Microsoft Flight Simulator Aerosoft Aircraft - A330 Preview

[Hans Hartmann 3695]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I would say that if you can make a MSFS A333 you can also make an A350 that is somewhat believable. All this talk about ultra realism is partly just PR. There are enough A350 FCOMs floating around on the net. There are also enough videos and pictures to be found. Then you have some pilots that are willing to assist. 
 

The A350, IRL, can also be flown when having an A330 Typerating and doing just a few simulator missions as a RW Pilot. The A350 flight characteristics are closly matched to the A330 because of this. 
 

MSFS add ons do not need to model different internal A350 Network environments, systems and such. If you are just doing normal SOPs you could get a pretty good A350 if you took the A330 code as a baseline. Engine wise there is also not that much of a difference to the Trents except for fuel flow and small parameters that a sim pilot would not notice at all when comparing the two. 

 

I can see that the Airport Navigation Function and BTV would be the biggest differences with the A333 and maybe AS could just switch them inop for the initial release.  

 

Hoping for that A350 in MSFS….
 

 

A clear no, just because you want it

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

3 hours ago, Pilotalexyyz said:

It will be interesting to see what the next project is. The a330 looks great but i can already see some modeling for example that was optimized for Xbox i.e the wheels for example are just PBR textures and normal height maps vs actually being moddeled same with all the hydraulic lines in the wing box etc. Regardless i do understand Aerosoft logic as they are a pay ware company and no one would pay for a super high fidelity model plus you would kill the XBOX market as it would not be optimized.   

 

That is simply not true. No image we shared shows code optimized for Xbox, and I dare you to show more detailed examples and run 60 fps on a solid PC.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

3 hours ago, Pilotalexyyz said:

All the information is now on airbus world and its not allowed to be printed or shared. There is jail time involved if leaked. Its only available to pilots, engineers and so on and it would be very hard to get without the potential of being in a lot of toruble.

 

airbus world?  What is that?

 

The issue is that what we actually need is not even available to pilots. The tables we need are NOT in aircraft manuals. If things were only that simple.

 

 

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

32 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I would say that if you can make a MSFS A333 you can also make an A350 that is somewhat believable. All this talk about ultra realism is partly just PR. There are enough A350 FCOMs floating around on the net. There are also enough videos and pictures to be found. Then you have some pilots that are willing to assist. 
 

The A350, IRL, can also be flown when having an A330 Typerating and doing just a few simulator missions as a RW Pilot. The A350 flight characteristics are closly matched to the A330 because of this. 
 

MSFS add ons do not need to model different internal A350 Network environments, systems and such. If you are just doing normal SOPs you could get a pretty good A350 if you took the A330 code as a baseline. Engine wise there is also not that much of a difference to the Trents except for fuel flow and small parameters that a sim pilot would not notice at all when comparing the two. 

 

I can see that the Airport Navigation Function and BTV would be the biggest differences with the A333 and maybe AS could just switch them inop for the initial release.  

 

Hoping for that A350 in MSFS….
 

 

 

You are not helping Frank... lol.

 

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

2 hours ago, Cpt.Ronin said:

I totally agree with this statement. 
Im a certified engineer on the Airbus 350 and the documentation provided is so crap compared to legacy aircraft. It barely skims the essence of how the systems operate and in some cases it’s even lacking certain features. I did my type training with Airbus, and even the Airbus employed instructors struggled to describe certain system logics based on the information given to them. 

 

The famous: 'What is it doing now?" 

 

But indeed. These days aircraft are software, like a Tesla.  Even though Tesla has some amazing engineering (their mega presses are still unmatched), the value is the software. You can only do so much to make an aircraft lighter, which costs a fortune and a half in production, while shaving off 0.05% in a climb profile by tweaking software will save airlines millions on all models. 

 

Not just Airbus....  getting real data for ANY modern airliner is near impossible. You might know how long it takes an aircraft to get to FL300, but you will not know what pitch and engine settings are optimal over the whole climb. 

[Moo-Walk 21]

Anyone else keep re reading the released manual PDFs? imagining flying this right now..

[JeffFromTheIRS 69]

14 hours ago, Zocopeta said:

If is an a320, why would you like to fo that when we got the fenix that is study level and is cheap, just i want to know what is your opinion about this. @Mathijs Kok

Fenix and Aerosoft target completely different audiences. Fenix is aiming at "study-level" simmers while Aerosoft generally markets towards people who want a product that's between the default aircraft fidelity and study-level.

[TaWeno 1]

can we see the cockpit?

[Carl Järvholm MAGYe 36]

2 hours ago, JeffFromTheIRS said:

Fenix and Aerosoft target completely different audiences. Fenix is aiming at "study-level" simmers while Aerosoft generally markets towards people who want a product that's between the default aircraft fidelity and study-level.

People forget about xbox too. There is actually no workable 320 on xbox right now, and never will be unless they do more AAUs or another developer like Aerosoft brings one out.

[RogePete 28]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb Mathijs Kok:

 

The famous: 'What is it doing now?" 

 

But indeed. These days aircraft are software, like a Tesla.  Even though Tesla has some amazing engineering (their mega presses are still unmatched), the value is the software. You can only do so much to make an aircraft lighter, which costs a fortune and a half in production, while shaving off 0.05% in a climb profile by tweaking software will save airlines millions on all models. 

