Jump to content
Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A318/A319/A320/A321/A330 Professional Preview

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Speedbird ATC said:

With the Aerosoft, you could even fly with the fuel pumps off, with the "other bus", the fuel pumps have a small delay in turning on.

 

 As you can in the real one. 

 

Come of, give us a break, something that fundamental we would not leave out we might not care about that short delay (that fully depends on the remaining pressure in the system that FSL does not simulate), but if you would need fuel pumps to run the engine we would model that.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Pilot Aslan said:

Hello,

I love Aerosoft Airbus. Only one thing has to be done i believe. Just like default planes and PMDG planes, when you click to screens (Pfd, Nd, Ecam) has to pop up (zoom) This option will help while you are flying. Will it be done this time?

you can use Ezdok so u can custom ur views and moving around all the cockpit smoothly by just one click  , after using this perfect app i don't need to any 2D cockpits or pop-up screens 

Share this post


Link to post
vor 8 Minuten, Ehab sagte:

you can use Ezdok 

I would recommend 'Simplecam' It's cheaper and does allmost exactly the same

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Lennart1948 said:

I would recommend 'Simplecam' It's cheaper and does allmost exactly the same

 

2 hours ago, Ehab said:

you can use Ezdok so u can custom ur views and moving around all the cockpit smoothly by just one click  , after using this perfect app i don't need to any 2D cockpits or pop-up screens 

 

Airbus view system enough for me so i don't need to pay extra for that. I was just asking for zoom but Mathijs explained. I am not agree but what can i do? :) Guys at least relese 330... We can not wait anymore...

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Emanuel Hagen said:

 

I am sorry to disagree with you here, our market research shows that this is not the case and our sales numbers in fact confirm it.
The "typical" simmer and customer of our (and other developers!) products is a guy who had a hard day of work and wants to relax with one or two flights in the evening witha beer and probably his children playing in the living room behind him.
Most are kept really busy with the normal procedures already and therefore use things like our copilot, FS2Crew, etc. as an aid flying the airplane.

 

There is with no doubt a market for those ultra realistic study level addons, but it is far smaller than the market for normal procedures addons. In fact a lot smaller which also reflects in the higher prices.

Developers of such addons do not invest 3 times the effort into creating their addons compared with ours as you might think when looking at the price. It is mainly the number of sales that makes up the price.
We can offer our Busses at a rather low pricelevel not because of less effort that goes into the development of the product, but because of the bigger customerbase that our product aims at.


You will probably not agree and that is totally fine. This product might not be something for you based on your argument. If you prefer flying airliners with a lot of abnormals there are other developers out there catering your demands. I am sure at some point there might even be an A330 that suits you. Ours will unfortunately not be that one then.

I don't know how you got that data but it fits perfectly in to my profile. Put the kids to bed, put on a pot of coffee, plan a quick route with onlineflightplanner, chuck it in the Bus and off I go. Max 2 hour flights or I'll fall asleep in front of my monitor. That's why I love the Aerosoft Airbus, it's like it knows me. I love flight simming but as I've grown older and reproduced, three times over lol! time has become a premium and I just want to get the essentials out of my few evening hours of flight simming time. I can't even remember when I had time to sit down in the middle of a day and just fly around until bedtime. I recently bought a newly released high-profile add-on aircraft from another developer and while I love it and wouldn't dream of returning it, there are so many functions and simulated stuff that I will never use it almost feels like a shame. I almost feel guilty when I have failures and other stuff disabled in it but I just can't see the fun and value of simulating failures, I'm sure others do though.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Speedbird ATC said:

With the Aerosoft, you could even fly with the fuel pumps off, with the "other bus", the fuel pumps have a small delay in turning on. So called study level aircraft simply feel more fluid, and connected. When you screw up on one of those planes, you WILL notice.

If you were referring to the FSLabs A320 with "the other bus", you should know that you CAN fly that bus with both engines while all fuel pumps are off...

3 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 As you can in the real one. 

Sometimes, I agree on certain arguments that people say like for example that two individual N/Ds would add to the realism and makes your sim experience fell more real. But with the experience I had in the last 4 years (with PMDG 737NGX and FSLabs A320 - both study level) I can say such things only matter to you in the first weeks (or legs, depending how much you fly it after you buy it). After a while, such things doesn't really matter that much anymore. I never used a 737ngx failure and only used it in the first weeks with the fslabs, because I wanted to see the ECAM memo at work. The same for the N/D, wich is/was quite a topic here. First weeks, always tuning it accordingly to the situation. After a few weeks, meh... today I most of the time barely touch the FO's N/D settings. Aaaand the same goes for the lighting. I always go to one specific setting, the only variations I make is whether the flood lights are on or not....

