Microsoft Flight Simulator Aerosoft Aircraft - A330 Preview

[cwa alt 47]

Just now, NIT267 said:

Flying holds manually is not hard to do whatsoever. Each leg above 14,000 feet is timed at 1.5 minutes and at 265 knots. Really not that hard to do...

yea but if aerosoft is aiming at normal ops than that should be included, also controllers will give you holds at a specific waypoint so doing them manually can add a layer of stress and complexitiy having to handle radio calls and try to fly a pattern around a waypoint with no reference

[Ozzwald_GER 3]

Hmm.... im into Flight Simulation since FS 95.... long fellow Aerosoft Customer, but something has changed quiet fast during just a few month.... it doesnt feel as if it is the same Aerosoft i have known for ages now .... I cant explain it; a feeling.... a kind of arcade game feeling.... pre-AAU-Asobo-Planr-is-enough-feeling .... it has started before the uncomment vanish of the Otter ... but that is something leaving a sign that customers arent that mush worth as we thought ...

[NIT267 8]

1 minute ago, cwa alt said:

also controllers will give you holds at a specific waypoint so doing them manually can add a layer of stress and complexitiy having to handle radio calls and try to fly a pattern around a waypoint with no reference

Even if they are at a specific waypoint a controller will tell you either a time or a distance to keep your legs, even in the real world. All you would essentially have to do is just time it/monitor the distance from the waypoint as you do your laps in the hold. Also, I do know that it is a "basic" feature. However, it doesn't hurt to do things manually from time to time. If the FMS doesn't support it initially you can still use heading select to do your legs in the hold.

[ben carpy 40]

3 minutes ago, NIT267 said:

Even if they are at a specific waypoint a controller will tell you either a time or a distance to keep your legs, even in the real world. All you would essentially have to do is just time it/monitor the distance from the waypoint as you do your laps in the hold. Also, I do know that it is a "basic" feature. However, it doesn't hurt to do things manually from time to time. If the FMS doesn't support it initially you can still use heading select to do your legs in the hold.

I control app in the uk on vatsim. Most pilots can't even fly headings or follow climb instructions let alone flying a manual hold

[YAG 194]

Wow wow wow just wow, I really thought we are getting release date in the new page and all we got is screen shots with issues that showed how far the release is. Don’t get me wrong guys I think the blue bird 757 is closer than this plane. And what’s shocking is the aircraft is not coming with cabin, engine options failures or 200 variant, and basically we got a simple 8 month delay or possibly one year I’m really disappointed.

[pinolo1978 9]

so, new and completely useless site, in practice you have reported only what we already knew. in any case, no problem, I'll sit down and enjoy the release of the 757, the a300 inibuild and the next mega update of the a330 headwind, don't worry, wait and see how the market will cheat you even that 2% of the market that remains and before commenting, know that someone was smart enough to put on sale a product declared in beta at half the price, very usable and which will end up as study level, maybe you could learn something about marketing.

[Bojangles 87]

Wow, just wow.  Thank God that MSFS has created this boon of new and exciting developers, with some of them being free.  The old guard of developers are clearly just being outmatched by new comers.  I have mentioned it many times before in my past posts, that people should be very, very concerned about this product.  And I think this website just answers that question.

[GruenePizza 5]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Alvariteus:

Just... wow.

 

I always tried to stay calm about this development, but the website, the issues that are still pending, even the wingflex (which is a pretty simple thing compared to others)... I don't think we will gonna see this aircraft released in 2023. I think too much hype was created around this website, and maybe the communication was way ahead the real development status. I feel really disappointed, and I think it is time to think about other options that will come first and give Aerosoft all the time they need to finish their product as a high fidelity aircraft, and even provide different engine options. Also, I don't understand why an A330neo was announce if the A330ceo is still in this situation.

 

Well, let's hope this will be clearify, but at the moment I don't see myself buying this product in the short or medium term. Good luck to the developers and keep working hard to save Aerosoft from a disaster.

