastic help from Asobo. Simply put, without them this project would probably be release late summer. Microsoft (Jorg) was extremely supportive. Ingo. While a lot of the manuals could be taken over from the P3D version, the tutorial was a complete rewrite and all other manuals were overhauled. I think they are damned good. Vanessa. In this project we decide to embed the marketing department very closely in the team. Normally the development hands over projects to marketing at the end, but I always felt that was not the right way. Coordination with Microsoft who will do a lot of marketing just as our online friends was damned complex and it was all handled. Winfried and myself. We did a bit of project management here and there. Lost some sleep, had some fights. And of course there are many more people. Marie who does the product pages and coordinates with other shops, Andreas who makes the installer, the people who translated the manuals. The saying goes that it takes a village to raise a child, but believe me, this problematic child was raised by a village that worked together. It was by far the hardest project we worked on for many reason, from technical, via political to marketing. But we got it done and everything is on schedule a release next Tuesday. stic simulator that is without a doubt the future. The second we have a new option in the sim to add to this project, we'll work hard to include it. But speaking the project manager I can tell you that moving my focus from development to support is a big deal. From one kind of stress to the next.
    56 points
  7. Okidoki, so I am sure you won't mind if we remove you from this topic for 36 months.
    55 points
  8. Wait.... and the Illuminati have nothing to do with it. Riiiiight.... Oh you poor misguided soul. _____________________________ Might I make a short personal comment? While it is frustrating not being able to give the release date and having to hide some stuff. I, and the complete team behind this project (I am really just the assigned figurehead, the real aces are the developers, I type, they code and model), thoroughly enjoy the conversation here. Sure, there are hiccups and sometimes tempers flare. But this is 2021 and the internet, right? But let me tell you, the whole team reads these posts and love the enthusiasm, support and general spirit. It means a lot to us. We have always tried to include the people who pay for the product, see how the product is made (insert joke about sausage here). Even when thing did not go as planned. I started with FS as a hobby because I could not pay for flight lessons. I stayed in the hobby because I could fly aircraft I could not afford to take lessons in later on. But more and more it was the community that attracted me most. Flightsimmers are weird. They spend their hobby time learning something new. Because that is what flight simulator is about. Learning new skills. Not how to shoot down zombies faster, but how to get a mental picture in your head about a complex approach. Not only skill, but also knowledge. If ATC asked you if you can do a direct to this and that VOR and arrive at that altitude, you do not have time to make calculations, you got to have the answer somewhere in the back of your mind. Yes, we can do that in this aircraft, with this weather. Or no way, the passengers would start to scream if we try. Now people who do that as a hobby are almost always people I can have a conversation with over a beer in a hotel lobby (remember pre-covid?). They are not stupid, they almost always have something to say. They are also willing to assist other people. The real cool once remember the first time they done a low ceiling ILS landing and saw the runway magically appear in front of them when the broke the cloud cover at 250 feet. The first time you do that is magical. You solved a problem. Now add 20 knots of crosswind and do it again. As said, flight simming is learning, seeking new challenges. Exploring new airports.
    52 points
  9. Abusing my moderator rights to post a comment: 1) Yes, there have been three other issues that were found during the testing at Microsoft. Two in the CRJ, which have been there since day 1, but never showed until Sim Update 5 (dark instruments after loading and HUD constantly flipped down) and one in the Marketplace ingestion process which wasn't directly related to the CRJ, but caused a delay anyway. 2) Everything has been fixed and as of 18:47 CEST yesterday evening, the ingestion process has been completed and the CRJ was sent to Microsoft's testing team. When it will be available? I don't know. Will Microsoft find another issue that needs fixing first? I don't know. I will have to wait - just like you.
    49 points
  10. I take the pleasure to lock this thread now! https://www.aerosoft.com/de/detail/index/sArticle/3303 Also check out the CRJ club here on the forums: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/clubs/17-the-crj-community/ Have fun!
    47 points
  11. Friends, I was asked to posts this. ----------------------------- Dear FlightSim Community, We feel the expectation on us to give official information about the release of the Aerosoft CRJ 550/700 for the Microsoft Flight Simulator. In this regard we have a concern and we’ll keep it short: We made a really tough decision to postpone the CRJ release into the first quarter of next year. This decision wasn't easy for us, because we know how much anticipation there is in the community for this add-on. We have decided to do so, because we want to deliver a CRJ that meets all expectations, but we have not reached this level yet. We need more time for the development and beta testing. We hope the additional time allows us to complete the necessary work to provide the highest quality and the best possible experience for you right from the start. We therefore hope for your understanding. However, we do have a little present for you. The first official teaser: We wish you and your loved ones a Happy New Year!
    46 points
  12. Friends, there is one 'special' thing about this release that is new and will potentially cause serious support issues. We'll mention it in the installer etc but as it is so new we decide to mention it on the forums until you are sick of hearing about it. See, when you load the 550 and the 700 for the first time in the simulator there is a translation done from the C++ code to the WASM code the sim needs. Even on a high performance system this takes minutes. Now I know installers often say to be patient for 'minutes' to do something and it takes seconds, but in this case it will be minutes. On both, the MS Store as well as the Steam version of MSFS it takes about 5-8 minutes on a current high performance PC. On older and/or slower machines, this time can easily extend beyond 10 minutes. And all that time MFS will not show anything and be unresponsive. This behavior might also be visible after an update. As you understand, we are very worried that customers will feel the sim has crashed because of the add-on. But this behavior is fully normal and will only happen the first time that aircraft type is loaded. Any add-on that uses C++ code will behave like that. The more C++ code the longer the pause will be. So if you ever see a person complains the sim 'crashes' when they load the CRJ, ask them if they waited ten minutes. Because on some systems, that is really what it could take. Help a fellow simmer..... Edited by Hans to fix a misunderstanding. Mathijs is already gone for the day.
