Aerosoft Airbus future plans

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

Friends, let me explain what we are planning in 2020 for the Airbus (and CRJ) series.

 

First of all, let me say how incredibly lucky we are with so many simulators that are simply very good. Laminar (X-Plane), Lockheed (P3D) and Microsoft (FS) will all be superb simulators in their own right in 2020, while for many people FSX remains a viable (but unfortunately not any longer commercially viable) simulator platform. We are spoiled for choice and that is amazing.  With these choices come the fact we need to make decisions. As we do not know what the biggest platform will be late this year, these decisions have to be made with some flexibility in mind.

 

To be perfectly honest, we were very enthusiastic about P3D V4 in the beginning but as many parts of the graphical engine were left half done this enthusiasm slowly evaporated. Doing the modeling of the CRJ and A330 using the latest standards was a royal pain in the behind to be honest. The fact there are almost no aircraft add-on devs who do fully blown P3D V4 models (95% has only partial PBR for example) speaks volumes and our worries were shared by other developers in non public forums.  So clearly we are not looking forward to redoing the A318/319/320 and 321 to the latest standards. It will mean many many months of work (as we do not just want to drop some {BBR textures but do it as it should be done) and will bring in almost no new sales. Asking an update fee for this is not really our style.

 

At the same time Microsoft is showing us what a simulator can look like in this day and age. As you might know Asobo was so kind to invite me a few times to their offices (as I live close to them) and when we saw the sim for the first time running, the sound you heard was jaws hitting the floor. What we all thought were rendered demo video's turned out to be real in game footage, not even on a crazy hardware system.  I follow up visits we learned a lot about the platform, what can be done, how things should be done and above anything, how determined Microsoft and Asobo are to assist developers. If we have a question, we call them and get answers. Let me tell you, that's bloody amazing. (BTW, Lockheed was also very approachable for us for a very long time). As you know Aerosoft loves all simulators. we sell add-ons for FSX, P3D, X-Plane and AFS2 . And we'll continue to do so, Flight Simulator will just be another platform. But one that we believe very strongly in. 

 

So at this moment we decided not to work on full new builds of the smaller busses for P3D V4.  We do expect P3D v5 somewhere this year and are sure a lot of the issue we now have will be solved. We decided that because we feel the current versions are pretty strong and can stand the competition in the same price range. What will come very soon is a smaller update that adds the Electronic Flight Bag to the smaller busses. This will be at the same time as we can include Navigraph support for those device.  After that we'll still work on open issues and if there is time we'll also complete CPDLC that is partly developed at this moment.

At the same time we will start working on the Airbusses and CRJs for Flight Simulator. How much of those will be 'ports' and how much will be done to the new standards remains to be seen. As there is no SDK yet it is impossible to say what can be done and what not. For sure the old idea you will not pay again for code you already bought will remain intact, so depending on much how will be new, you will get a substantial discount if you own the current versions. The same is true for our scenery products and tools. A smooth transition is the key. There will be enough problems and new things to deal with. 

Depending on the manpower we have available (we are expanding our development staff) we will also being as soon as possible on a project that is fully based on the new standard. Most likely that will in the form of the Twin Otter that seems ideally suited to explore the new world of Flight Simulator. 

 

I hope this clears up some of the questions. If you like to tell me that we are bonkers and P3D will remain the platform of choice, feel free to do so in reply! As I said, there are a lot of uncertain factors and your opinion is always welcome.

 

[colz99 26]

Hi Mathijs, does this also include that the smaller busses will get independent ND's for example? thats something I keep missing. What would also be nice in the smaller busses, but really only a neat detail, would be to make the side window blinds operatable like in the A330. Any answer to this? I'm on the verge of rebuying the A320s for P3Dv4 right now and this is kind of a deciding factor.

 

Regards  

[kylep 0]

Hello so I would like to confirm. Does that mean there will be NO A330-200 for P3d v4.5?

thank you

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

7 minutes ago, colz99 said:

Hi Mathijs, does this also include that the smaller busses will get independent ND's for example? thats something I keep missing. What would also be nice in the smaller busses, but really only a neat detail, would be to make the side window blinds operatable like in the A330. Any answer to this? I'm on the verge of rebuying the A320s for P3Dv4 right now and this is kind of a deciding factor.

 

I will see if this can be done. If the FS SDK is not available soon we just might fit this in. Certainly no promises!

