Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by PatrickZ

  1. Ryanair flies to the real Brussels as well, just like they fly to Brussels South (Charleroi). But as you said, no need to discuss that one here. No need to discuss it anywhere I would say because there is a good Charleroi scenery already. So let's keep it to Zaventem.
  2. I guess that's because of a technical issue, the release date cannot be empty. There needs to be something. But as long as I can remember Aerosoft has always said you shouldn't look at that because it's just a meaningless placeholder. Maybe it's an idea to put in some date in the far future. That's the way we do it at my work. For some issues we need to fill out a date when they will be fixed, but we don't know that until they have been fixed. In that case we enter the furthest date wich the software accepts, wich is 31-12-2099.
  3. If you look at the Simware site for this product (link in my post above) it also says FS9+FSX+P3D there. Not that it matters for me, I'm using FSX anyway. But once stated you can't get back on it without a good reason, so I'd like to hear that reason.
  4. Allright. I was asking this because it's also listed on the website of the Aviation Megastore in the Netherlands, but usually they sell the Aerosoft boxed version instead of the Simware.
  5. Just a question. Is this the same product or have you got competition? http://www.simw.com/flight-simulator-add-ons/brussels-airport-fs9-fsx-p3d.html?___store=sen&___from_store=sfr
  6. The reason the surroundings look flat could be because they are flat. It's supposed to look that way.
  7. All I found out is that it's a rather new building. In Google Streetview it's nothing but a grass field (the GA-terminal next to it is under construction). In Google Maps with satellite images it's under construction and in Google Earth it's finished.
  8. This has been discussed so many times, if you use the search function you'll find everything you need to know. But for your information, there's no other publisher that releases as much FS9 sceneries as Aerosoft does. But the market for FS9 keeps shrinking and therefor it's not always possible to make an FS9 scenery without making too much loss on it. Eventually development for FS9 will come to an end, there'll be too few customers left. It's impossible to say when that will be, it depends on the market, but FS9 won't live forever. One day it'll be over.
  9. A mega airport usually takes about a year, depending on wich airport it is and who develops it. One developer is faster than the other. Some mega airports have taken up to 2 years development time, but I honestly don't expect that here. Release dates are never given, it's done when it's done. But certainly not within a few months.
  10. Looks like Brussels indeed, wich seems very logical. I assume it's done by DFS again since they did the previous (current) Mega airport Brussels too. And they're about to finish Rome, so it's time for their next project.
  11. From a management point of view there are roughly two aspects to Aerosoft products: quality and quantity. While quality is an ever raising line, Aerosoft keeps improving itself, I'm under the impression that the quantity of products is slightly going down. If you look at the number of products released per year, I think 2004 and 2005 were the top years. I remember lots of products from those days. Maybe I'm wrong, but if you compare that to 2011 and 2012 I think Aerosoft has produced less quantity. Again, nothing to complain about quality but that's not what this question is about. I don't have the exact numbers but I'm sure you do, and this leads to two questions. First one of course, is my impression right? Has the number of released products indeed gone down? Or is it just an image in my head? Question number two, are you planning on increasing it? Turning the downgoing line of quantity around and producing more products again? Maybe hire some more developers? Or do you satisfy in the current level of quantity?
  12. Indeed Aerosoft Stockholm Arlanda is the only payware scenery for FSX in the whole of Sweden. Back in the days of FS2004 you had SwedFlight but those sceneries don't work on FSX and they've got no plans on upgrading or redeveloping them. I do recall several Swedish airports often being mentioned as requests, but so far nothing has been done with it.
  13. No, I don't have any traffic add-on installed. There is no third party afcad file for Weeze present, only the one that came with the Aerosoft scenery.
  14. That makes me wonder Mathijs, Mega Airport Madrid is quite old too. It's still good, but will there be a new version of that one too?
  15. No, they're still floating however it does make a difference. With FS Global enabled, they float about 3 meters above the ground. When it's disabled, they float about 1,5 meters above the ground. Also with FS Global disabled the ground textures seem to be cripled, the platform and taxiways are fully grey without lines on them and the edges are not smooth. This might have to do with Flight1 Ultimate Terrain Europe wich modifies the terrain.cfg file. I've had a similar problem before with Lelystad. Lelystad was built to work with the original non-modified terrain.cfg file and gave problems with the modifications needed for Ultimate Terrain. However in this case the ground textures worked fine with FS global enabled. And another thing I noticed, with FS global disabled AESlite suddenly became active. There are busses driving around. I didn't miss it before, but now I noticed it was there suddenly. I guess AESLite is dependant on the airport height level too.
  16. I got a problem with the Aerosoft Weeze scenery in FSX. A group of trees just east of the terminal building seems to be floating in the air, instead of at the ground they float about 2 or 3 meters above it. Other trees are normal as far as I figured out so far, only those aren't. I don't know if it makes any difference, but I got FS Global 2010 installed. Could it be that this ground mesh places Weeze at a different hight than the default FSX?
  17. Who says I don't know? I may not have this specific scenery, but I do have others that require activation by the launcher and I know they keep working after uninstalling the launcher. It would only be logical to assume the same is the case with this scenery.
  18. But I assume you can uninstall the launcher after activating the scenery, you don't have to keep it. But I agree you must install it first in order to activate the scenery.
  19. Maybe it's because Englisch is the German word for English.
  20. I think there are some improvement points for Aerosoft in the story you wrote here Matthijs. For example, you said you hardly look at the competition when you decide on a project. I suggest you better do so, because it might make a difference in sales. Looking at myself, I certainly am an Aerosoft customer. I got a lot of Aerosoft products, but that doesn't mean you can take me for granted. I always make my own choices and sometimes the competition wins. For example, for Faro I'm using the TropicalSim scenery instead of the Aerosoft scenery. Not that I don't grant Aerosoft, but TropicalSim just offers a better product. The same might be the case here. I haven't decided yet wether I will buy the Aerosoft Dublin or the new Eiresim Dublin. I make my decision based on reviews and they're only available after release. You say one of your competition instruments is additional quality. Whatever comes with the scenery, like for example a manual in several languages. Honestly I got to admit I never read those manuals, I usually throw them away. So the product wouldn't be any less to me if there wasn't a manual. An installer I can understand, but for example UK2000 has good installers too. They might even have a higher protection level than Aerosoft. When I look at quality I look at the quality of the product itself. Does it look a bit nice? Are the taxi lines clearly visible? How do the buildings look? Are there no strange things in the scenery? Is it FPS friendly? That's quality for me, the rest doesn't matter. And I got to admit Aerosoft is not the only one doing a good job, there are more. I'm writing this not to burn you down, but to make Aerosoft an even better developer and publisher than they already are. PS If you thought no serious shop will sell products that are of lower quality, you might be wrong. Simmarket for example sells anything any developer has to offer, regardless of the quality.
  21. If I was Aerosoft I would at least contact Eiresim about this, maybe instead of compete you can coƶperate.
  22. Indeed this is already in FSX by default. FSX was originally developed in a time when most screens were regular 4:3 screens, no widescreen. Therefor this setting was set to false by default. But setting it to true means FSX is optimized for 16:9 widescreen display, wich in those days did exist but was rarely used.
  23. Somewhere I heard UK2000 had plans for something similar, but I don't know if that's true. It was just a rumour.
  24. Indeed I'm not Aerosoft, but I've been around long enough to know how Aerosoft thinks. I admit, sometimes I got a different opinion but in this case I agree with them. At least, if I know them well enough.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use