Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by cbd80

  1. Amazing, particularly when compared side by side!
  2. And the Emmy for best FSX video goes to...... Fine work, as always. Chris
  3. I have both of them and have no issues. Do you? With them both being in the scenery folder of the addon I don't believe there will be a conflict. Chris
  4. Hi. AES itself is free to download, see the link on the product page (that way you can easily update to the latest version). The credit packs you see advertised contain 10 credits to be used to activate airports that are AES compatible (see list on the product page). Larger airports require more credits to activate. As you buy more packs you also get additional free credits, so it works out very good in the long run. Chris
  5. Damocles, I don't think you're doing anything wrong at all. I've looked again, and when I tested I must have selected the SIE transition for 18R as that relates to 149DM, and works fine. However, when I do select SIE for 18L, it displays the transition correctly with 146DM in the right place, but when 'Adding' to the flight plan it goes wrong and 146DM ends up in the position shown in your screen shot. All the 18L transitions have this fault. The Ban3B terminates at TAGOM, so the final leg is shown as direct to 18L. In reality you would be vectored or on the ILS at that point.
  6. I also use Aerosoft Madrid. If I recall, Madrid has a north/south AFCAD switcher tool. Perhaps check to see if this is set correctly for the wind conditions and then run the FSC indexer tool. Chris
  7. Interesting. I've just put in a flight plan LEBL to LEMD with the SIE Transition and I get a 149DM, which is correct. It must be to do with the Navigraph data that is contained with the demo. Chris
  8. I'm on the latest version of the launcher as it insists on re-installing even if I have it and it re-sets my previously activated products. Personally, now I don't bother with it. Hopefully, it will be sorted soon. Chris
  9. An additional charge for FS9 is indeed a shift in distributing the software. However, the development of the FS9 version costs in addition to the FSX version, so is it that unreasonable? Aerosoft has been tending towards FSX in the main, and perhaps as it should, given the market and potential portability to MS Flight or alternatives. I have both FSX and FS9 installed on my system at the moment, and the latter as a novelty. Surprisingly, FS9 performs worse than FSX (albeit I have good FSX performance). Chris
  10. Hi. I had this frustrating problem too: Go to your FDC folder and run the following: PFE_V312_System.exe & Sysinfo_inst.exe This should solve your problem. Took me a long time to figure out. Chris
  11. Additionally, if you're using FSGlobal there is a file in the Local Meshes folder specific to Madeira that causes conflict. Chris
  12. Hi. That is basically saying 'Please remove the old version before installing the new version'. Have you hit 'Repair' instead of 'Remove'? Alternatively, just use 'Add/Remove Programs' in the Control Panel. That should do it. Chris
  13. I don't think there is too much of an issue mentioning a developer or scenery in passing (politely) I.e another developer used such a feature, will Aerosoft do similar? Or, will the scenery be compatible with the scenery by developer X? The above are questions related to Aerosofts business. But advertising the release of another developers product or even a link to freeware is an issue as it directs customers away from future potential Aerosoft developments. Chris
  14. Hi Joshua. It is best to load your flight ('Fly Now') using a default aircraft, this should prevent the CTD when loading Airbus X. Unfortunately the CTD after finishing a flight is still to be resolved. You want the ASC.dll to run. When trying to register your product on the Aerosoft site are you sure you're entering the details in the section for the download product and not the boxed version? For any further issues getting the update I would send an email to support@Aerosoft.com stating your details, and I'm sure they will be able to sort access to the latest update. Chris
  15. Hi Jeff. Airbus X is left seat only by design, as it was intended to simulate the pilots perspective. Chris
  16. No problems Thralni. I've seen your reviews on occasion and I know you like Aerosoft products (else you wouldn't be here). Indeed a conscientious approach from developers is welcome. It wasn't so much you, I just wanted to make the point that people are quick to blame the developer and not their hardware. Regards, Chris
  17. I don't think it's particularly fair to say that Aerosoft's products don't perform well. Aerosoft has delivered many high end ambitious sceneries. I believe they have been developed in an efficient manner. Aerosoft states the system requirements for their products. It is not their responsibility to ensure the end user has the suitable resources. If Aerosoft where to make more simplistic sceneries for the sake of fps, it would lead to complaints that they lacked quality and features. They would also slide down the scale of being a high end adding developer, which would be bad for busin
  18. Hi. Have you tried loading your flight and then selecting Airbus X. This usually solves the issue. When ending a flight FSX may CDT; this is a known issue. Chris
  19. I take it you've reinstalled Windows? You need to input your serial numbers back into AES and reselect your airports. Chris
  20. <br /><br /><br /> Given the amount of recoding and development to be done I wouldn't expect it til the end of the year or next spring at the earliest. Chris
  21. What I do is to be ready for it; on AP disconnect pull up and set some positive trim on the elevator. I find this compensates for the nose drop. Also, disconnect the AP when you're 7 miles out or around 3000ft. This gives you the time to correct the situation. Chris
  22. Perhaps because development takes a long time. If they're working on the internal systems then there really isn't much to show. I don't think that much of the external aircraft or internal cockpit will change. Look at FSLabs and how long they have been in development with their Airbus. I really wouldn't expect anything soon from Aerosoft, particularly given the lack of objective viewpoints expressed when development ideas/progress/issues were shared during the initial development of Airbus X. Once bitten, twice shy. Chris
  • Create New...