Recently we have seen a lot of codes used to unlock our products being offered for discounted prices. Almost all of them are bought using stolen credit cards. These codes will all be blocked by our systems and you will have to try to get your money back from the seller, we are unable to assist in these matters. Do be very careful when you see a deal that is almost too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

Jump to content
Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A330 Professional Preview

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, Jammin16 said:

Lack of date seriously. I have tried to talk with someone from this forum if there would not be an A380, A340 and A350. But it seems that Aerosoft is not intrusted in making money. 

 

We sure like to make money, but what products we do depends on many things. From customer demand (that we gather via market research) to what information we can get. For some of the Airbusses it is at this moment simply impossible to get the information we feel is needed to create a quality product. This is mainly because Airbus has changed it's procedure. Even pilots do not have this information (they do not need it) and all documents are highly protected.  That you do not believe that is true is something you will have to deal with. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Trevor11350 said:

, we have a study sim a380 and a very Hugh fidelity a330 in development but the aircraft that is least flown now and on its way out of service is so hidden - why?

 

Let's judge those when they are released.... Still not very sure what a study sim level aircraft is though, never heard a real pilot refer to any sim add-on as that. But that's another discussion. If another company feels they can do an A380 accurately without the data we think we need so much the better for them and you!

 

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, SWOOS said:

Just one Question. Is it possible to get internal sounds in wingview e.g? 

 

We do not like wing views a lot because we simulate the job of the pilot and not the passenger, but exactly what internal sounds you want to hear? The sound a passenger hears? Is there any add-on that does that seriously?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Gent's let's close the floppy wing topic. The A330 will have flex as we always said.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Trevor11350 said:

I have no doubt it will im simply asking if you would consider implementing a simple feature that really gives life to the aircraft and enhances the experience

 

This would only be immersive if it would be fully synchronized with any 3rd party tool like GSX. Everything else would just look silly. So it will not happen, as the Aerosoft buses will not start to depend on certain 3rd party tools for their features to work.

 

This is the final post about wingflex, flappy wings, flexings wings, etc. 

 

All follow ups will be removed.

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Airbus Fan said:

Will the Lufthansa livery which is coming with the initial release have white wing tops? Just asking because many Lufthansa liveries have these grey wing tops, but as you know Lufthansa wing tops are painted white.

 

The new Lufthansa livery does not have any grey at all so you can forget about that colour in the future. They did it to make it easier for the sim livery painters. ;) 

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post

How does one become a beta tester for your 'bus products? Are outsiders considered? I tech for a living and have worked on several sim product betas.

Share this post


Link to post

AS, Mathijs, mostly invite people we know from these forums when AS needs new testers. Once in an half moon Mathijs asks people here to apply for the position and a big part of getting the slot is your behaviour and standing in these forums. Being an RW bus pilot or aviation tech guy also helps. 

 

Being on other beta teams can be a plus if you are known in the back channel talks or you know somebody who knows somebody. 

 

As beta testers come and go it could be possible that Mathijs will ask the question again sometime in the future. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post

Oops I was posting in the wrong section.

 

For the A330 we have not yet decided, I need to look what is the most common amount of pax for the models we intend to do.

Most likely it will be in the 270-280 range.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

Well there are of course several places where this is stored. But if you don't mind, why do you think this is something worth doing? For the flying of the aircraft it almost never makes any difference. It does not matter if you maxed out a Japan Airways aircraft (they stack incredible numbers of pax) or are nearly empty and have 5 heavy containers.

If one uses an economic simulation, then the number of pax makes a difference. Like in your example: in Japan, they use large aircraft for short haul and try to squeeze in as many people as possible. On longer flights, more leg room is needed. And one may have a different mix of classes F,J,Y. You are completely right in that for the simulated flight only the total payload matters (well, perhaps the CG is affected as well if simulated cabin and cargo holds have a different center-of-mass each). However, I for one would consider it a bonus if I could reconfigure the number of passengers in a model to reflect economic decisions of a simulated airline.Ideally, have three numbers (for Y, J, F), or maybe even more now that premium economy is becoming popular among airlines.

 

Peter

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

As with the 32bit buses and the already released A318/A319 you can manipulate these numbers to your liking in the aircraft.cfg file, [general] section, performance value.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Tom A320 said:

As with the 32bit buses and the already released A318/A319 you can manipulate these numbers to your liking in the aircraft.cfg file, [general] section, performance value.

