Aerosoft Airbus X - Preview

[Vee One 33]

*Expecting my post to be marked negatively :|

I still don't get the marking negative to the posts... Why is it ever used? I think it's the most unusable and ridiculous thing in Forums... Again I've said in other parts, Forums are to talk things out, not to outcast someone on their views or ignorance of something... I am really sick of it in some forums. Are we in a Roman circus or are we in a Forum? (I sometimes wonder how many people KNOW what a Forum was/is...)

If someone is really BAD and provocative, the admin should warn him or kick him out. Nobody should be intimidated to post their views so a kid or grown-up kid starts marking negative any comment. I hope the admin people here see this.

Just my two cents on this issue.

Vee One

[Nick C 110]

I still don't get the marking negative to the posts... Why is it ever used? I think it's the most unusable and ridiculous thing in Forums... Again I've said in other parts, Forums are to talk things out, not to outcast someone on their views or ignorance of something... I am really sick of it in some forums. Are we in a Roman circus or are we in a Forum? (I sometimes wonder how many people KNOW what a Forum was/is...)

If someone is really BAD and provocative, the admin should warn him or kick him out. Nobody should be intimidated to post their views so a kid or grown-up kid starts marking negative any comment. I hope the admin people here see this.

Just my two cents on this issue.

Vee One

I just marked your post up, I will admit I'm a big kid.

[Guest pao]

The wing on the A321 does flex, in fact you can move it around a foot by hand, and it'll flex even more in flight. In fact, the A321 wing flexes the most out of the entire family due to the greater wing loading.

Aerosoft has choosen not to replicate the wing flex on the basis of performance, and they have not hidden the fact - and I am more than happy because overall the package looks excellent.

Now, for those touting the fact that the pilot doesn't see the wing flex as a reason it was not modelled, please think about it. If that were really the case, then what is the point of modelling any of the exterior of the aircraft? Or the Houchin? Or the chocks?

My post isn't intended to be inflammatory, honest.

*Expecting my post to be marked negatively :|

... Well the pilot sees the chocks and the outside model (during walk around tour prior to push back)... Sorry ;-)

[EightSevenNorth 18]

... Well the pilot sees the chocks and the outside model (during walk around tour prior to push back)... Sorry ;-)

Is this tit for tat?

[cbd80 258]

Will people stop asking about wing flex ! There will be no wing flex on this plane, it has been explained ten thousand times why there will not be some !

The pilot can't see wing flex from his seat and this plane is all about the pilot

I agree, it has been clearly explained why wing flex isn't included. I was on an A321 a couple of weeks back and sat over the wing both ways. The wing flex was minimal, certainly nothing to get excited about and it wouldn't make a good screen shot or video. Stick to the heavies for that.

What's important here is for the systems to be modelled accurately and the flight characteristics.

I've seen the beta of this product and I must say it is one of the best aircraft I've seen to date visually. The systems are coming along nicely, but they take time to implement and get right. No one should be asking for a rushed release, as it'll only give you problems! Give the developers time to get things right and you won't be disappointed

Hang in there,

Chris

[Guest pao]

Is this tit for tat?

Well It has been explained thousand times by Mathijs that the bus was focusing on the pilot job.... nothing to add more.

[Vee One 33]

I just marked your post up, I will admit I'm a big kid.

LOL

[juju 38]

I'm sorry about my question

But i think the main issue in fsx is the reality no the captain and fisrt officer jobs only ,they are include into

And wing flex can add reality with smooth wind for example

[Stewart 134]

I'm sorry about my question

But i think the main issue in fsx is the reality no the captain and fisrt officer jobs only ,they are include into

And wing flex can add reality with smooth wind for example

Some cheese with that sir?

[AA777-200ER 549]

Let's get off the wing-flex, it's not going to happen according to Mathijs!

Now for some real questions.....

First, are the viewpoints going to be set at a 4x3 ratio (normal for FSX) or at a 16x9 ratio (all newer LCD and laptop screens).

Secondly, is the cockpit lighting going to work during daylight hours (like the PMDG B744) or not (normal for FSX).

Thanks for any answers given...Darryl

[liam727 45]

Let's get off the wing-flex, it's not going to happen according to Mathijs!

Now for some real questions.....

First, are the viewpoints going to be set at a 4x3 ratio (normal for FSX) or at a 16x9 ratio (all newer LCD and laptop screens).

Secondly, is the cockpit lighting going to work during daylight hours (like the PMDG B744) or not (normal for FSX).

Thanks for any answers given...Darryl

HEY,

Anyone know if there will be wingflex? can we pleeeeeease have some?

I am not sure why you would need to be able to have the lights on in the day time, it seems like something extra that probably sucks up frames, but dont take my word for it.

[cbd80 258]

Secondly, is the cockpit lighting going to work during daylight hours (like the PMDG B744) or not (normal for FSX).