 

vor 52 Minuten schrieb Syalsulaiman:

 

Thats it !! Off to XP11-12 ... Just cant get a decent long haul aircraft here while the Toliss A340 is just sitting there waiting for me to dash around the globe with

 

vor einer Stunde schrieb paolo pini:

so, new and completely useless site, in practice you have reported only what we already knew. in any case, no problem, I'll sit down and enjoy the release of the 757, the a300 inibuild and the next mega update of the a330 headwind, don't worry, wait and see how the market will cheat you even that 2% of the market that remains and before commenting, know that someone was smart enough to put on sale a product declared in beta at half the price, very usable and which will end up as study level, maybe you could learn something about marketing.

Something that strikes me more and more and somehow makes me angry when I look in the forums and then people there complain that AS would only generate hype and only make empty promises and so on, or that if you haven't heard anything from the development for a while, the project has already been declared dead, or the questions don't get an answer very quickly and then you get excited about it, or start together Product XXX is better anyway (then don't write something like that here in the forum but enjoy your flight.
Or others get upset about promises that have been made, but these promises were NEVER made, it could always be and that's right.
You keep rocking yourselves up, and that's exhausting.

Then there are comments like, please release the plane before, for example, August 1st. I don't really understand.

And after sometimes so many unnecessary comments and reproaches, I fully understand why AS doesn't answer that much anymore.

 

If AS were to release an unfinished project now, everyone would scream "this is unfinished, full of bugs etc."

Really relax and look forward to an A330 that can fly well and hopefully only a few bugs have been found by the community.

 

I find it so tiring...
And a lot of people feel the same way who don't write anything.

And finally I would like to add a small but funny meme.

Please login to display this image.

[Frap 99 225]

1 hour ago, cwa alt said:

yea but if aerosoft is aiming at normal ops than that should be included, also controllers will give you holds at a specific waypoint so doing them manually can add a layer of stress and complexitiy having to handle radio calls and try to fly a pattern around a waypoint with no reference

Exactly!

[Repyuk 4]

2 hours ago, wingscatcher said:

To be honest, I wish Mathjas was back… this project is proper going down under based on the load of non-sense this website turned out to be. Shame to hear that in the flight sim free content gets delivered faster and it’s better than payware content… I’m out of this 

Like at least leave after the aircraft has been released ahaha

[Frap 99 225]

2 hours ago, Bojangles said:

Wow, just wow.  Thank God that MSFS has created this boon of new and exciting developers, with some of them being free.  The old guard of developers are clearly just being outmatched by new comers.  I have mentioned it many times before in my past posts, that people should be very, very concerned about this product.  And I think this website just answers that question.

That's right. AS standards is lacking.

[LifeBeginsAtV1 78]

1 minute ago, Frap 99 said:

That's right. As standards is lacking.

I agree, why paying 50 - 70 Euros for this limited product when you can soon get a ambitious A380 with everything you could imagen, for FREE!. 

[GruenePizza 5]

vor 6 Minuten schrieb paolo pini:

we aim to release it in December indeed no, April ah no, 1-4 months indeed no we realized that there are many problems and therefore we are opening a site specifically to summarize what we already know. therefore, either you have your eyes blindfolded and you only see what you like or you have no idea what real marketing is, exactly like aerosoft.

The release dates always said it could be, or even it's done when it's done, AS said never more. And would you rather have a finished product that you also enjoy a lot or have a half-finished product with many bugs that you will only get upset about?

[DLH9KA 69]

Hello

 

@Aerosoft : 

 

At this stage of development a feature set should be already fix and not in the process of beeing finalized! 

 

Anyway my thoughts as a flightsimmer on the minimum required features: 

 

- offset flying --> commong procedure used on a daily basis when crossing the NAT

- manually entering and defining waypoints --> not only to enter coordinates like LAT LON but also to create "helpers" along the route for diversions, or areas of special interest etc.

- ETP 

- full SID/STAR/HOLDING/ARINC LEG type/NPA/ILS/RNAV support --> everything used again on a daily basis around the globe during normal OPS

- TERR display, WX Radar --> NOT THE DEFAULT BROKEN MSFS TERRAIN DISPLAY but a Airbus like system

- ACARS/ATSU/CPDLC Support  --> weather changes during long haul at destination and needs to be downloaded of course prior landing, communication is often used via datalink nowadays and absolutely a stadard feature in an A330 today

- SEC FPL /ALTN planning --> diversions happen not only because of aircraft malfunctions but also because of weather etc. As MSFS has a very great weather system, it is crucial to be able to divert! 