 

Not just Airbus....  getting real data for ANY modern airliner is near impossible. You might know how long it takes an aircraft to get to FL300, but you will not know what pitch and engine settings are optimal over the whole climb. 

 

This is the problem we have with the FBW A32NX. That's why we weren't able to bring a performance (takeoff) calculator into the EFB so far. There's simply no available data on the Neo. We have many Neo pilots in our team, but we would have to take their EFBs and a drilling machine to have a look inside. But for some reason, they objected so far.

(btw in contrast: for the A320CEO there's plenty of data available)

[Juho Heikkinen 0]

2 hours ago, RogePete said:

 

This is the problem we have with the FBW A32NX. That's why we weren't able to bring a performance (takeoff) calculator into the EFB so far. There's simply no available data on the Neo. We have many Neo pilots in our team, but we would have to take their EFBs and a drilling machine to have a look inside. But for some reason, they objected so far.

(btw in contrast: for the A320CEO there's plenty of data available)

There is a the NEO perf calculator simsmart, but I going by their website they didn't use actual data tables but instead cross checked to flysmart until it was correct?
"All the data and performance figures have been tested by real world pilots and checked and compared for accuracy against the real world performance calculator, FlySmart."

edit:
" However, there is a limit to the accuracy SimSmart can gives due to the real world Neo engine performance data being protected by Airbus."
Read more of simsmarts webpage and yeah they are essentially just making an educated guess on the perf calcs.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, TaWeno said:

can we see the cockpit?

Old-ish picture but the best one I've found of the cockpit where everything is turned on. Would be nice with a new one at an airport gate or something but, looks really good:

[RogePete 28]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Juho Heikkinen:

Read more of simsmarts webpage and yeah they are essentially just making an educated guess on the perf calcs.

Yeah, we tried kind of the same. But there are so many whens and ifs, regarding weight, rwy, temp, wind, etc. The same goes with cost index.

[Paraso 7]

Any chance we could see a US airways livery?
Edit: Nevermind, P&W

[HDW Reggie 3]

On 5/22/2023 at 6:06 PM, devve said:

Nope, Headwind is making one

 

Our collaboration with Qbit Simulations on the A321neo did not make significant headway as our primary attention has been directed towards the A330neo and the Sukhoi Superjet 100-95. It is worth noting that this partnership was established well before the introduction of the LatinVFR A321neo. As a result, no official announcement has been made regarding the development of this specific aircraft. Consequently, it is uncertain whether this planned addon will ever come to fruition. We apologize for any confusion caused

Headwind Community Manager

[Moo-Walk 21]

Hi to anyone who knows... will we see the famous flaps shake on the AS 330? 

[Muhammed Arda Öcal 1]

On 5/23/2023 at 4:52 PM, Mathijs Kok said:

As there was some time... 

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

Finally, what I love to see!

[Alvariteus 127]

On 5/24/2023 at 6:25 PM, HDW Reggie said:

Our collaboration with Qbit Simulations on the A321neo did not make significant headway as our primary attention has been directed towards the A330neo and the Sukhoi Superjet 100-95. It is worth noting that this partnership was established well before the introduction of the LatinVFR A321neo. As a result, no official announcement has been made regarding the development of this specific aircraft. Consequently, it is uncertain whether this planned addon will ever come to fruition. We apologize for any confusion caused

Headwind Community Manager

 

I think this forum became the best place in the net to be updated about the whole developments for MSFS, not just Aerosoft :'D

[dkaper 8]

Once this bird comes out I'm deleting the A310.

[wingscatcher 25]

I really hope that Aerosoft brings the A320 family to MSFS, we need some variance for the single aisle. I would love the A319, A320, A321 made by aerosoft, they were great in P3D and just by looking at the A330... these would definitely look so good in MSFS. Unfortunately, Fenix takes very long to even bring a new engine to the plane or a sharklet, I seriously dont count on any other aircraft from them any time soon.

[cptGio 50]

Fingers crossed for A321NEO

[YAG 194]

1 hour ago, wingscatcher said:

I really hope that Aerosoft brings the A320 family to MSFS, we need some variance for the single aisle. I would love the A319, A320, A321 made by aerosoft, they were great in P3D and just by looking at the A330... these would definitely look so good in MSFS. Unfortunately, Fenix takes very long to even bring a new engine to the plane or a sharklet, I seriously dont count on any other aircraft from them any time soon.

You have fenix which is next level.

[YAG 194]

Interesting I wonder which. AircrAft they are making but I really hope it’s a long haul.

[hedgehog9780 9]

From viewpoint of business I would vote for A340, I think (not say) to release this aircraft could be much faster as it is an wide body airplane (a great base already established) and a huge gap would be filled by this step, as there has not been a well-flying A340 on the simulator market for a long time.
From viewpoint of community I would vote on A321 / A21N. I know, that there is some, but many many simmers would like to see it in his/her own sim hangar.

 

And I wonder if they would announce a version of the A350... but let's see  I would very-very happy with it.

[Guest]

 

11 hours ago, YAG said:

Interesting I wonder which. AircrAft they are making but I really hope it’s a long haul.

Yes, the most common of the short haulers are out now, so it's time to focus on the long haulers which they are.

 

Would absolutely not be interesting personally to hear that time is being spent on developing a high quality A319 when there's a really good A320 out already + a really good 737 NG for that matter. Although an A321 NEO could be interesting.