I think you know what I want to make clear with this and why I'm choosing exact this examples. For me right now, the way I'm seeing the A330 is being developed, Aerosoft's A330 will be like any other study aircraft out there, - without the first weeks with "implementation of hyper realism "... in the end, they all do the same, point A to B. If the cost for such an aircraft being more price worthy then others is simply ignoring the fact, that a fuel pump doesn't go instantaneously on, then I'm more then fine with it.

I bought the FSLabs A320 because I got myself blended with all those extra features (AKA failures), but in the end and now while knowing that A330's progress will be updated to Aerosoft's a320, I wished I had gone with the Aerosoft a320. Now I have an a320, wich does the same job as the other A320 would do and wich would cost me much less. I do respect those people, who actually can't stop doing failures with it, but I don't think that those people are in the majority.

 

PS. Did I mention the extra VAS usage for those extra features, that you don't even use? No? Well glad I have now.

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Teekannee said:

Wird es ein 330 neo Modell mit den neuen Winglets geben?

 

Nein, es wird kein NEO geben. 

 

No, an A330 NEO will not be modeled by AS. Only the A330-300 with RR engines for now. 

Share this post


Link to post

Hello everyone.. I do enjoy read your posts guys, but sometimes i wish i could help mathijs and other AeroSoft staff, to convince and give a clear picture to all dear customers on the FAILURE subject... 

I was honorably discharged from the airforce on 2013 due to back injury (car accident) sadly after only 8 years in service..however, we as pilots and student pilots, in military or commercial aviation are ought to study the failure and abnormal operation chapters including emergency procedures.. To qualify us to be in charge in BAD situations... Other than that, no pilot ever wish to see failures up in the sky. 

And no pilot would try out switching engine or auto pressurization off, or stall the plane to check his skills. Period .

I do have pmdg and majestic q400 and surely the AeroSoft A320/321planes, and never crossed my mind the failure sections...

We need to stop giving to much pressure to AS team, as they work real hard to extract a pure  normal operationally aircrafts, we need to give some support rather than continuous demands, mostly unnecessary.. I have demands about cockpit lights and 2d pop up pfd nd panels as well, but AS made it clear about that. Let's respect their philosophy. 

My regards to all AeroSoft team and to you guys, and the nice wise guy in this forum DaveCT2003.

I wish we all enjoy the upcoming A330 in SOP flights. 

P. S: i love the funny comments from mathijs and dudley

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

What FSL simulates is an aircraft as good as possible (though they seem to remove more and more and what is left in non standard ops and emergencies is not very correct as real pilots have said). They are doing a fine job, but when you use it with failures you are simulating a sim ride (that pilots use to train for emergencies) not a standard Munich to Toulouse flight. That is simply a very different product than what we have in mind! 

 

 

 

 

I thought the reference was to PMDG not FSL, My mistake, one should be careful about making assumptions. However, I have not had good experiences with FSL.

Share this post


Link to post

One more thing... BAD WEATHER is the challenge for pilots to land..it's all about experience and skills. 

So use ur imaginations in flight simulator 

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry guys, I will again get dislikes but I have recently noticed Aerosoft team attacking (indirectly) FSL. I find this so unfair, specially for a company like Aerosoft (which is not very well placed with their product to attack FSL....).

 

Aerosoft keeps saying failures are not realistic and that Aerosoft only simulates SOPs (which is, as per Aerosoft, very realistic). I am sorry, but A320 systems are completely wrong (the systems don't work how they should work during normal procedures). This makes Aerosoft's A320 not realistic at all (I am not even asking for failures....the systems in the bus during normal operations are completely wrong).

 

Regarding CFD, Aerosoft considers it more important. I have flown Aerosoft a lot with a good friend using CFD: Lot of good time but also lot of frustration. We both live far from each other....CONN ERROR, basic features were not synced...etc.

If a plane like Aerosoft A320, with simple systems, doesn't perfectly work using CFD, I can't imagine flying CFD in FSL. The A320X is a very complex aircraft and making cfd possible (perfectly) will require lot of work, I suppose. I assume FSL has other priorities right now, which are more important that CFD ;)

 

I have nothing against Aerosoft, just had a feeling of injustice regarding FSL, receiving some indirect attacks.

 

Wishing you good luck on your A330 project,

TheBusFlyer.

Share this post


Link to post

To add realism will there be airhostess coming in the cockpit??:Dabove 10000ft

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, TheBusFlyer said:

Regarding CFD, Aerosoft considers it more important. I have flown Aerosoft a lot with a good friend using CFD: Lot of good time but also lot of frustration. We both live far from each other....CONN ERROR, basic features were not synced...etc.

 

And they should.  Shared Cockpit is the coming wave in flight simulation, and Aerosoft is making an effort to be a big part of it.

