!! Windows 7 no longer supported !!

As Microsoft will stop supporting Windows 7 on Jan 20th we will be unable to test any of our
products on that platform. It may work, or it may not, but no guarantees from our side. 

Jump to content
Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A330 Professional Preview

Recommended Posts

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
10 minutes ago, DriverX said:

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 

That would require a major overhaul of the entire graphics engine, it is not something developers can add to products without LM adding it to the graphics engine of P3D

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, data63 said:

 

but also keep in mind, that there are many users not having the latest graphics hardware and nobody wants to update any plane or scenery to be compatible with the lastest P3D

 

At some point, sooner or later, users are expected to have updated to the latest version of the simulator available. We will always make sure newly released products support the latest version of the sim available. There will be no extra work done to make them support older versions than the one available by the time of release.

Share this post


Link to post

The Airbus projects will always be done to the latest sim, we will try as hard as we can to avoid legacy code. As you might have seen with the current version, having them compiled with the very latest compilers makes a huge difference in framerate. We have great confidence in Lockheed.

 

So yes, our modelers are working hard to understand where PBR could be beneficial to prepare for the moment P3D will include it. Believe me, there is a lot of good things to come.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, marvic said:

I bet Aerosoft would be glad to do a NEO. Do you have complete access to a real A330 NEO and technical data?

 

Indeed, if somebody promises a good NEO airbus (any model) he is either overestimating his skill or has access to data that Airbus absolutely does not want to share. Using that would endanger any possible Airbus add-on for sims because Airbus would come down on us like a ton of bricks. But they got it pretty well covered. A lot of the info is locked to devices, so you would need to steal an iPad to get the info.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Time for a small friday update. Exterior texturing works on the cargo bays have been finished now. Next week integration of the aircraft into the sim is one main task and also introducing new technologies available...

A330_EXT_AFT_005.png

A330_EXT_AFT_004.png

A330_EXT_AFT_003.png

A330_EXT_AFT_002.png

A330_EXT_AFT_001.png

  • Upvote 14

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Faisiecot said:

Hang on a sec... If Airbus isn't letting you use the manuals, how do you get the A320 family to be licensed by them?

 

Obtaining a license to use the name is not the same as getting proprietary technical information, N'est-ce Pas?

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

That's a sales license that Dovetails has with Lockheed. Nothing related to our developments and only covering the versions we sell on Steam.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, masterhawk said:

You know, the 330 will use a lot code of the 320s?

 

 

In fact it is 95% the same. Just as Airbus does we use one base code and config files to make it fit the aircraft.  The current A320 already has a lot of the A330 code in it!

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, HDC said:

Could  you implement a function that the Airbus start whit the same windows as i have closed it the last time. I have 3 monitors. The first for the simulator the second for the overhead panel and the third for the option mcdu and the FO mcdu. I had everytime to open the option mcdu, the FO mcdu and a new window with the overhead panel. Every panel i had to undock, put it to the other Monitors and change the size. Thats very annoying with the A318/319/320/321.

 

 

Easy. Just save a flight (P3D) in the panel state you want to start the next time with those windows opened. I would say that it works with undocked windows too.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Hightower said:

Im curious to know if allowed, what are the fundamental differences and challenges to the A330 in coding if the core foundation rests on the previous A318-A321 series? Its mentioned that they are very similar in systems, with the obvious difference being a different flight dynamic size and weights. But there must be alot more to it than that to have the projected release many months after the previous models. The exterior model looks quite progressive as does the previous previews of the VC also looked well underway. So the A330 must have something in particular that is a great challenge to overcome. 

Some pages of the SD are very different. So new coding required. ELEC is splitted into AC and DC page. Fuel system is complete different with trim tanks in the horizontal stabilizer. That fuel pumping back and forth need to be modeled. Different HYD-System...etc.

ND, EW/D, PFD and FMS is almost the same. Only small differences.

But we want first redo ND and PFD for the smaller ones in SP1 and then use it in the 330.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
vor 10 Stunden , AA777-200ER sagte:

Are you going with 4k textures this time around (like most developers, civil and commercial)?

I've had 4k exterior textures with CaptainSim, QualityWings, and Carenado for many years (5 plus).

data63: Just using "4k" says NOTHING!

 

Data63 is not wrong here! While of course more pixels enable to contain more information inside a texture, the visual effect lessens very much going over 2048er size if you stay with the same covered surface area. This you not get a linear increase in visual quality anymore for

usual viewing distances which are kept far over 90% of the time.