    43 points
  13. Okay okay, we'll admit. The CRJ has wing flex. But not the 'floppy' wings I see so often in other aircraft. This is pretty sophisticated stuff with it's own controller. Only that way could we get the 10 Hz 'vibrations' of the short wings. Very noticeable on the ground. We believe it is damned cool because it is not done as a gimmick but really as realistic as possible.
    42 points
  14. I felt rather unhappy about some of the discussions on our forums (and the accusations made) in the last week, so I decided to have a glass of wine and reflect on them. First, we do not remove a discussion from view without a lot of internal discussions. We only do so when we feel the discussion is unjust, contains incorrect information or simply violates our idea of what is right and wrong. Our forums are NOT ‘public’ forums like on other sites. We decide what is welcome and what is not. Now there are very few forums without commercial links (if a website has a shop you will see not everything) but you can still find them and you should be free to post about Aerosoft what you want there. But you will find a LOT of posts on our forums that start with “I expect this to be removed very soon” that are still public. In fact, we are very lenient on these things compared to other forums. If we remove something from view you can almost always find it in Avsim in minutes. Secondly, we are willing to discuss almost anything and willing to defend the decisions we make. But there is Aerosoft’s own productions and Aerosoft’s product where we just sell what we get delivered. Of course, we only sell what we feel is correct. But if you want to know why a developer decided to do something in a certain way, we can only forward the question. We agreed it was suitable to sell (and feel free to discuss that) but the decisions are not made by us. Thirdly, these are exciting times. A lot is changing. If you see a person posting a rather serious complaint about Aerosoft, do check if they have commercial interests that might conflict with ours. If you see somebody complaining about our focus on MFS, check if they have commercial interests in P3D add-ons. Ask them if they might have been refused higher levels of MFS development support. Check their (ex) role on P3D forums. It might show things in a quite different light. Fourth, Aerosoft is a commercial company. We are with some margin the largest flight simulator add-on company. We have over 50 employees and a lot more people we depend on us in other ways. My own departments (support and internal aircraft development) got 5 new full-time employees in the last 9 months. That is a shit load of money to be paid to these people every month. So, while we still love that FSX customer who wants an update for a 16-year-old sim and a 12-year-old product, it is just not going to happen. If you feel your 27-euro purchase in 2009 entitles you to an update to make the airport look like it does right now, sorry. Everything we sell is without ANY promise of new features. Name me any company that does that differently. Fifth, (I should stop counting). We like P3D V5. Honestly. It has some fantastic new features, but when we see that the same files produce different brightness levels in EVERY update or hotfix and to correct all of that for every update takes us 2 weeks to match the new sim standards, we say that we rather wait for Lockheed to make up their minds. Most lights in P3D are 1999 standards, we must calculate how a light source works with a surface. So that is why our Airbuses work well on some airports where PMDG aircraft do not and there are airports where the opposite is true. In MFS we just define the light, modern standards. Again, we love P3D V5. We just do not love the fact it is changing its mind all the time. Now I am not blaming Lockheed. They always made it clear their professional customers come first. They loved the fact a few tens of thousands of simmers bought the sim and tested it. They also made an add-on market possible and to be honest, we got to correct a lot of professional users every month who believe a 40-euro purchase allows them to use the add-on on multiple stations. The basic fact is that Lockheed lost thousands of testers and dozens of developers. Because just check most developers who worked on P3d v4 addons might have release version that that ‘work’ in P3D v5 but very few actually spend serious time on P3D v5 features. New P3D releases are like hens’ teeth at this moment, exceedingly rare. And if there are any, they are not overly exciting. If people honestly believe that my comments about the open issues in P3D v5 affect developments I am seriously honored. But it is laughable. The dev companies who use us as publishers are smart. Most have been doing add-ons for a few decades. They know where the money is. Just as we do. And the money is in MFS. All these people got to pay invoices, just as we do. We do not ‘decide’ what platform to make add-ons for, we go where the customers are. If you get me five thousand FS2002 users willing to buy add-ons we gladly make add-ons for that platform. We will make serious money as making add-ons for FS2002 is super simple at this moment. But these customers are not there. Just as FSX customers are not there and as P3D customers are not there. Even serious P3D users who do not even think about looking at MFS are not buying add-ons right now. There still are a huge amount of FSX users. But for us, they are non-existing as they stopped being commercially interesting in late 2017. There is a serious amount of users of P3D and they were all very willing to buy add-ons, but they stopped buying add-ons in early 2020. X-Plane users are still remarkably interesting as they keep on buying add-ons. Do not be surprised to see X-Plane add-ons being made, they simply sell. -------------------------- Aerosoft does not ‘make’ the market, we follow. For sure we have commercial interests in X-Plane 11 and MFS and will promote these platforms. Openly. We are co-publisher for MFS (as we did the boxed version) and we have been co-publisher for X-Plane for the same reason and we still hold a lot of the Steam rights for that sim. We are proud of that. We invested hundreds of thousands of Euro's in those products. But we sell what customers want. I realize this message might sound vindictive. And to a certain degree, it is. I am upset about comments posted that have a hidden agenda. We do not delete them because that only boosts the ‘Aerosoft deletes all negative post’ idea. Which, again, is simply nonsense. If people claim that, ask them, what posts are deleted, the internet does not forget right? But again, if you see something posted that is rather negative, search Google for the poster. If the poster is not man enough to use his own name, that should tell you something. If he/she does us his own name, good for them, I respect that a lot. But check if they are selling P3D scenery (or tried to). I can understand they are upset if a business venture fails, been there. I do not understand how speaking bad about a competitor that is successful helps in any way. My name is Mathijs Kok and my work email, mathijs.kok@aerosoft.com, and my personal email, mathijs.kok@gmail.com are in no way hidden. You can find me on Skype, Discord, WhatsApp. Open visor. If you have a problem, let's talk. Now I will have another glass of wine. A good evening to all.