 

Pricing VS features: 

 

Have a look at Fenix! 

 

Fair price for a huge feature set! 

If you cut out all "non-normals" and the failure simulation and the fuses etc... you'd come up with the above mentioned features at around 40 to maybe 45€ not a single cent more!!!!

 

Possible early access? 

 

Many are having the feeling that a kind of early access is coming up! 

Maybe because of the missing features at release like stuff you mention in regard to online flying or because it got common nowadays. 

If you plan to do so...please tell us honestly! 

If not tell us as well please! 

 

Expectations: 

 

As you may have noticed the expectations dramatically disconnect from the current project staus! 

Maybe you should not have been writing about exciting news when not coming up with exciting news! 

 

For the rest....

 

I hope you seriously have a good feature set at release without basic stuff missing! 

And again... basic stuff for a long haul aircraft includes more features than for a medium haul A320! 

 

 

 

[JeremyBoyles 40]

When the A330 will be released:

Please login to display this image.

[Tom 392]

Hello all,

 

Needless to say, we missed the mark with this one, and there have clearly been some communication issues with the launch of the A330 portal. We have already began going through the forum posts from today, and will have a further statement out as soon as we can from our CIO that clarifies some of the issues brought up in this thread, such as the lack of new information about the project, and the incomplete FAQ's which we are aware need to have further explanations as some of the questions posted there do not provide enough information, such as the one regarding Vatsim/Online use, which seems to have raised quite a lot of questions. 

 

This is not being posted immediately as rather than rushing out a statement we will instead will discuss the issues brought up internally first between departments responsible for the A330, so we can come up with a plan moving forward to address said concerns. Furthermore, I do just want to quickly clarify that we have not specifically mentioned any/which particular systems that will be missing at launch, but this is something that will specifically be talked about internally, so we can clarify this for you. 

 

We appreciate everyone's comments, even if they were not what we wanted to hear, as ultimately this is what will allow us to improve going forward. We'll of course be keeping the thread unlocked for any further comments you may have. 

 

Thanks for your patience in the meantime.

 

[bob fox 16]

1 minute ago, Tom said:

Hello all,

 

Needless to say, we missed the mark with this one, and there have clearly been some communication issues with the launch of the A330 portal. We have already began going through the forum posts from today, and will have a further statement out as soon as we can from our CIO that clarifies the issues brought up in this thread, such as the lack of new information about the project, and the incomplete FAQ's which we are aware need to have further explanations as some of the questions posted there do not provide enough information, such as the one regarding Vatsim/Online use, which seems to have raised quite a lot of questions. 

 

This is not being posted immediately, as rather than rushing out a statement, we will instead will discuss the issues brought up internally first between departments responsible for the A330, so we can come up with a plan moving forward to address said concerns. Furthermore, I do just want to quickly clarify that we have not specifically mentioned any/which particular systems that will be missing at launch, but this is something that will specifically be talked about internally, so we can clarify this for you. 

 

We appreciate everyone's comments, even if they were not what we wanted to hear, as ultimately this is what will allow us to improve going forward. We'll of course be keeping the thread unlocked for any further comments you may have. 

 

Thanks for your patience in the meantime.

 

you guys need to carefully examine what you put out so you don spark this outrage from your customers, there needs to be less vague generalities when going over what systems are going to be simulated or not, please dont miss the mark on the follow up statement

[twnsor 31]

5 minutes ago, Tom said:

Hello all,

 

Needless to say, we missed the mark with this one, and there have clearly been some communication issues with the launch of the A330 portal. We have already began going through the forum posts from today, and will have a further statement out as soon as we can from our CIO that clarifies the issues brought up in this thread, such as the lack of new information about the project, and the incomplete FAQ's which we are aware need to have further explanations as some of the questions posted there do not provide enough information, such as the one regarding Vatsim/Online use, which seems to have raised quite a lot of questions. 