 

Regarding your personal experience with CFD, I'm sorry to hear of it but I recently made a 2.5 hour flight with someone who lives in Algeirs (I'm the U.S.) and due to his connection the ping was at least 250ms.  The CFD flight was flawless.  The main reason for this is that we completed the Aerosoft setup correctly.  Connection Error simply says that one or both of you were not set up correctly or (in the case of a few ISPs worldwide - at least two in Germany) port forwarding is prevented, but there is a successful way around this.

 

I now have about 65 CFD flawless flights in the Aerosoft Airbus with people from around the world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

Okay, then you are asking us to simulate something that simply has NEVER happened in real life. Not one time in over 200.000.000 hours of A320 block time. I understand why you want it, don't get me wrong, but it has simply very little to do with actual flying. It has a lot to do with flight training and we always said that that was something that does not interests us much.

 

Even if systems are extremely reliable, there is still a little history of bird strikes....

 

But you are right, I (and maybe others) would be interested to have this one for a little bit of self practice at home in a relaxed environment...

I understand however that outside of the scope of your targeted customer and may be a niche market not really worth spending developing time.

 

I would already be happy enough with a good and realistic MCDU and autopilot modes as well as your immersion items for a bit of fun.

 

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
vor 5 Stunden , TheBusFlyer sagte:

Sorry guys, I will again get dislikes but I have recently noticed Aerosoft team attacking (indirectly) FSL. I find this so unfair, specially for a company like Aerosoft (which is not very well placed with their product to attack FSL....).

 

Did you ever look at FSLs marketing before the time where the stolen files scandal became public?
Their whole marketing was an indirect Aerosoft bashing.

Their "we are always right, these things happened in our (12 year outdated and by now not even considered airworthy anymore in real life!!) old MSN" policy does not make things any better.

 

vor 5 Stunden , TheBusFlyer sagte:

I am sorry, but A320 systems are completely wrong (the systems don't work how they should work during normal procedures). This makes Aerosoft's A320 not realistic at all (I am not even asking for failures....the systems in the bus during normal operations are completely wrong).

 

You got a type rating on the A320 or what qualifies you to make such a statement?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AirbusCG said:

You got a type rating on the A320 or what qualifies you to make such a statement?

 

Come come, let's not feed the trolls....

 

And I am closing the discussion on 'realism' because it goes a bit beyond the purpose of showing off the A330 development. We have a very clear idea of what we want to do and at what price level. Others companies like BlackBox aim for a bit simpler product and others like FSL aim for a much more complex and complete product. There is a market for each of these product obviously. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

Come come, let's not feed the trolls....

 

And I am closing the discussion on 'realism' because it goes a bit beyond the purpose of showing off the A330 development. We have a very clear idea of what we want to do and at what price level. Others companies like BlackBox aim for a bit simpler product and others like FSL aim for a much more complex and complete product. There is a market for each of these product obviously. 

 

I couldn't agree more, once again Mathijs. All this realism and comparison thing among several FS addons and companies is extremely irritating. I simply cannot understand why we should always argue over that when there are clearly many markets for simulation companies to target.

 

I personally own both FSLabs and Aerosoft airbus products and I am really happy with both of them; of course they obviously have their pros and cons, but which one I will fly, depends actually on my mood each time :D:D:D:D . So let's stop that unnecessary comparison/discussion

 

So guys, please enjoy those wonderful add-ons which have been developed recently, cause if we look few years back, we would all fall into tears with the quality of the add-ons we were using :D:D !!

 

Can't wait for this wonderful A330 by the way!! :):):) 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

Come come, let's not feed the trolls....

 

 

 

To finish off this discussion, I would simply like to point out that I still received approximately 10 likes. Therefore, I was not the only (troll, as you say) thinking that.

 

Sorry for the off topic and as Mr Mavros says, unnecessary discussion on this forum. Let's discuss A330, as that's Aerosoft's future aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post

Swiftly moving on from the whole realism thing, how's the alpha testing going?

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, layth23 said:

Swiftly moving on from the whole realism thing, how's the alpha testing going?

 

So far so good. We have a meeting with the main development team tomorrow to discuss how to move forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Vor 1 Stunde, TheBusFlyer sagte:

 

To finish off this discussion, I would simply like to point out that I still received approximately 10 likes. Therefore, I was not the only (troll, as you say) thinking that.

 

You got 13 and they're read which means they are dislikes.

 

Mathijs could you ask your developers if it is possible to include CPDLC over the Hobbie network? VATSIM and IVAO are using this network for CPDLC and I do not see that changing over the next few years.

Other programs like TOPCAT can already access the Hoppie network and do the ACARS and CPDLC for you!

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, AirbusCG said:

 

You got 13 and they're read which means they are dislikes.

 

 

I have got dislikes on lot of other posts. I can show you my notifications, I got more than 10 likes on that post (however, most probably as many dislikes as well). 

I don't care getting dislikes, I just wanted to say I am NOT the only one thinking that. 

 

Screen Shot 2017-02-13 at 1.17.56 pm.png

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...