Aerosoft official retail partner for Microsoft Flight Simulator !! 
Click here for more information

Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aviator1985

  1. Looks like someone didn't run the pre-flight checklist item "coffee quantity". Luckily I don't drink coffee, but rumor has it that item is more important than fuel quantity on many airlines
  2. The question is how it got their, since a) I installed the A330 after the smaller busses and b) I was already using the FuelPlanner for the A330 without issues UPDATE: Reinstalling did the trick. Still a mystery how the old one got there in the first place. Oh well doesn't matter right now
  3. I will try that EDIT: I decided to reinstall the A330 to try to solve the FuelPlanner issue as well. My guess is that might help with the AP
  4. Hey there, I just noticed that my left side (HDG and SPD) are blank and the right side is cut off. I am pretty sure they were functioning normal after update. The only other change I did was install the trial flight model fix, which I then reverted back. Same problem.
  5. Already done that. I was then able to open the fuelplanner which showed the A318... when switching to the A330 I got another error message.. I was able to ignore it and put in some numbers, which was recognized by the aircraft then loading it in. Unfortunately I then encountered another issue with the MCP, but that's for another thread (unless I can find if someone else has posted that). Anyway upon returning to the fuelplanner I get the same error message I had to begin with.
  6. I am also getting an error message when trying to open the fuel planner. Only thing I have changed was installing the temporary flight model fix. I then reverted back to the original file with no help. I also deleted the FuelPlanner saved settings file, I could open the fuel planner again, but when selecting the A330 I got another "force quit" error message (which can be ignored). When I leave it at the A330 I get the same error message again as seen below
  7. I am not sure we are facing the same "issue" here but my A330 will also start rolling at idle upon releasing the brakes. The acceleration is slow but steady and won't stop requiring a regular application of brakes. My hardware throttles match the VC throttles. I will say that I had light loads due to short flights but it seems kind of strange Airbus would design an aircraft that needs regular braking activity during taxi. The B77L even at light loads would slowly bleed off GS at idle. I can't make any claims about realism, but the A330 is the first payware level jetliner that needs brakes during taxi. I always imagined if engines were that powerful to get the plane rolling at idle the GS would level off at below 10 kts or so.
  8. It's surely not un-flyable, but I too look forward for changes to the better. I don't know if the current aileron input logic is realistic or not. Perhaps a lot of P3D limitations, but I'll take a better responsiveness nonetheless if it can be achieved without causing other FDE aspects to break. Perhaps MSFS will provide a much better environment for this A330 should Aerosoft decide to bring it over.
  9. I will add myself to the list of those that notice slow response from the aircraft after input has been made. At first I thought it might be the larger aileron travel on the honeycomb yoke, but there certainly is a delay. The sidestick animation corresponds perfectly to my yoke inputs. While I think with a little getting used to hand flying is possible it sure feels a lot different than all the other planes I have (including the Aerosoft A320) and there isn't much difference among the others. I think the pitching thing is due to auto-trim? Perhaps switching FBW off might help for the time being?
  10. I don't think so as navigraph works fine for me. My thoughts are the A330 ships with the navdata pro set and if you want to use navigraph you'd need to update it for the A3XX
  11. I just did some fooling around and I think you can get used to it quickly. It will certainly pose a challenge when landing in Kai Tak (one of my planned flights with the A330), but I am sure it ain't impossible hehe 😉
  12. Hey Dave, I have actually done those steps before, but just in case have done so again. Nothing has changed and the yoke is actually configured correctly. The animations of the side-stick, ailerons and the white cross on the PFD respond perfectly to the yoke inputs. I also tested the A320 for reference as I recently used it to see if anything has changed. The A320 performed as expected (just like it did before without problems) to the inputs. It's just the A330 isn't as responsive as the A320.... and perhaps that's how the real aircraft actually behaves in real life. That's why I tried not to use the word "issue" but "finding". I haven't flown other heavies (787, 747, etc..) with the honeycomb, so can't really tell if it's just heavy vs. non-heavy aircraft. Perhaps the A320 is even too responsive. I can't say. The only thing I can say is that there is difference in responsiveness, between the A320 and the A330 when using the aileron.... but just the actual turn.... side-stick and aileron animation match the yoke inputs perfectly and show no difference between A320 and A330. Perhaps others notice the same responsiveness difference between the A320 and the A330. Anyway the same about very slight acceleration during idle power, which possibly is perfectly normal for the A330 (not so healthy for the brakes though lol). All I really want to know at this point is if others experience the same behaviors (again don't want to call it "issues" just yet as it may very well be what the real aircraft is like and/or intended to be that way) 😉 Cheers,
  13. Yeah that was my initial thought on the taxiing. I just wanted confirmation on that, not that something is wrong with my setup and the fact that a beta tester claimed he never encountered the aircraft to accelerate (albeit very slowly) on idle so I thought I might share. I am using the native axis settings.... calibrated with sensitive to max and nullzones at min. I assume the white cross on the PFD is linked to the yoke rather than the aircraft itself. But who knows maybe the honeycomb isn't right for the A330. Maybe someone who used the honeycomb for the A330 might share some experiences. I will investigate myself to see if indeed I did some doing to this, but it's quite hard knowing I haven't really tampered on anything other than installing UUEE and the A330. PS: Using the latest P3D client