 

This is not being posted immediately, as rather than rushing out a statement, we will instead will discuss the issues brought up internally first between departments responsible for the A330, so we can come up with a plan moving forward to address said concerns. Furthermore, I do just want to quickly clarify that we have not specifically mentioned any/which particular systems that will be missing at launch, but this is something that will specifically be talked about internally, so we can clarify this for you. 

 

We appreciate everyone's comments, even if they were not what we wanted to hear, as ultimately this is what will allow us to improve going forward. We'll of course be keeping the thread unlocked for any further comments you may have. 

 

Thanks for your patience in the meantime.

 

Hi Tom,

 

I don't mean to poke at you here, but communication seems to be lacking internally. Why is it that the website says that some maneuvers will not be available from day 1 when the team isn't willing to share what maneuvers won't be available? Of course, this is not your fault, but I still think, even now, Aerosoft is rushing things in the wrong direction. I don't think a further statement is necessary since this is the statement on its own, but I do think people and myself would appreciate a roadmap with "general" timelines of what Aerosoft plans to do, especially since some of the issues have already been publically said on the website.

 

Thanks.

[anndrew 12]

13 minutes ago, Tom said:

Hello all,

 

Needless to say, we missed the mark with this one, and there have clearly been some communication issues with the launch of the A330 portal. We have already began going through the forum posts from today, and will have a further statement out as soon as we can from our CIO that clarifies the issues brought up in this thread, such as the lack of new information about the project, and the incomplete FAQ's which we are aware need to have further explanations as some of the questions posted there do not provide enough information, such as the one regarding Vatsim/Online use, which seems to have raised quite a lot of questions. 

 

This is not being posted immediately as rather than rushing out a statement we will instead will discuss the issues brought up internally first between departments responsible for the A330, so we can come up with a plan moving forward to address said concerns. Furthermore, I do just want to quickly clarify that we have not specifically mentioned any/which particular systems that will be missing at launch, but this is something that will specifically be talked about internally, so we can clarify this for you. 

 

We appreciate everyone's comments, even if they were not what we wanted to hear, as ultimately this is what will allow us to improve going forward. We'll of course be keeping the thread unlocked for any further comments you may have. 

 

Thanks for your patience in the meantime.

 

I would imagine it'd be common sense to release an aircraft only when, at the BARE MINIMUM, it could perform all functionality under VATSIM ATC. Though I assume it is not. Aerosoft at this point doesn't seem to surprise me with the comically sad project management internally and externally.

[Jonas K 36]

It seems like there are massive problems internally after Mathjis left. With such a big developer/publisher, something like this should never happen. I think Aerosoft has really disappointed a lot of people in the community and maybe they need to make up for it. The news in the portal doesn't sound like news. It seems like the release has slipped further into the distance again. Let's hope that in the next few days/weeks or even months the tide will turn and we will have a wonderful new product. 
 

[DLH9KA 69]

I think the development of the Airbus A330 has gone into a very problematic situation! 

 

First of all expectation vs possible reality: 

 

Over the last years we have seen that very good quality AddOns dont need to cost very much at all. 

Fenix is very fair with regards to features vs price as is the ATR.

JustFlights airliners are a bit more expensive but feature a lot of variants and theire respective features. 

And freeware developers like Working Title and Fly By Wire etc....have showed us what can be done by the community. 

Especially the last part is the most interesting one with regard to the A330 development.

Although there is no competition between a freeware WIP Mod for an even different A330 version, it is needless to say that the underlying features in regard to flight management systems, interface, usability etc. are very capable and in many areas above some payware standards! 

If aerosoft aimed for a normal ops, pilot focused systems simulation then the whole freeware feature list has to be exceeded as of day one! 

And in my opinion this is the problem here....

 

I guess we know that many features are considered uneccessary or more complex than intented by aerosoft and put aside. 

But what if you can have thos features for free versus to pay for less? 

Yes you guessed it...it becomes problematic! 

Furthermore the fantastic headwind developers are in the process of creating even more A330 specific systems and an own cockpit for it to get rid of the default Asobo stuff. 

Once that happens....it is a real desaster in terms of selling a software which features are at lower standards compared to maybe freeware. 

Only exception may be the XBox market! 

 

So in my personal opinion this situation plus the early development fails in regard to those missing and marked as unneccessary features is the root cause for what is happening now. 