 

Hello Tom,

 

I know that, but Mathijs mentioned in his post that the pax number is stored at several places. Plus, there isn't really a standard when it comes to these numbers. Some developers strongly discourage changing the aircraft.cfg numbers. Others, like CaptainSim, change the numbers themselves for every flight. If I recall correctly, another developer stated in a forum discussion somewhere that these numbers are ignored in their model. The only confidence I have is that I can use aircraft.cfg to change load stations for default airplanes.

 

That's why I think it would be nice if Aerosoft would make this somehow configurable. Ideally, the load stations in aircraft.cfg would be honoured, no matter what the entries are. However, I will buy the A330 even without such a configuration tool. It is just a suggestion, in case it would be easy to implement.

 

Peter

 

Share this post


Link to post

Manual changes to original files like the aircraft.cfg are of cause always on your own risk and not supported by the manufacturer. That's here not different as to any other manufacturer. 

A manufacturer would open the pandora box if they would allow getting their original files manipulated and would fully support that.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry we are not willing to give out dates or even rough ideas of a date. We got to balance professional (those not for customers) projects with this for customers. 

Share this post


Link to post

Almost always professional contracts includes a clause that forbids us to discuss things, but parts of our Airbus products have been licensed for professional use. From static simulators that assist novice pilots to get acquainted with procedures to the use of our models in movies, demonstrators and even advertisement. In some occasions that also includes enhancements on existing products to make them more complex. However we have very well defined ideas on our products and do not often feel the need to include those in the commercial versions of the product.

 

This is also true for the current bus projects. Their is however, as Frank written, no 'advanced' version. There are only partial advanced bits but we have no intention of ever selling those to the standard customers. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

Almost always professional contracts includes a clause that forbids us to discuss things, but parts of our Airbus products have been licensed for professional use. From static simulators that assist novice pilots to get acquainted with procedures to the use of our models in movies, demonstrators and even advertisement. In some occasions that also includes enhancements on existing products to make them more complex. However we have very well defined ideas on our products and do not often feel the need to include those in the commercial versions of the product.

 

This is also true for the current bus projects. Their is however, as Frank written, no 'advanced' version. There are only partial advanced bits but we have no intention of ever selling those to the standard customers. 

 

Ok, so we can expect the 330 to have the same complexity as previous products? normal ops only

Share this post


Link to post

Basically yes. only things that pilots actually see in day to day flight. We have absolutely no interest in things that have never happened in a real aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/6/2018 at 2:59 AM, Citation X said:

 

Ok so what you are saying is there is a advanced version of this for say training purposes not available to the public, am I correct? Why aren't they available for customers how much is a training-level license?

 

Just adding to this here and please take it as a general essay, not something which must be done on this particular aircraft addon:

"Training level" does by no means mean a full system simulation. With most ATOs a type rating starts by sitting in a paper mockup of the flight deck, pressing "buttons" on those flight deck posters. And you do this for hours - many many hours.

So something on a "training level" could be as easy as a simple 3D model with working buttons replacing those paper mockups.

Learning the airlines SOP and understanding why you do things the way they are done is maybe the hardest thing in a type rating (at least for me it was). If you take the 3D model to the next step and add SOPs and the aircrafts reactions to it you can already save lots of simulator sessions which cost a big load of money.

And you can give your pilots a good insight into the systems deisgn, the computer logic, etc.

That's what you can, in my opinion, do with a "training level" flight simulation software when it comes to real aviation.

 

Once it comes to emergencies and the like there is just no platform currently available which could cover even half the scenarios you learn during a type rating. In fact I was quite surprised how few of the scenraios I had to learn for during my Type Rating were actually covered by the addon of my plane, despite it being a highly recognized one among the community. The fact that you miss a second pilot and only sit in front of a computer screen instead of an actual moving 3D environment just makes it a completly different experience, one which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for training.

 

Again, this is all just my opinion on things and does not represent Aerosofts or any other official points of view.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post

A question. Nvidia has brought a new light/shadow technology with their new 2xxx series (Raytracing). Will that be programmed as well or does Lockheed Martin needs to program that and then all planes inside the sim will have that feature. Bye Pascal 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...