Aerosoft Airbus X

[Raffaele 1]

Hi all and hi Mathijs..

I only have one question and maybe a request!!!

What about for wheater radar integration into ND?

I think that it's a good thing to add!!!

Congrats for this wonderfull job..

Bye

[Stewart 134]

Hi all and hi Mathijs..

I only have one question and maybe a request!!!

What about for wheater radar integration into ND?

I think that it's a good thing to add!!!

Congrats for this wonderfull job..

Bye

Read the thread Raffaele. Weather radar will not be included for the reasons previously stated.

[Raffaele 1]

Read the thread Raffaele. Weather radar will not be included for the reasons previously stated.

Thanks Stewart,i didn't find this before!..

I'm sorry for double post;)

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

I asked these questions a week ago but never received an answer???

A.) Will all repaints have the same dirt (in paint-kit like Captain Sim's) or can it be added to one's individual taste?

B.) So far, I have not seen any dynamic shine or alpha...will it be added to the released product?

A.) It's a separate layer in the paint kit. So you can edit that as much as you like. It's not an easy paintkit but it allows you to get exactly the same results as we do, very extensive.

B.) I am not sure what you mean with dynamic shine or alpha. An alpha layer can be a lot of things, it's sort of a configuration file for textures, it is not a "feature" as such (always funny to see it in a feature list as it can do reflection, transparency, glossiness or even specularity etc. Saying the aircraft used alpha layers is like saying it uses "real textures".). And yes of course we got use a dynamic specular to give surfaces individual reflective properties, if you would see the difference immediate if it were removed in all the screenshots. It surprises me you did not see it. Perhaps it's because we do not want to make the aircraft as clean as some other addons are.

Sorry I missed your older questions:

1) yes the screens show a reflection, but it is not dynamic. You don't want that believe me, lol. Also keep in mind that the builders of these aircraft do their best to avoid ANY reflection and are rather good at that. Some people think they reflect a lot because they have seen pictures, but most pictures of cockpits are done with flash and give a very incorrect impression. I was in a 737 NG pit yesterday (cloudy day) and could not detect any reflection what so ever. It's one of those things that sound great, but is not very realistic.

2) Yes, there is no other serious way in FSX.

3) Chocks, traffic cones and a GPSU. We would be silly to other add stuff that AES can provide a lot better!

4) No. It would mean a complete recompile of all cockpit files. But it's not a big deal, the colors we use are almost standard in the newer generation, it's rare a company wants it different.

5)...

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Just to alleviate any concerns, several aspects of the PFD and ND that are visible in that video have already changed pretty substantially. The first things I see, noticeable just from the still image, are: control surface limits and indicator plus the yaw bar (under 30 ft radalt) have been added to the PFD when on the ground; the bottom of the speed tape's markers are eliminated; on the ND, VOR's, airports, etc. are properly masked; Mathijs may have the VOR / ADF needles set to OFF, but all needles are in fact present, selectable, etc. ; Flight Mode Annunciator indications have changed and been added to; the flightplan is of course visible in the proper Nav Display modes... and probably a dozen other things. Again, this is just to snuff out any fires that the video may ignite. ;-) The displays immediately struck me as slightly older versions. But work on them is progressing nicely.

Scott

So noted! We'll do a special high def video on release of the displays as they are really gorgeous.

And as said before, all in xml so you can tweak ANYTHING if you think we done something wrong. We now found out that although C++ is a lot easier to develop in (debugging in xml is hell) the actual performance is the same. We got something like 80.000 lines of code running in the VC and it does not seem to matter a lot. Real surprise that.

Finn worked today a lot on the "state saving" that allows you to load and save the exact state of all systems. 900+ variables. Huge amount of code but it's a feature we feel very strong about. We really love it to be able to save your flight and your aircraft as detailed as possible.

[federalfsx 2]

Mathijs, if i pre-order, will i get a download link once its released? or how does it work.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Mathijs, if i pre-order, will i get a download link once its released? or how does it work.

If you want the download version I would not pre-order, that's for the boxed version. Just link into the newsletter: http://www.shop.aerosoft.com/eshop.php?action=news_detail&news_id=51 and we'll make sure you know about it.

Or just keep following this here, we'll be as open and honest as we can about a release date and we are not afraid to leave a few things to be patched up. Any aircraft that is done internally in Aerosoft is a work in progress when it is released. We know there are always things to fix and we know there are always more things customers would like to see added or changed. Beta tests are nice, but customers know better. Learned that the hard way.

[curt1 23]

Mmmm indeed.... need to check that, sorry!

That pesky fuel pump file has tarnished a good number of addons. I silenced it forever by renaming it. The sounds otherwise sound great, and knowing they're from a real Airbus makes me think I won't tweak them at all.

Curt

[federalfsx 2]

Great Mathijs. And Curt whats the file called? would really like to know

Thanks

[SimPilot767 157]

Great video! Thanks for that!

I noticed, that on the original airbus the ND-screen "stucks" for nearly 2 seconds

if you switch between the modes and the range with a green message on the display

"mode change" and "range change". This is still missing here, but maybe this is work in progress...

Regards,

Timo

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Great video (except the cessna fuel pumps sound )! Thanks for that!