 

 

6 minutes ago, kylep said:

Hello so I would like to confirm. Does that mean there will be NO A330-200 for P3d v4.5?

thank you

 

Indeed. No new models planned at this moment.

[GBNLL 17]

So the issues with the smaller aerosoft airbusses can't really be fixed due to the limitations with P3D?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

6 minutes ago, GBNLL said:

So the issues with the smaller aerosoft airbusses can't really be fixed due to the limitations with P3D?

 

Issue like what?

[masterhawk 800]

12 minutes ago, GBNLL said:

So the issues with the smaller aerosoft airbusses can't really be fixed due to the limitations with P3D?

From Mathijs post:

“After that we'll still work on open issues“

[GBNLL 17]

I Just keep reading stuff on the forum about issues etc.. I've had one today with the fuel planner with the latest update that has now been resolved thanks to @DaveCT2003's document. I haven't flown the A330 either after purchasing it because I've seen numerous problems being posted in the forum.

 

I've tried flying other developers aircraft but I enjoy coming back to aerosoft aircraft because of how easy they are just to fly but yeah maybe I should read about all the issues people are having eh?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

3 minutes ago, GBNLL said:

I Just keep reading stuff on the forum about issues etc.. I've had one today with the fuel planner with the latest update that has now been resolved thanks to @DaveCT2003's document. I haven't flown the A330 either after purchasing it because I've seen numerous problems being posted in the forum

 

I'm not saying that there are no issues still open, but last weekend I noticed 23 A330 at the same time online with the well known ATC groups. There are really no issues that make flying in any way impossible. If you like to discuss those please do so in another topic and not here.

[GBNLL 17]

Thank you Mathijs for the reassurance that it's still flyable. 

[colz99 26]

vor 36 Minuten, Mathijs Kok sagte:

I will see if this can be done. If the FS SDK is not available soon we just might fit this in. Certainly no promises!

 

Would be a shame if this is not going to be done. Seeing as it was said that the A320s are supposed to be at the same level as the A330. The blinds are not really important, but at least unsyncing the NDs would be great, also the VOR/ADF switches. I don't think that should be that much work, or? But nice to hear that you are going to bring the Airbusses and the CRJ to the new Flightsim.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51562]

Unsyncing the ND's is a pretty big job, needs full new MDL's for all models, new code, new test cycles, at least 200 man hours of work.

[colz99 26]

Damn, I thought that because of the A330 and the A330 also having similarities in code to the A320 AFAIK... Oh well.. Anyway, would be a super nice feature, I think I'm not the only one that would like it  Think I also saw it mentioned a few times around the forum as well. Have a nice evening

[Love_Aviation 8]

The Only bug I see for now that is left for The A-330 is when you turn the Batteries ON or OFF and/or EXT Power there is no clunk sound being played. Its not a big issue just takes away from the realism. I hope its being added in the future update.

[kbuf_aviator 1]

I apologize if this has been asked differently previously,

To confirm, is the possibility for new engine models (PW4168A or GE CF6-80E1) for the A330 out of the question for the year 2020 with the development plans for MFS and the other sims? 

Much appreciated

[Flugkapitan 7]

Hi Mathijs,

 

Thank you for the Airbus development road map regarding the immediate future!

 

However, while I do understand the reasoning (from a business standpoint) of not much of the way in future improvements for the Baby Buses, I have to express my disappointment that it is not likely the Nav Displays will be reworked to operate independently of one another. Also for a purely selfish reason  I was hoping that bringing the Baby Buses up to the A330 standard would somehow cure that nagging drooping elevator problem I'm having. As I posted in that thread, I truly appreciate the efforts of members of your team to track it down. I fully understand it is a rarity and cannot be reproduced by team members.

 

I am certainly enjoying the A333!

 

Regards & Best Wishes,

Scott

[Detail50 17]

I'm looking forward to Navigraph being incorporated into the EFB.  Are you able to share some window of when we might see that?   TY  Ray

 

 

[klisura 92]

When can we expect CFD in final release? Is it still alpha?

[FWAviation 485]

On 27.1.2020 at 16:48, Mathijs Kok sagte:

Indeed. No new models planned at this moment.

 

Does that include that there will be no new engine variants for the A330-300, at least for the moment?