    40 points
  15. Update from the previous post Stefan just did some quick test. Now settings and hardware do not really play a role as it is the comparison that counts. CRJ, fully loaded on runway: 45 FPS Default Airbus, fully loaded on runway: 52 fps Now I have the idea that internal memory is important. We have all 32 Gb or more. MFS loves memory. But all in al, we are not afraid of the performance. Interestingly enough the texture load of the CRJ is 12% less then the default Airbus. Now, okay, a larger aircraft, but still. For people with a graphics card with a moderate amount of memory every megabyte helps! Last bit of news... Stefan spend this weekend adding more weathering to to the VC, fingerprints etc. Now this will be the last 'overall' images until release (we might show a menu here and there when needed). See it as a sign we get close. And feast your eyes. Click to see the images in the best resolution the forum allows. Look real close at the knobs to see the grime. It makes you want to disinfect the flight deck.
    38 points
  16. On Monday we will give all dates.
    38 points
  17. My friends (and I mean that).... I am closing this topic because it is counterproductive and toxic. Most people just seem to add without reading. Even more just start to click up and down votes without reading (I seen somebody come online and giving 9 downvotes in the first 92 seconds he was online). Some of the comments here are simply not acceptable. If you want to discuss things with those words there are dozens of forums on the internet. I will not allow my developers to be ridiculed here. Let's get a few points straight): We absolutely agree that ILS following should be better. Nobody has ever claimed anything else. Exactly what triggers the problems is impossible to determine at this moment, as we can all see it seems to affect some people way more than others. If we would know we might make a tweak, we simply do not know right now. We have tried really hard but using WASM coding it is simply very hard. The fact less complex aircraft can do it does not really mean a lot because we can't use XML/Java but have to use C++/WASM to do what we want to do. EVERY seriously complex aircraft you will see for MSFS will be using C++ and they will all face the same problems as we do. We have discussed these things WAY before release. We tried to be as open as possible about them. These issues have been discussed with Asobo and will be discussed again. We are to a large degree depending on what the simulator can deliver. We believe that at this moment, with our knowledge, ILS following is as good as the circumstances allow for a complex add-on that is forced to use C++/WASM. When you compare the CRJ to fantastic community efforts to enhance default aircraft, keep in mind none of them have 1/5th the code we use. And do keep in mind we love those efforts, we support them as much as we can. Just ask them. But the problem is that adding complexity on one hand using C++ locks you out of other things. That is the state of the sim at this moment. Just when I was very upset about this topic, I got a mail. From a CRJ pilot who invited me a few times to his flightdeck. He even allowed me a few seconds of time on the stick. I copy a few lines of his mail: "Simmers always seem to believe airliners are perfect machines. I can't even start to count the times I decide my aircraft systems started to do something I did not agree with. In these cases I did not post a message on a forum, but switched off the system, looked at the paper chart and flew the damned procedure. And if you ask my right seatert a lot better than the systems would ever be able to do. I am trained to do this shit you know? I agree with your customers that your CRJ sometimes messes up a glideslope. The real CRJ does that (1990 systems) I have no idea why. But I have never messed up a touchdown because of it. If your customers do, tell them they have a yoke, rudders and throttles. I have never met a pilot who believed a computer could approach/land better than he could. " If you have anything to tell us that is not covered by post, feel free to make a new post, with details etc. Honestly, we want to solve this issue, make a new topic is you have new information. If you simply do not want to believe what we (I) tried to explain, just vote this post down. I got something like 38.000 upvotes. I can stand a few downvotes from people who just want to click. In the ten years we use this system I have not even removed down votes from a person who believed the earth was flat and we (Aerosoft) supported Bill Gates to create a world dominating government. Every other downvote is still there. Feel free to downvote the absolutely factual post from Hans. Those downvotes however will be deleted by me because I know what Hans wrote is 100% true.
    37 points
  18. I can confirm the A330 has priority at this moment.
    36 points
  19. As some people felt the sides of the door were not in the level of detail they should be... At least it is clear we listen to what people comment on.