  14. Hey there, First of all nicely done. Looks good, performance is quite good, too. Currently on my way from ESSA to UUEE. I will continue to investigate, but I thought I might drop two (potential) findings. First of all I noticed that the plane at idle starts to roll when releasing the parking brakes. It slowly, but steadily will increase speed. I have to regularly use brakes to keep the speed constant. At first I thought that might be normal.... it appears some planes with powerful engine will in fact start rolling (and my load for that flight is light, too). Someone however suggested that in his tests didn't come across this "issue". I wouldn't know if anything else might cause this.... as I didn't change anything prior to installing the A330 (and my other planes including the A320 don't show this behaviour). Secondly, which I also only observe with the A330 (also here the A320 doesn't show these "symptoms") is, when flying the A330 with the honeycomb yoke (yes bash me for it lol.... but it's just such a quality difference compared to my joystick and don't want to buy a joystick on the same level right now) I have to turn the yoke at least 50-60° to get some reaction and then it reacts pretty hard..... I am not sure if this is due to the fact that the yoke has a large aileron travel, but then again the A320 turns "normally" in a steady curve. I'd also like to note that the white cross on the indicator correctly corresponds to my yoke inputs. Thank and Cheers, Amadeo
  15. On my way from ESSA to UUEE for a quick test flight
  16. As long as it can be turned off for potential performance gains I am fine with that. On the 737 I only really use it for the performance calculations. After that they are both off.
  17. I imagine one could grab and use GE or PW soundsets. Although you'd have to sort out engine only files. I remember back in the days when using simple aircraft I would just have 3 folders and then in the cfg specify what soundset to use for each livery (just like you would specify which model). I never looked too much into sound files, but I wonder if you could (like textures) have a global set of soundfiles (switches, gear, etc..) and engine specific soundfiles. I would certainly pick up some PW and GE soundsets from TSS if that were possible.
  18. I can understand the disappointment. I won't speak for Aerosoft, but they obviously can't provide every single A330 livery with the base back. Many aircraft developers don't ship with any airline paints. For me it's more important that time is being invested on the aircraft itself. I personally don't want to wait for a finished product, because specific liveries are not included. Usually popular airline paints don't take too long after release to be available and Turkish Airlines not only being a major A330 operator, but also a major airline on a global scale I am confident it will grace the P3D skies not long after A330 release 😉
  19. You slightly misread my post. I didn't want that screen. I exit the browser on reflex, because I didn't want the charts. The problem was I couldn't switch to any other menu on the EFB (e.g. to remove the chocks).... I couldn't switch it off... it seemed it was waiting for me to enter the credentials for navigraph, but since i closed the window there was obviously no way to enter anything anymore and I also wasn't able to retrieve the browser window to "answer" the EFB's request for me to enter my navigraph credentials.
  20. Hi, Ok I am sitting at LOWW ready to go and have quite the problem. Chocks are still in and the EFB isn't responding. I clicked on Charts and actually didn't want to, so I just got rid of the browser opening for navigraph login as it's just a testflight as I don't intend to use charts via EFB: Now the problem is the EFB isn't responding anymore... i can't click on anything and can't seem to switch it off. I really don't want to go through all the pre-flight prep again and need to remove the chocks via the EFB. Is there anything I can do. I will wait a bit for an answer lol. Is there anyway to tell the EFB I don't want to login to navigraph or maybe some service I can force quit. Or perhaps use the link the EFB wanted me to go?? Thanks
  21. I assume turning off the EFB will improve performance. The only reason I ever use one is for performance calculations if there is one.
  22. I am sure painters will provide a delta livery nonetheless. I mean we are "cheating" with the B77L as well using it for B772 operators. For example UAL B77L with GE for B772 with PW or SIA B77L with GE for B772 with RR. So why should we make an exception for the A333?
  23. When you talk about navigraph being worked on. Do you mean just the EFB integration or is it also referring to FMS data as well? I assume it's just the EFB bit but just want that confirmed
  24. Can't argue with that. But it appears this one is starting over again from start to bug free all over again. This thing has been scheduled for 2016 (latest 2017). Sure sh** happens, but I got the feeling that this project can't keep up with all with the evolution of it's host and thus is going into a neverending cycle and will probably stall very quickly. I'd rather go without PBR if that meant a project start-over, which may cost another 2-3 years. There seems to be a huge zig-zag between alpha- beta- amost done- alpha-almost done- beta-...! I assure you this post is not meant to be disrespectful or trying to put pressure on this project. The developers sure earn my respect (any that takes on aircraft, especially popular ones like the A330). It's just genuine disappointment after being excited for 2-3 years and seeing it going always further away and I am not talking about potential deadlines that haven't been met, but the apparent lack of progress.
  • Create New...