What you get for sure is an exploding demand on texture memory resources, in fact it multiplies with factor 4 for a single color texture. Also the single pixels in the texture have to be accessed element for element by the GPU shading processors.

Taken into account you also have to assign a gloss/specular and a normal texture, then we are at factor 12 already. Large aircraft then come to 3 materials for their long tube sections. That would be 3x12=36 fold the demand.

 

Sadly in flight simming aircraft not hang in empty space: They need a hires environment so landscape tiles, cloud tiles and foremost detailed airports and MEGA airports. Those will also get crowded with details more and more with time. Modern top end graphics cards come with 6

to 8GB (not many want to buy such expensive cards still yet and got less) but how long do you think does it take to exhaust that again, when all (aircraft and scenery designers) think they can play a lone main role in using resources on the sim platform?

 

Below i made a small sample image that shows the result of a 4096er and a 2048er representation of the same content. Try different distances from the monitor and see how fast you cannot see the difference anymore. And i just compared paintkits from the manufacturers mentioned with the result, you also cannot read the smallest labels there too...

40962048_comparision.png

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post

On top of what Stefan said already, keep in mind another little detail: The quality of the final visuals does not depend on texture size at all.

It depends on how much area you cover with a certain texture file. If you cover a small area with a 1024 texture it can look a lot better than covering a large area with a 4096 texture.

Did you know for example that PMDG uses mostly 1024 textures in their cockpits? Just take a look at their files in paint.net or phonoshop. Yet their aircraft look amazingly stunning!

 

And on the other hands side I have seen other developers using 4096 textures whose aircraft look quite blurry if you go close up.

 

It all comes down to what the texture artist does with the files, not to what resolution he uses.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Vor 1 Stunde, Yapke sagte:

Sorry for any confusion Mathijs... 😕

 

I sertainly didn't doubt that those preview of the Lufthansa and Virgin Atlantic liveries didn't matched with the real ones… I'm sertainly sure your develompent team knows what their doing! 🙂

 

I was just wondering if it was possible for other liveries. 😕

Just because I used to fly with the Wilco Publishing versions and was very disappointed that WP didn't configured the winglets correctly.  I used to fly with their Brussel Airlines liveries, and they weren't able to place the logo on to the winglets because of the poor winglet programming.  I noticed that when I thought they only forgot, and tried to place them by myself… very frustrating and disappointing 😞

 

I hope I didn't say anything wrong... 😕

 

PS.: Sorry to mention an other development team... but I'm only using it to proof your team is able to do better than Wilco used to at some point. 😉

 

Greetings, Yapke

 

Hi Yapke!

I dont´t know where your doubts come from, but of course the winglets are in hires and they are not simply mirrored. Each side can be painted independent and that will be shown also in the next friday update presenting the final coloring of the VirginAtlantic livery. This livery got, different than the blank Lufhansa ones, painted winglets with the airlines logo on it.

We have also decided now which livery comes next: CathayPacific.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry if this has been asked before,

But I am just wondering if the A330 will come with Automatic Step Climb, like in other long haul planes released for P3D.

This would allow us to cheat and set up a flight plan before going and doing something else!!

 

Thanks for all the work you are all doing! :) 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, CRJ900 said:

Sorry, but I have to chime in here in regards to liveries. How does a state of the art, mainline, 60€-70€ product for Prepar3d get released with so few and such random stock liveries these days? Compare that to pretty much every other aircraft addon, be it the 717, Q400, or the "very popular" Boeing's and they get released with pretty much every livery that can be found of the modeled type in real life. Does Aerosoft really lack the man-power to create aircraft liveries and has to force their main 3d modeller to do such tasks? I mean even every DCS aircraft addon, which often times even costs less, comes with every imaginable squadron scheme that ever existed. In my opinion many and highly accurate liveries add so much more value to an aircraft addon and also lure in more customers who might be drawn to the product just by the sheer fact that a livery of their local airline is included. This is one of the reasons why repainters like Tavers or Goldstar Textures are so popular among the community. 

 

image.png

 

Apart from the PMDG 737 I know of no other add-on aircraft with that many liveries available. The main reason we do not include many liveries is that in increases the download size a lot and that a Canadian buyer most likely has no use for a Uzbekistan Airways livery (and  vice versa)

  • Upvote 12

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...