    36 points
  20. Check this out:, a preview of the Come Fly With me videos (https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/1061-come-fly-with-me-by-the-dude/)
    36 points
  21. I have seen some questions about wingflex on other sites. Now, readers here know why we do not care a lot but let me go over it one more time to close the discussion ones and for all. The CRJ has very stiff and rather short wings, it is not an A330 with huge floppy wings. That's why the CRJ is not the most very comfortable aircraft in turbulence. It is like sportscar with stiff suspension. We know exactly how stiff the wings are and we know exactly what force makes them flex. As we can calculate the forces rather easy we know how much the wing tip should move if it was to be realistic. When we use those parameters, inside MFS looking at wingtips from the cockpit at 50% zoom, on a 4K display, 90% of the movements would be less then 15 pixels up and down. You would need to look carefully to see it. Only at strong forces, rough landing, very serious turbulence. would it be more. And in these cases we hope the pilot is looking at the flightdeck instruments and to where he is going instead at how cool the wingtips are going up and down. Did you know the CRJ has a extremely stiff body? It is designed to withstand a wheels up landing! That means that the vertical tail is also very stiff. It hardly moves. Look at the an A330 and see how much the tip of the tail moves side to side. It's impressive, yet have you ever seen a an FS addon model that? Probably not because passengers do not see that so easy. Yet it is a fact. Have you ever seen how flexible the engine of a 747 are mounted? Certainly at take-off they can have very different AoA. Up to 15%. Now this is something a passenger can see but no simmer seems to ask for that even though it is a very alarming sight to see the engine pointing up and the other down. Ask me why I know. Wing flex is not very mature in MFS, just as it was not in P3D. It is impossible to get the animation fast enough or precise enough. Fact is that most wing flex in P3D is more aimed at what customers expect then it is realistic. It is based on YT video's that show wildly moving wings, but if you look at most of these videos you see the camera is moving more than the wingtips. Video's with a static mounted camera are very rare. We have some for the CRJ and we these confirm our ideas. Most wing flex in FS add-ons if overdone. Overdone because customers feel it should be visible. Making wings on a small aircraft like the CRJ flex is complex. Do you calculate them from the wheels on the ground (on the ground most wings flex the most) or the centerline as they would in the air? Do you calculate flaps, spoilers? If these are extended wing flex is totally different from a 'clean' wing. Do you calculate them with wing tanks full or empty (on a CRJ that does not matter a lot but on an Airbus that influence is massive, full tanks stiffen up the wings a lot). All in all we simple felt like we could not do wing flex on the CRJ in a way that would be cheap enough on our development while still being reasonably realistic. Not for the 15 pixels of animation. Not for a 40 Euro add-on. Now if this would be a 100 Euro add-on I would most certainly want to see the data we have implemented. It is not so important that customers would not see 90% of the actual animation as it are tiny ripples or a few centimeters of movement. If you have that data and you do what many people like to call a study level add-on, by all means include it. Just as you should include tail flex. For this project we decided not to bother as, realistically, it does not matter a lot for 99.999% of the time you fly. If you feel that is unacceptable I am sure there will be another add-on that does have wing flex as you prefer it to be. If the company that makes that can show you that their animation is accurate, so much the better! I know some do care about this. Now my post is not an invite to revitalize this discussion again. We have been having it at least 20 times and our point of view has never changed and it will not change. We have had input from pilots, people who know about metal flexing and people who design aircraft. We have the actual data of the stress tests. We take that input over YouTube videos. Not open for discussion.
    36 points
  22. We have to start a preview post about our Airbus Microsoft Flight Simulator projects at some time, so why not now? As most people will know we have three aircraft projects for MFS in development at this moment. All of them are complete new builds using as much of the fantastic features of the new simulator as possible. In order of scheduled release these are the CRJ 500/700 (followed up by the CRJ 900/1000), the Twin Otter and finally the Airbusses. We have at this moment 3 people working on the 'systems'. Over the next few months that will grow to 6 people. Feel free to comment, ask or rant, we will reply when we can, but as this is a project in pretty early stages of development, please accept that we are not ready to share a lot. To avoid a negative flow on this topic, let's agree that we'll reply when we can and want, and will not reply when we do not want, okay? Seeing a dozen "we are nor ready to discuss that yet" comments every day just looks nasty. But is you have any wishes, feel we should absolutely do this or that and we should never do that or this, please let us know. I assure you we read every comment. This project will be in the same 'idea' as we have done before, we focus on the job of the captain, rather than on the system. That means we rather include a fully working cockpit door system that is used every 30 minutes then a dual generator failure that has happened twice in all the hours (20 million plus) that these aircraft have flown. Pilots deal with sick passengers, drunk passengers, blocked toilets, missing catering, crashed multimedia systems etc etc on a daily base. A broken engine is something they might see once or twice in their career. Ohhh, of course you want a picture... Here you go. That how it looks at this moment. And that is because we have not yet started on the model/texturing. That will start soon and then things will start to look nice. At this moment it is really the core systems that are worked on. Again, we'll reply when we got something to say. Do not be upset if we do not comment on your question, that only means we are not able or willing to reply. We do love your input though!
    35 points
  23. 20:58.... started at 08:00. Time for some wine, some food, walking the dog, talking to the horses and perhaps some incredibly stupid TV. I can recommend that to anybody!
    35 points
  24. Yes and I apologize for that. We have no idea what actually happened but it seemed we upset some people in the FBW Discord channel. Now that is weird as I promoted that project several times and still consider it one of the coolest things in MFS at this moment. Some of the people from that forum chat made several account to avoid limitations and used them to upvote there own posts. Something the FBW Discord channel frowns up on seriously. These are NOT public forums, these are our company forums. We decide what is acceptable and not. There are many forums where you can say what you want. Not here. If I see nonsense being posted that affects our products I will try to explain. If that does not help and the same incorrect information is posted we will take some action. That same information is then send from a new account from the same IP we have had enough. The FBW project has our love and admiration, the fact some people had misguided ideas does not change that in any way.