 

By the way, @GBNLL, I can confirm that the A330 is very much flyable, at the very least in its current version 1.0.0.7. I did a flight from EDDL to KMIA last weekend, and everything worked like a charm, also the MCDU fuel indication problem which was present in the earlier versions of the A330 was gone.

[DaveCT2003 2556]

3 minutes ago, FWAviation said:

Does that include that there will be no new engine variants for the A330-300, at least for the moment?

 

 

Yes sir.

 

 

[FWAviation 485]

vor 38 Minuten, DaveCT2003 sagte:

 

Yes sir.

 

 

 

Thanks for the quick reply, Dave!

[DaveCT2003 2556]

4 minutes ago, FWAviation said:

 

Thanks for the quick reply, Dave!

 

You are most welcome.

 

I think the point that Mathijs makes about moving into the future of Microsoft Flight Sims (MFS) is a very important one.  My take on this is that we've leave our P3Dv4 Airbus products as excellent and stable as we move into the future of Micrsofot Flight Sims. 

 

There was a post today elsewhere where someone made a great point.  At this point Microsoft would have to fail on may promises for the upcoming Sim not to be a gigantic leap forward for us all.  But you know, even after the new sim is released some considerable time might well still be needed before fixes are produced (because they are always needed) the addon products catch up to the new sim... so it may still take some considerable time before we'll have the same capabilities as we presently do with P3D.  I'm not talking overall sim visuals, which is what most people in our community seem to be focuses on.

 

So.. I'll likely be using P3Dv4 / v5 for my serious simming for some time to come.  But have no doubt, Aerosoft will step into the new sim in a Big way, and with Mathijs leading us it will be a great experience for our customers (sincerely).

 

Best wishes!

 

 

 

[FWAviation 485]

@DaveCT2003 The assumption that it will take considerable time until we have a comparable range of add-ons for MSFS as we have it now for P3D is an assumption I share. But this assumption is actually also a very good rationale why it might be a good idea to develop additional A330 models and engine variants for the P3D version while P3D is still very much in use and MSFS hasn't caught up completely yet.

[DaveCT2003 2556]

7 minutes ago, FWAviation said:

@DaveCT2003 The assumption that it will take considerable time until we have a comparable range of add-ons for MSFS as we have it now for P3D is an assumption I share. But this assumption is actually also a very good rationale why it might be a good idea to develop additional A330 models and engine variants for the P3D version while P3D is still very much in use and MSFS hasn't caught up completely yet.

 

If ours was a freeware product then surely, but alas it's not and we have to pay for the work involved via sales and as Mathijs said we don't like to saddle our customers with having to pay for updates.  Even if we were to do an expansion package for P3Dv4/5 MFS would have been out for a good while before it was ready, and of course our developers would need to be working on products for MFS instead of a sim that many people would be moving from. It's just too much to go backwards especially when the crowd is moving forward.  For this reason, we likely won't see new engine variants for P3Dv4.  It's far more work than people realize and we'd have to obtain the real world data to model it as well.

 

Second guessing the experience we have behind the scenes and the decisions we make is something we have to live with, but we have to take into account many things the general public never considers or aren't aware of.

 

My very best wishes!

 

[TorstenFS 60]

Hello alltogether,
I've read that there will be a "legal mode" in MSFS so that you can run FSX aircrafts in the new flight sim.
(Don't know if this is still valid.)

So if you are expanding development staff AND have to wait for the new SDK, it might be an idea to have a look on your FSX aircrafts if one or the other of them could get a small refresh.

For example the Bush Hawh XP would be a very nice plane to fly with over the new MSFS world ("low and slow"). Maybe some other liveries (other nations) could bring new interest to this plane. So maybe there might be new buyers because MSFS will bring new customers.

In addition it would be very nice to have a fast plane for quicker sightseeing in MSFS. A Piper Cheyenne IV LS 400 is still missing as payware. Don't know how difficult it is to change the Piper Cheyenne I-II into a IV LS 400. I personally would buy it as a new aircraft.
If you don't like this plane, then the Hughes H-1B might be an alternative.

 

And if you are looking for a new aircraft type for MSFS: what about a small but very fast bizz-jet?
This a/c could fit beginners (sightseeing) as well as semi-professional and professional pilots (flight planing from A to B with real weather, alternate airport strategies, starting from cold to dark etc.)

 

I don't need an answer, because I don't want to read a "no"

But maybe you and/or your staff will remember this idea some day . . .

Good luck and good success with the coming MSFS!
Torsten