I noticed, that on the original airbus the ND-screen "stucks" for nearly 2 seconds

if you switch between the modes and the range with a green message on the display

"mode change" and "range change". This is still missing here, but maybe this is work in progress...

Regards,

Timo

I believe that on the older versions this was indeed the case. The newer versions (with the square displays) got a faster CPU and it's near instant. Need to check on that though.

And could we please ignore the sounds for now, arghhhhh, lol.

[curt1 23]

If you want the download version I would not pre-order, that's for the boxed version. Just link into the newsletter: http://www.shop.aerosoft.com/eshop.php?action=news_detail&news_id=51 and we'll make sure you know about it.

Or just keep following this here, we'll be as open and honest as we can about a release date and we are not afraid to leave a few things to be patched up. Any aircraft that is done internally in Aerosoft is a work in progress when it is released. We know there are always things to fix and we know there are always more things customers would like to see added or changed. Beta tests are nice, but customers know better. Learned that the hard way.

Glad you brought this up, since many here have probably experienced the recent fiasco with that "other" Airbus developer. If your plane can take off and land, then you've just beaten your competition. Well, that's not totally accurate, but it will ring true for some. A new release having a few rough edges and loose ends to fix, I think we all expect that; if there's a long, lengthy list of issues, then I'd prefer you hold the release back a bit if need be. You've released enough products to know where to draw the line, so I'll just trust that.

Curt

[curt1 23]

Great Mathijs. And Curt whats the file called? would really like to know

Thanks

The file is fuel_pump. It's located in your FSX/Sound folder. I renamed it to fuel_pump_disabled, and it's never bothered me again.

Curt

[Emi 5161]

Is there already a video out of this airbus or not?

I can't find one, but a few persons are talking about it,

so where can i find it? Youtube, Myvideo or where?

[Emi 5161]

an other question:

is the terrain on ND switch going to be functional?

or is it just for a good look there?

[Guest inbrekers1]

an other question:

is the terrain on ND switch going to be functional?

or is it just for a good look there?

PLEASE! I'm begging you... read other posts in the topic.. Then you will find the answer. On page 31 it has been answered.

[Todd_F 38]

Mathijs,

As I understand it the Airbus will not have any wing-flex implemented. It is not a huge issue because it really doesn't have much flex to begin with. However, would it be possible at a later date to create a wing-flex enabled swap-out .mdl? That way people could decide whether they want it or not.

Thanks,

Todd

[virtualstuff 76]

Great videos

[SimPilot767 157]

Mathijs,

As I understand it the Airbus will not have any wing-flex implemented. It is not a huge issue because it really doesn't have much flex to begin with. However, would it be possible at a later date to create a wing-flex enabled swap-out .mdl? That way people could decide whether they want it or not.

Thanks,

Todd

Don´t forget that all the work of development always has economic reasons, so i doubt that a developer spents expensive

time on this questionable .mdl-file.

And you did already admit, that the wing-flex is hardly visible on the A32X. (Something different on the A380 - there you

can see a huge wingflex)

Timo

[andromeda 51]

To Mathijs and all those of you involved in the development of the Airbus project:

I just took a look at the uploaded preview beta videos (And I'm referring to the one called "VC.wmv").

Excellent! I like the floodlights at the rear cockpit ceiling (Whatever they are called.). And despite the fact that it's not a crucial flight function the folding and moving jump seat is very nice.

[SimPilot767 157]

To Mathijs and all those of you involved in the development of the Airbus project:

I just took a look at the uploaded preview beta videos (And I'm referring to the one called "VC.wmv").

Excellent! I like the floodlights at the rear cockpit ceiling (Whatever they are called.). And despite the fact that it's not a crucial flight function the folding and moving jump seat is very nice.

Good post, Andromeda!

And i really wonder what kind of little boy quotes a post like this down? For what reason?

Andromeda says nothing offending, asked no needless question but rather praised aerosoft´s work.

So what reason for quoting such a post down??? This is not very mature...

And like Mathijs and Finn said a lot of times: If you don´t know the sense of quoting, let it be...

Thanks

Timo

[AJM101 3]

Mathijs, I know I said that this product could never compete with Airsimmer and all and that it was stupid because it wont have any systems etc. but I take all that back. I'm actually looking forward to this product now, and I was wondering....... could you guys model an A319 too?

[SimPilot767 157]

Just to bring up some humor again...

Mathijs, it´s very comfortable in your VC....

Regards,

Timo

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

an other question:

is the terrain on ND switch going to be functional?

or is it just for a good look there?

Emi, who don't you spend a few moments reading before posting messages? http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=31804. As you see from the negative rating on your post it is something most users would do.

Same for the video, just scroll up a few posts and you'll find the links to it.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Mathijs,

As I understand it the Airbus will not have any wing-flex implemented. It is not a huge issue because it really doesn't have much flex to begin with. However, would it be possible at a later date to create a wing-flex enabled swap-out .mdl? That way people could decide whether they want it or not.

Thanks,

Todd

In principle yes. But it would be asking us to spend rather serious development time on something that would just not me very realistic. It's at best a few pixels on the screen and it never moves very realistic. So I doubt we'll spend the time on it.