    35 points
  25. The first episode of the Come Fly with Me series is now online! Check it out:
    35 points
  26. Friends, might I ask for a Christmas cease fire on this topic? The reason I posted what I did was because when a company changes its communication I believe it is best to simply say so. It is part of my idea to be as open as possible to customers. You share the good and the bad. In my experience 90% of customers just understand things when you explain them and even are okay when you say that, for what reason or another, you are not able to explain. Aerosoft is not a small company any more. We got departments, offices, floors, managers. In 2020 I got two new full time employees in my development teams. We are building up a far more solid quality control team, in any way we are growing, expanding and trying to be the best possible partners for those who work for us, those who work with us and those who we want to sell our products to. Now in some areas we will not communicate as we did before. And exactly why is just one of the areas I am simply not going to be able to explain in full detail. Any conjecture on that is just that, conjecture. And as such, in my opinion, better suited for non commercial forums. After all, no matter how you look at it, I work for Aerosoft and thus anything I write in a topic about a non release product is marketing. If I tell you Hans, Stefan, Alexander and all the other involved are doing a kick ass job that is because I know they do. But again that is marketing. And that is a part of Aerosoft we want to streamline. What we can and will say depends on the product, the people involved, the platform and possibly a dozen more reasons. So while we are not sharing a lot about the CRJ, check out this: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/158053-cpdlc/ to see we can be more public in other topics. So, just do not see what I said as being a standard for all proiects, for all platforms. I believe most readers here will know I (we) just love showing of what our teams are doing. These are my friends who are setting new standards. Take my word, what I can show will be on here in seconds. But how and when will simply have to be coordinated differently. That's all. Nothing more. Cease fire. Please.
    35 points
  27. We are still tweaking the manuals a bit, but as I promised to deliver them a week before release, here they are: Vol1_Aircraft Operating Manual_Part-1.pdf Vol2_Quick Reference Guide.pdf Vol3_Tutorial.pdf Vol4_Normal Ops Checklist.pdf Vol5_Aircraft Operating Manual_Part_2.pdf Vol6_FMS.pdf If anybody sees some error, please drop me message at mathijs.kok@aerosoft.com
    34 points
  28. Nice catch! That image was not supposed to be there and we have tracked down how it got there. Not a big deal but we got a pretty very marketing department who (as I as project manager) want to control what is shown. It is all a storm in a teacup, all solved, no harm. But the simple fact is that the aircraft is shared with a lot of people already. Not only with our core testers (people who we worked with for many years) or experts (real pilots, mechanics etc) but also with people that we want to keep informed. It is unavoidable that something like this slips out. We notice, we ask the websites to be careful. But in this case we got no problem and I told Calum to leave the image online. But I love the way you noticed. You earned a free CRJ. When we release drop me a mail at mathijs.kok@aerosoft.com ND I will get you the aircraft for free.
    34 points
  29. We are hurrying up.... And even though a project manager will always find something to complain, things are going simply pretty damned good. We lost a week on the schedule a few months back because we still needed to define things, we lost another week when people decided they needed vacations (tjeeee....) and another week when we decided to add the skydiver version. But the progress is steady and scheduled and believe you me, that is rare. It is kick ass team that works on this project. The sim suits this project very well but still, it is the developers that count.
    33 points
  30. Since my last video YouTube has been so kind as to process my videos faster. Going from the upload to 4K streaming only took 5 minutes instead of the usual hours and hours. Here you go, Episode 4!
    33 points
  31. The Delta, one of the last liveries we wanted to add is ready,
    33 points
  32. Quick note..... No need to F5 right now. It will be very clear when we are days from release. Right now things are going great. I just completed the complete release document for our departments. That document helps to get every things aligned. From the people who need to add the product to the shop pages, via the people who make the installers, the people who add it to the Microsoft shop, the marketing department, the server people (as they will need to get enough bandwidth) ending up with the support crew. Fact is we are close to going to Release Candidate. That's the one we share with our friends on other sites with permission to show and tell. At that moment only the smallest tweaks can be done, the code needs to be stable and mature a few days. It is the first time the code is shared with people who are no in our 'circle of control' so if there is anything our extremely extensive testing has not found we hope it pops up at that time. People who know me will be surprised about this cautious attitude. I have always been a huge fan of releasing when we were happy and being honest with customers, see what bugs them most and focus on that. Releasing is just the moment when you start working to customer wishes and not on your own ideas. But this will simply not work well with this release. We are aiming at a a huge customer base, many of them will never have flown a more complex aircraft before. One with a few hundred pages of manuals. We are fully happy with progress. And there is one person who guessed the release date right.
    33 points
  33. Mathijs, If you wouldn't mind, I would take back to the higher ups that this is quite a shame and I think a poor strategy in both marketing and sales. What you're doing in this thread is actually typical of modern marketing for boutique products such as the CRJ. I actually decided to purchase the CRJ specifically because of your open communication and insight into the process and development of the product. There was no other factor that played more of a role in my decision. I've also seen the Aerosoft CRJ featured in multiple videos on YouTube and multiple news articles on large flight simulator websites purely due to your comments and information in this thread. That's FREE advertising! The videos and articles were very complementary and very pro-Aerosoft as well. It doesn't change my decision to buy at this point because you, Mathijs, have personally already sold me on the product, but if I was interested in the CRJ and didn't have this information I can certainly say I'd be taking much more of a "wait and see" approach to the product and it certainly would not be a day 1 purchase for me. Hopefully if enough people express this opinion management might decide to walk it back a little. As always, take it easy for Christmas and don't burn yourselves out. Spend time with family and friends. Merry Christmas, Matt W.