Let's wait, see and hope they will be able to put a good and nicely done A330 together! 

[mo35k 10]

 

I don't usually post or comment, but I felt compelled to share my thoughts on this matter.

 

The lack of communication surrounding the A330's development has been particularly frustrating. We eagerly anticipated this release and were met with substantial hype from the company. However, as time passed, their updates became sparse, vague, and at times, misleading. This lack of transparency has left many of us feeling let down and betrayed as loyal supporters.

 

Additionally, the company's decision to announce the product without essential and basic features expected from an Airbus A330 is deeply disappointing. It appears as if they disregarded the valuable feedback and desires of the community entirely.

 

As a responsible consumer, if the comments on the FAQ are true. I would not purchase a half-finished products. It is important for me to invest in products that meet my expectations and provide the value I seek. Choosing to buy an incomplete add-on would only lead to dissatisfaction and frustration, which is not a desirable experience for any consumer.

 

Aerosoft's handling of the Airbus A330 for MSFS has been a disappointing experience filled with fake hype and a lack of transparent communication. I sincerely hope that Aerosoft listens to the concerns of their community and takes this criticism constructively. As loyal customers, we invest time, money, and passion into this hobby, and we deserve to be treated with respect and honesty by the developers we have supported over the years.

 

[belisar 126]

I think the thing to understand is that most of the reaction is one of disappointment. People that expected more of Aerosoft, or something to be communicated better. The way the product page was setup it led people to believe that the product is of lower quality than people who trust Aerosoft or have been old customers of theirs expect.

 

I do appreciate how this was handled by Aerosoft though, and Tom's message above is one that reflects a sound organization with proper consideration for its customers. Mishaps happen, and companies with deeper pockets than Aerosoft have had worse launches. If Tom's message is an indication of things to come, then I think that we are on a good path. 

 

Yes, the disappointment comes from a place of love and appreciation for Aerosoft, who also develops, supports, and delivers other amazing products beyond the A330, which has not been released yet. I am guilty myself of being fast to react to this and being a bit harsher than I usually am, but many people have worked too long and I don't want to be in their place reading this forum, commenting on something they have not launched yet.

 

Even when it does launch, it is more of a question of being straightforward with the feature list on launch and things will improve with time. I suggest everybody calms down, cut the people behind the avatars you see on the forum some slack, and give them a chance to make this right. 

[hpw44 1]

6 hours ago, NIT267 said:

Each leg above 14,000 feet is timed at 1.5 minutes and at 265 knots. 

 

 

No, it isn't.

 

I suggest you scan through PANS-OPS.

 

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/15-Ref09_Doc 8168 PANS-OPS Vol I Flight Procedures.PDF

 

 

 

[Tibbo 69]

The developments around the A330 really disappoint me, for a wider reason: I'll "show my age" and admit that I've been flight simming since C64 days, and have owned every version of MS's flightsims to date. Even back in FSFW95, FS98, FS2000 days, I learned one thing: if a product has "Aerosoft" on it, you can buy it immediately, without any fear you'll be disappointed. VFR Germany was revoltionary, the MegaAirports knocked you out of your chair, and when Aerosoft started developing planes as well, they were incredible. The Airbus A320 professional series was life changing (for me). 

 

That makes it so sad what's happening now. Under the assumption of the above, I bought the CRJ ... and was not totally impressed. Then the Otter ... not totally impressed. Then came the announcement of the A330 and I was very excited ... but ... yeah. See this thread. And then the Otter disappears with no explanation at all (has that ever happened before in our community with a developer of this clout?), then the A330 runs into big trouble ... it's taken what feels like a few months for Aerosoft to lose the spotless reputation it built up for decades. Sceneries still seem "safe", but Aerosoft airplanes ... I have lost trust, and it honestly pains me to admit that. Up until today (even!), I would have bought the A330 on release day ... I had that much trust left. Then the much-hyped site went live ... now I'll honestly wait a few days for the first solid reviews. For me, that's breaking a tradition for Aerosoft products that I have had since 20+ years, and I am only writing this because I really, really hope to impress upon Aerosoft how sad that makes me, and how much I hope they find back to their old path ... because this new way isn't the right one.