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

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

One thing to also notice is that the RW A330 does not have a build in (class 3) EFB like the B788,748.

 

Any rendition of an A330 EFB would therefor be a tablet. As most people already have one at home it would be very realistic to use that one. ;)

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/30/2018 at 9:03 AM, MaxZ said:

This has been already discussed and the answer is no. It has the 3rd MCDU which has similar functions.

 

We are looking again at a EFB.  It's however damned hard to keep the product in the same price range then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, BudSpencer said:

 

OK, thanks for this detailed Explantation. So that means an EFB is in no way directly connected to the aircraft's systems? And pilots always still enter the final calculations by hand?

:D:D:D

 

Of course this depends on what kind of EFB you have, for the A320 and A330 where there are no class 3 EFB's available you are absolutely right, all entries have to be done manually.

Even for aircraft where there are such EFB's available some companies still decide to not use the EFB available from the manuafacturer, for example Lufthansa does not use Boeings EFB in the 747-8, but they use their own one to keep commonality with their other types.

My airline also uses an iPad which obviously means we have to enter everything ourselves.

 

8 minutes ago, vin747 said:

no, but PMDG has its own cockpit camera shake functionality.. i was referring to that.. the default P3D dynamic head movement is not very good i hear..

 

We do not plan to include such a feature. Reasons amongs others are:

  • We feel such a feature should be provided by either the simulator itself or by a camera addon
  • In real life you would simply not notice any such shaking. On cameras you do, but did you ever notice your "picture" of your eyes shake when driving a car?
    I at least never conciously did, not in my car and not in an airplane. If at all sometimes the panel (especially the FCU vibrates a bit, but that's a different thing than the head shaking.
    The human brain is very good in creating a stable picture in front of your eyes, even when there is a bit of vibration.
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

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

I am sure you are well into the development of this bird, and may not be in the position to add new features, but as a long haul aircraft, I would like to humbly put in a request for a "jump ahead/practice on approach" feature akin to that found on the QW787.  that makes it so nice when trying to fit a transatlantic flight into my available simming time, and you don't have to deal with the various issues with time acceleration etc...  Thanks for any consideration you may give to this.

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

No need to start a new topic, there is already a wishlist 😉 

 

 

A regular "repaint request" topic will only make sense after the release, when the painkit is available and repainters can actually work on their own liveries.

 

 

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
1 hour ago, CRJ900 said:

 

You are missing my point. All of those are USER crated liveries and vary in quality/accuracy. Half of the old Airbus Extenden etc. liveries are hardly compatible with the new busses anyway. Or at least only after a tedious workaround/procedure. Again, only my opinion. Majestic, or Tfdi offer in-house liveries of all, if not most operators as well. 

 

I am sorry you feel that way. Almost all liveries are simply installed by dragging the downloaded zip in the livery installer (assuming they are made to our standard) and we feel most of them are of pretty good quality (in fact a good number are made by the same people that made the liveries that in the installer!!). There are over 90 operators of the A320/A321 and assuming you are really interested in Berkut Air,  Cham Wings Airlines and Solomon Airways that would mean a download file of over 4 GB. The vast majority of that download would be files you would never use. 

 

We have no plans to change the way we do things. What we'll never do is charge for versions or liveries packs.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, luke123452468 said:

Why doesn't Aerosoft do something similar to the PMDG Operations Centre, where you can pick and choose the liveries you want to download from a large variety of them? 

 

And what would be the difference between getting liveries through a download center or a download page??? 

 

You know of course that there are 1.600+ liveries for the Airbuses ready to download from the download page here in the forum, right? 

 

OK, Mathijs made it already clear, that there won't be any changes in the way Aerosoft is doing their own liveries and also giving the community a place where repainters can share their fantastic work and make it easily accessible to everyone. 

 

And this concludes the livery discussion. Follow up post will be removed. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, stephanek said:

Just checkin in after more than 2 years without news; so A330 still not ready in any version, (virtual cockpit F100 anyone ?) FSX version more and more uncertain. This is becoming ridiculous. I'm not a spoiled teen, been waiting for years, been caught in this 32bits vs 64bits drama and now think I will never see any half descent A330 for FSX. What a shame. Before coming here for news I quickly checked PMDG and saw their latest B747-8i addon available for FSX. Well thank you PMDG and I'm sure this is also making sense business wise. Alas AS took another srategic business decisions...

 

  • Two years without news? Sir we have given news just about every week in that period. 
  • Virtual Cockpit F1000? Aerosoft has absolutely nothing to do with that project, we are not the developer, not the publisher. 
  • No A330 in 32 bit? You might have missed it but we have always said we have not yet decided.

I am  not sure what you were trying to show with your post, but it sure does not make a lot of sense to me and it seems you are mixing up a lot of things. If you have made up your mind that we suck and will not do a A330 in 32 bit that's fine for us, but what's the point in posting here? I know the Internet seems to be only a place to complain and show ignorance but please not here. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Lennart1948 said:

It could indeed be possible. I guess the next months will show if they are going to develop it for 32 Bit :)

 

Friends, let's close this line of discussion. We have not yet decided if we'll do a 32 bit version.  After the 64 bit version is done and stabilized we'll consider this. At that moment we need to look at what the sales potential is and how much of the product we would have to remove or simplify to make it usable. The sales potential is determined by market research, something we take pretty serious. It does not only ask potential customers but also includes sales predictions by resellers (both download as boxed). 

 

The simple fact however is that 64 bit P3D or XPlane add-outsell 32 bit version by a large margin. As the discussion with FSX versus FS2004 the reason is pretty simply. While there are still a LOT of FSX users, they tend to spend a lot less on their hobby. And for us only the amount of potential buyers count. Converting this to a 32 bit version is NOT a trivial task, it's months of work so costly.  Any discussion here about this will not change our point of view. So basically it is pretty useless. As we have seen it quickly deteriorate into nasty stuff we prefer that you discuss this somewhere else.

 

So let me write this one more time. We are working on a P3D 4 version now that will use the very latest options (you will be surprised, believe me). When that version is complete and fully stable  we'll decide if a 32 bit version is possible. That moment is not close, it is many months in the future. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

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...