    33 points
  34. Going to defend PMDG here. Robert is a good friend and PMDG and Aerosoft have been working together for a very long time. Although PMDG and Aerosoft aim for different goals in aircraft simulation (they want to simulate the aircraft, we focus on being a airliner captain) we have a very good idea about the costs in development and support. In the very limited market we have all been working for, what they asked was a solid price. If there are 30.000 potential customers for your product and a good deal of those are not 'ready' for a complex add-on like the PMDG 737, you are left with a limited group of people and as developer/publisher you have to make hard choices. PMDG decide to go for the top end. The really hardcore simmers for who the price of an aircraft is not a big deal. If you fly 6 hours a week (as many do) and do that for a year you logged close to 350 hours. That is less than half a dollar per hour. Find me any hobby that has costs like that. I drive 1970 British sports cars as a hobby. And though I spend a lot of time hiding the cost from my wife, I can tell you that per hour driving it is a lot more. Now with MFS we are poking around in the dark. Scenery sells very very easy. That is driving the prices of those products down. Market forces at work just as they should. For aircraft this has not happened yet as there are simply no aircraft for sale with the complexity of our CRJ, let alone the depth of a PMDG 737. So we simply do not know how much we will sell. If it turns out that is much higher then we now think (hope?), there will be others that will start to sell solid products a lower prices and that will drive the price down. Exactly as it should be. Customer determine where prices are. Everybody doing FS add-ons has been working on razor thin margins for a long time and not having MFS products to sell and P3D add-ons simply not selling for many teams things are getting grim. That is why I said that they teams that have money on the bank will be in the best position at this moment. If you have 6 people in a team working on new aircraft you are burning through 35.000 a month at least (Euro or Dollar) and that is just cost before you can release. Marketing, installers, testing, PR, add another 30.000 on top of that. After release you most likely have you whole dev team still on the product but now also your support department is starting to eat up money like you never seen before. Your monthly burn rate after release can peak at 50.000 if you are lucky. At least you are selling at that time. When I started managing FS add-ons I was handling projects that had a total cost of 15.000 Euro/Dollar. Now there are days in a project when we burn through that. A quarter of a million? I need to ask my CEO to spend that, but he will sigh and sign off. Half a million on a project, he will moan and sign. And you know... prices of add-ons on average have not gone up much. The MadDog I sold 20 years back cost the same as the CRJ now. There is 100 times more code and over 500 times more polygons (!) in the model, but the price is the same. As said margins are razor thin for many years. How many dev teams active then are no longer active now? How many dev teams are now based in low cost countries or in tax heavens to make ends meet? So if PMDG asks $140 for an add-on I am pretty sure they know what they are doing. I (Aerosoft) would not go that way, but that is fine. We do not make the same products and we do not aim for the same customers. But I have full respect for their 737 just as I know they have it for what we do. The problem I have and Robert does not, is that people compare products without taking price into account, lol. But that has been happening for over a decade and we learned to deal with it. If you say the FSL airbus is better than ours, I say that first of all we make a very different product (look, pilots have to know how to open the cockpit door to get coffee, aircraft run on coffee and petrol, and they have to manage many bits of paper on every flight, do crew management etc. All things we simulate) and that if you compare a product to another product that is twice as expensive you better have some damned good arguments. And buying PMDG products helps keeping a DC3 in the air! Robert flown his DC3 to our office and took some staff for a ride. How cool is that? I apologize for any of our staff in shorts. It was a very hot day. No excuse, I know.
    33 points
  35. You might think so, but not really. I spoke to everybody on the team this afternoon and we simply do not know what we can do right now to make things better. I am working with the support team to make sure support is done as efficient as possible (https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/1085-frequently-asked-questions/) and Hans and the test team are flying. They done several flights today with zero issues. Hans, Stefan, Alexander did all they could, now it is up to my team of support to handle the release. Did I ever tell you how incredibly stupid it is to be the project manager of a project AND be the support manager? So I am responsible for the bugs and the efforts to support it. I am screwed I tell you, screwed.
    32 points
  36. Want to hear something you probably NEVER heard a project manager say publicly? I do not want to raise the price of this product even though everybody tells me I should. They have good reasons. I do not know any project with better modeling/texturing (Jae and Anne are really doing a remarkable job and it is all 101% MSFS without any P3D imports), Alexander and Hans are really going for state of the art in the flight model and instruments. Sounds will be fully MSFS standard, no P3D files. There will be a 100+ page manual with several tutorial flights. The biggest argument the 'raise the price' people have is the amount of models. Normal wheels, tundra wheels, ski, floats, amphib, 3 blade prop, 4 blade prop, long nose, short nose, we cover it all. Check out ANY other MSFS add-on aircraft and you will find none that even comes close. Not even in the same ballpark. I really want this to be the ultimate aircraft to explore the MSFS world. At a sub 30 Euro price (ex VAT of course). If I ever took a gamble hoping that low price = loads of sales will work, this is the one. I have never been a fan of $100+ prices for add-ons because you reach a limited number of, pretty high demanding (and they should) customers.
    31 points
  37. Proof is the pudding. Just check the vids https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/1061-come-fly-with-me-by-the-dude/. If you believe this is not complex enough for you, just wait. For me it is. Keep in mind that what you read might have a reason. Development teams that did not jump on MFS and now are late, development teams that were refused access to MFS channels etc. For our internal aircraft development we made a very clear decision, while we still update P3D projects (like the busses with CPDLC) our focus is on MFS. Everybody makes his own choices and just as I am pushing MFS others will be pushing P3d V4.
    31 points
  38. Now that is a post that I seriously appreciate. When we release contact me on Mathijs.Kok@aerosoft.com and I'll see that the core team at your side will get a free copy.
