We got a new video from World of Aircraft: Glider Simulator and are asking for some alpha/beta testers! Check this post.


Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About ahuimanu

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Solo

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It is a feature and it is horrible. PLEAS PLEASE PLEASE aerosoft: Let us disable EFB (I realize it is a part of the model, but please let us disable it) Allow the EFB to pick up the login WITHOUT having to close and reopen the sim (or even go to another aircraft and back) Let us disable charts Allow us to lower the brightness I get set up for a flight, do all the preparation, and then have this happen to me. Even worse, I switch back to NavDataPro (I don't subscribe) as the Charts provider and the configurator does not obey the selection. PLEASE MAKE CHARTS OPTIONAL! The non-optional EFB has not made the Airbus Family a better product for me. Jeff
  2. I had this error the other night. As with others, only with the A330.
  3. There are many concessions made in this product, and many of the aerosoft airbuses before them to accommodate simmers: The settings/3rd MCDU Pause at TOD Instant loading via the settings MCDU "magic" pushback mechanisms through the MCDU The checklist/autopilot feature Controlling the doors from the settings MCDU ACFT Thrust Bump And others I'm sure I failed to cover. As it has been nearly 6 months since the OP's request, I ask Aerosoft to consider this vital feature for long haul pilots who might want to do other things (and like the OP sleep for a bit) during a 8+ hour flight. I see no difference between the logic of Pause at TOD and Auto Step Climb. I am afraid that a high reluctance to implement that which is not in the real plane has already been yielded to other creature comforts to make the simmer's life easier and use of the product more enjoyable. I did my first long haul from LFPO to KSFO in the A330-343 last night, which should be reasonably within the A330-343's capabilities (air distance of 5125 nm last night) and, given that I had to pick a compromise set altitude, I was barely able to make it. I love the product (the flight was amazing), but please consider allowing users a fuller experience by implementing an Auto Step Climb feature. Thank you for considering this request.
  4. Hi, Great trick that I didn't think of. Thank you.
  5. Hello, as I have P3D4.5 and P3D5 installed, is there a way to export to both? Also, since other third-parties install to both folders, who about supporting add-ons for both? Am I missing something?
  6. where are the beta versions? Everytime I log into the aerosoft updater, it doesn't show betas.
  7. If Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 turns out to be our "No Man's Sky," I'll at least be entertained. Its a shame that P3D4x didn't take us where we thought we were headed. I remember the heady days of the 64-bit onset of P3Dv4 in 2017 and thought we'd finally have a settling in period. Then XP11 took off. The add-on market feels less settled as a result. MFS2020 is being made out to be the second coming, I hope all eggs aren't going into a single basket. Microsoft is certainly going to deflate P3Dv5 and I can't see how folks will shell out to realize their sim dreams in Prepar3d, XP11/12, and MFS. That'd be like getting the same game for Playstation, Xbox, and Sega (or whatever). The baby buses seem to be in good enough shape and provide more value than other alternatives.
  8. Thank you Joan, This line: (A:SIM ON GROUND, bool) 1 ==  Wouldn't be working on its own because it is not conditional to the if statement without the && operator (& & because it is an XML file)
  9. Writing about a 320 CFM kit as well please.
  10. Joan, Replacing line 7: (L:ABrkactiv, number) 0 == is an operand in the compound condition from this original portion of the file: (L:ABrkactiv, number) 0 == ((L:ABrkactivlst, number) 2 != && Did you mean to replace those operands with your statements? (A:SIM ON GROUND, bool) 1 == (A:BRAKE INDICATOR,position) 0.6 > && I am so eager to have autobrakes again and I wonder if by replacing the original you are breaking something else? Would you be willing to attach the whole file or at least screen shot this part?
  11. Back to partially answer my own question, A:BRAKE INDICATOR is a built-in simulation variable: http://www.prepar3d.com/SDKv4/sdk/references/variables/simulation_variables.html#Aircraft Controls Variables No matter what deadzone I put in for these MFG pedals, they do not return to zero on the toe brake axes and I think this is making the logic in this gauge disconnect the AB. Aerosoft, help?
  12. I am writing to both thank and follow up with Joan Alonso. Joan, in the original thread you discuss updating the ABRK.xml file with these lines: Replace the 7th line of the file: (L:ABrkactiv, number) 0 == by this two lines: (A:SIM ON GROUND, bool) 1 == (A:BRAKE INDICATOR,position) 0.6 > I understand the first variable and expression, but want to discuss the 2nd. I have better behavior with your solution but it is not yet perfect because I think the sophistication of the original approach, in terms of whether one's hardware is perfectly calibrated, is a confounding issue. Specifically, does this line (A:BRAKE INDICATOR,position) 0.6 > test to see if the brake indicator's position is above 60% deflection? Would that mean that I've applied more than 60% of the travel available in the controller axis I'm using for toe brakes? With your adjustments, I see that the decel light stays open longer but I still have the autobrake disconnect. Although I have adjusted deadzones with these pedals (MFG crosswind) to ensure good autobraking with PMDG aircraft, I still seem to cause the Aerosoft airbus to disconnect. Is the 0.6 value from 0 to 1? Aerosoft, as an aside, it seems to only add to difficulty to close these threads prematurely when it is possible that any of these issues can arise again. Making "subject heading version x" headings seems inefficient.
  13. I have this same issue: any fix where I don't have to edit source files? I would have preferred to keep that original discussion going.
  14. I made a quick test based on what Captain Tim says here and he's right, all of the fields from the OFP manual work when you create a file for crew info. Not sure how useful this is right now because I can't figure out how to get this into a briefing package.
  15. I encountered the problem in this thread too. How can I fix this myself?
  • Create New...