    31 points
  39. This is what really sucks about the flight sim community. Aerosoft does something awesome and shows us previews PRE RELEASE which they don't have to and are extremely open to suggestions . They build an aircraft that looks to be AMAZING quality for only the price of lunch at a nice restaurant. And what do some people do? they complain about the most absurd shit. "the wingflex" "the cockpit door" and funniest of all "the inside of the door texture" which is about the dumbest thing to complain about yes we get it its not 90K quality but who cares it's the inside of a door you never look at, this is not door repair simulator, it's a flight simulator. We should thank Aerosoft for even showing us previews..
    31 points
  40. Just some more images as I got nothing else to report today (we are awaiting some files later today). We have also had some discussion on the lighting. MFS does a pretty good job of simulating the very harsh light conditions over 10.000 feet. So when you look outside the pit will look dark, if you look down it will look far brighter. Up Something in between..... Down.
    31 points
  41. There will be another way to learn about this aircraft. A good friend, a real pilot with thousands of hours on the CRJ will be doing short training 'sessions'. These will consist of short (say between 5 and 10 min) video's about certain aspects of the aircraft.The first one will be called, 'Bring Your Coffee and Let's Sit Down".
    31 points
  42. Alexander was working on views and his screenshots are really nice and crisp...
    31 points
  43. Just some information we did not share yet: CRJ 550/700 42,01€ (plus VAT when applicable) CRJ 550/700/900/1000 58,82€ (plus VAT when applicable) CRJ 900/1000 Upgrade 16,80€ (plus VAT when applicable) Please note the 900/1000 upgrade assume the 550/700 is installed, it is not a stand alone version Unable to give a release date, but we are in the holding awaiting clearance. We assume the product will be released in the Marketplace at the same time as we release it.
    30 points
  44. Hello everybody! I have some good news and some bad news for you. Let's start with the bad news. Due to technical reasons, the release of the CRJ-900 and -1000 needs to postponed until a later date, most likely late September or October. We regret this, but we explored all options and there is no way around. Now for the good news: The CRJ updates for compatibility issues with Sim Update 5 have been completed and are being readied for release as we speak. They should become available in the next couple of days. The nice folks at Asobo were able to identify and fix an issue in the WASM runtime (which is part of the SDK, but open source, so it's not made by either Asobo or us) and by this, to put the airspeed indicator in the CRJ back in action, without requiring a hotfix for Flight Simulator itself. Other issues (e.g. texture and shadow quality) have been fixed by our own developers. More good news: Testing of the CRJ on the Xbox platform will begin shortly. We have no specific release date planned so far though. Kind regards Winfried
    30 points
  45. The issue is fixed on my end. I asked my testers to check it now and then I will send it to Microsoft for adding to the marketplace. Unfortunately, I don't have any influence (other than saying please please please) to speed up the process on their end. The reason for the issue is, that apparently none of the whole testing group uses a single axis controller. Therefore we simply didn't come across the problem. This really was unnecessary and I am the only one to blame here. I apologize to everybody for this mishap. I'm going to lock this thread now and write up a guide how to delete the M-files as soon as I have a minute.
    30 points
  46. As project manager I am only losing a moderate amount of sleep over this. Fact is that these are things you try to calculate in but that only works up to point. Look, I do follow the chats where this is discussed. I actually get paid to read these things. Sometimes it feels like I am not paid enough. But we feel the changes that Asobo made are correct. They fix problems and we will end up with a better simulator. Unless you build your own OS and application you are always working in a fluid environment. Remember FSX? After 2 years we had two patches and were left with a huge list of bugs and issues. The things that were fixed were sometimes very weird, even stranger were things that were not fixed (my favorite, how light systems were linked to one switch). Now we have Asobo that clearly reads the forums and has send out more patches then FSX ever had. Even if not everything is perfect, I greatly prefer that. The guys at Asobo are cool.
    30 points
  47. On behalf of Majestic Software, I agree entirely with Mathijs. It is so important to cooperate especially on a challenging subject of MSFS2020, because every addon that is available for any sim platform constitutes to the interest to flight simming in general, and indirectly benefits all the addon developers. And if we think how much the complexity of addons, especially aircraft addons, have increased since FS9 - I wouldn't be surprised if we soon consider sharing the knowledge on a regular basis in order to help each other. There is a lot in the addon development that is not aircraft specific and would benefit all. And if Microsoft/Asobo helps us all to get the interfaces we need for MSFS2020, we are looking at a major jump in the flight sim realism in the next few years
    30 points
  48. Dear friends, it is time to introduce you to a new Aerosoft development, Aerosoft One. It will be launched pretty soon and will change the way you install our products. Aerosoft One is a tool that makes extremely simple to install and update your Aerosoft products. It does more, we will get to that later, but the main task is to make sure the files on your system are always up to date. When you have bought a product (you can do so securely from the browser inside Aerosoft One) you do no longer have to download the installer, just go to Library, find your new product, and click install. The product will then be downloaded and installed. To check if there are new versions, click go to Update and click update. That is all you need to know. We like to keep things simple. As said, Aerosoft One does a bit more. You can quickly see our news, visit the shop, find all your serials, access our forums and support options and find the most important parts of our websites. It is called Aerosoft One because it is a one stop method of using all we have to offer! In the next few weeks we’ll share more information, show some more features and gladly answer any of your questions. Let me share some images that will show you how things actually are presented to you. Here you see all the MSFS products actually supported by Aerosoft One (at the start not everything will be included but we’ll quickly expand that! In this screen you can see what MSFS products you have already installed and can find more information on that product. Aerosoft One offers you complete freedom where to install the DLC, but will give you some very solid advise on what to avoid. On the Queue display you can see what you have downloads, what is being downloaded and what will be downloaded.
    29 points
  49. So, after a very busy period it is now the time of football and warm summer evenings. That means things for us slow down a bit (you have no idea how much these things affect our sales, give us a rainy, windy. cold long weekend and we make a lot of money), I got glass of wine, it is 19:30, Wales is winning from Turkey and I got little else to do. So let me explain what the this Twin Otter project is intended to be. First of all, the aircraft that we are doing for MSFS fall in to price ranges. 50 and 25 euro/dollars, That does not mean we'll not do a 30 euro/dollar one or a 70 dollar/euro one, but they are two different levels. The CRJ, Airbusses etc will all be in the 50 euro/dollar range. They are pretty complex, have 100+ pages of manuals and are thus for a limited audience. No matter how it seems, in the 30 years (yes party this year) we have been doing this we have learned that complex aircraft get a lot of attention, less complex aircraft get a lot of sales. Our Twin Otters have been selling very well for over 10 years. They are the products we make our money on over the long run. At a certain moment we think a 100 euro/dollar aircraft for MSFS will be viable but we simply are not at that point right now. The Twin Otter is in the 25 euro/dollar class. (might be 29, we'll see) That is a decision we took after a lot of discussion. See it is a pretty complete project. You get 3 base models and many variants, like normal wheels, tundra wheels, floats, amphibian, and ski, many of those in cargo and pax versions. in and many liveries. Try to find ANY MSFS add-on that offers a selection like that. It is also most likely the most modern model when it releases. As the Xbox is a platform we want to use we had to use the very latest technology. While we are not yet released I am going out on limb here and say that when we release it will be the most advanced modeling available. Big words and feel free to tell me if I am wrong when we release. I think it looks kick-ass. In essence, the Twin Otter was designed to go anywhere. And we used that as the basic idea for the project. If there is a few hundreds of meters of more or less flat surface you can land. Water or land, tarmac or mud, snow or water. We got the Twotter that will land there. It is the ideal aircraft to explore the fantastic world that Asobo created. In a few days I will post a series of images of all models Moving on to flight models and engines. At this very moment a bit of an open issue, but Alexander, who handles that, will refuse to release file to me that he is not happy with. And believe me, he is critical. What we are aiming for is beyond what FSX or P3D could offer. Our friends at Asobo are assisting. It is hard to explain how important this is. In P3D this was possible, but only if you move the engine and flight model OUTSIDE the sim. And then, you are not talking about a 250 euro/dollar product. What's left? Ahhh gauges and displays. Here we made some very strong choices. The 'steam' gauges are rather special. They are really accurate to match the more advanced engine model. Asobo offered us new interfaces and these are really something we have not seen before. For the navigation instruments we have decided to use the default systems of MSFS. This decision was done after a lot of discussion. Making our own would move the project into the 50 euro/dollar range and would make it MUCH harder to be able to use the Twin Otter on Xbox (more on that below). But not only that, the default gauges are simply not bad and get better every month. We realized the people who expected a hardcore Twin Otter will now have steam coming out of every orifice, but that is not correct. It is pretty hardcore. In modeling, flightmodel, sounds, effects, instruments, manuals, models, variations and liveries we dare you to find anything that competes in that price level. And keep in mind we did a Twin Otter Extended before, so while we go for a low price, loads of sales model first, who knows when we see the option for a PC only version that offers more depth at a higher price level. On Xbox. We know most add-on developers simply do not see this as an important market (a bit because it is so hard to buy one), but we disagree. We do not think a super high end (100 euro/dollar) add-on will ever do well on Xbox. But a Twin Otter that is designed to be used with an Xbox controller that lets you explore the world.... yeah that will work. Put the sim on your TV and it becomes a surprisingly social game. I done it with family, we tried to find all of their houses, places they went on vacation, the place they were born. Three hours of some of the best flight simming I ever did. And challenging as weather got worse and worse. I had to work real hard on navigation. The Twotter will be perfect for flights like that. You got some speed, can fly slow and low and can land almost everywhere. 20:45 now, time for some food and a new football match. Glass empty. I hope I was able to explain the 'base' of this project. I would enjoy your comments. complaints, kudo's, rants, raves or whatever you like to say.
    29 points
  50. No, I would say we are at the gate and preparing to start the engine. I do not want to create ideas that are not intended. We are at the hugely complex stage where we need to decide if what we got is good enough. As you will understand this is a hugely important project for us. You have really no idea how much effort and how much time was poured into this. It is by far the most complex project I have worked on in the 20+ years I am doing this. Not because the add-on is the most complex but there are so many bits and people that had (have) to work together to make this happen. Some projects are a labour of love. The Catalina we did for example. Everybody did that project because we just love that big lumbering weird aircraft. This was not a project like this. We wanted to proof MFS really IS a serious platform for more complex aircraft. Obviously it is a simulator with the graphical power to look like no sim ever did. But it was up to Hans (and Alexander) to show the WASM coding could do complex systems. And that was not easy as we simply had no experience to base our work on. This project was just damned hard work. A lot of the time frustrating. When TheDude posted his cloud surfing video this afternoon I was really happy, because it is so easy to lose track of how far we have progressed. If you are looking at bits you tend not to see the bytes. Are we fully happy at this moment? No, but I have never worked on a DLC where literally everybody in the team did not feel we could make things better. But when that would be inserted, they would just find the next thing. A real good development team has to be 'peeled' off a development to start something new because they will always default to just add that one last bit, and then the next last bit. I am honored to work with the people I talk to day in and out. I might be the one visible, but they do the work. In the last few weeks I seen people work 20 hour days, others coming back from a more than deserved vacation to solve issues.
    29 points
×
×
  • Create New...