Thanks for any answers given...Darryl

Hi. Yes the cockpit lighting works during the day.

Chris

[juju 38]

The aérosoft airbus simulates the brake fan system to decrease the temperature?

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51561]

The wing on the A321 does flex, in fact you can move it around a foot by hand, and it'll flex even more in flight. In fact, the A321 wing flexes the most out of the entire family due to the greater wing loading.

Aerosoft has choosen not to replicate the wing flex on the basis of performance, and they have not hidden the fact - and I am more than happy because overall the package looks excellent.

Now, for those touting the fact that the pilot doesn't see the wing flex as a reason it was not modelled, please think about it. If that were really the case, then what is the point of modelling any of the exterior of the aircraft? Or the Houchin? Or the chocks?

The A321 wing flexes more then the A320/A319 for sure. But compared to Boeing's or large aircraft it is really very little. Seeing it from the cockpit it would be a few pixels at best. Just seems not worth the resources (in time, money, memory and FPS). That apart from the fact it is not very realistic done in FSX most of the time, almost always it moves to fast (if it is done with the right speed many customers would hardly notice it) and that it should be done independent for each wing. We do know a lot about it, our Discus glider has it done extremely well, up to adding sound effects that let you hear the components under duress. As I said so often, it's one of those things that look good on a feature list and mean little when you actually use the product. As I also said before, I always am surprised when people show you how the wings move when the aircraft take-off and never seem to notice the empty seat next to them.

Now we do have a splendid external model because we see a detailed view of the aircraft before departing as part of the role of the pilot. They (and we all) see the aircraft from the outside when it is on the ground all the time.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51561]

Let's get off the wing-flex, it's not going to happen according to Mathijs!

Now for some real questions.....

First, are the viewpoints going to be set at a 4x3 ratio (normal for FSX) or at a 16x9 ratio (all newer LCD and laptop screens).

Secondly, is the cockpit lighting going to work during daylight hours (like the PMDG B744) or not (normal for FSX).

Thanks for any answers given...Darryl

Yes, I think we need to do viewpoints for both ratios. We worked with wide screens monitors only but I understood some people prefer 4x3 so we'll do something for them as well.

Not 100% sure I understand the light question, does this image show you what you hope to see?

[Gaura Mohana 23]

Yes, I think we need to do viewpoints for both ratios. We worked with wide screens monitors only but I understood some people prefer 4x3 so we'll do something for them as well.

Not 100% sure I understand the light question, does this image show you what you hope to see?

My laptop is a 1400x1050 screen, and therefore 4x3 is the only option for me

[EightSevenNorth 18]

The A321 wing flexes more then the A320/A319 for sure. But compared to Boeing's or large aircraft it is really very little. Seeing it from the cockpit it would be a few pixels at best. Just seems not worth the resources (in time, money, memory and FPS). That apart from the fact it is not very realistic done in FSX most of the time, almost always it moves to fast (if it is done with the right speed many customers would hardly notice it) and that it should be done independent for each wing. We do know a lot about it, our Discus glider has it done extremely well, up to adding sound effects that let you hear the components under duress. As I said so often, it's one of those things that look good on a feature list and mean little when you actually use the product. As I also said before, I always am surprised when people show you how the wings move when the aircraft take-off and never seem to notice the empty seat next to them.

Now we do have a splendid external model because we see a detailed view of the aircraft before departing as part of the role of the pilot. They (and we all) see the aircraft from the outside when it is on the ground all the time.

Mathijs,

I wasn't questioning your reasons for not including wing flex, I am perfectly happy that you had already reasoned why it was not to be included - many times over many posts. I am not asking for wing flex to be included!

My own observations having worked on the A320 family was that they wings can and do flex. In fact, you can even get the horizontal stabilisers to flex - easily seen on a ground run. The 737-1/2/3/4/5 wings flex even less than the Airbus.

I just wished more people would read your posts, and accept your reasoning.

[coqui 29]

Sorry if this question have been answered before. What will be the interaction between the Airbus and FSUIPC ? Independent ? In the other Bus in development multiples issues have come up due to FSUIPC lack of support. Thanks

[AA777-200ER 549]

I meant interior and panel lighting on those gloomy and poor weather days. FSX does not allow panel lighting during daylight hours but PMDG and Captain Sim aircraft do.

Yes, I think we need to do viewpoints for both ratios. We worked with wide screens monitors only but I understood some people prefer 4x3 so we'll do something for them as well.

Not 100% sure I understand the light question, does this image show you what you hope to see?

Yes...16x9 eye-point views on both the interior and exterior views, most aircraft are setup for 4x3 viewing making it a wide-angle almost fish-eye (especially in wing-view) when using today's monitors. It gets tiring always having to adjust viewpoints when entering a new aircraft except in saved flight mode.

Darryl

[LufthansaPilot 4]

The Aerosoft Airbus X cannot depart due to the volcanic eruption

PS: I am refering to the release date

[Emi 5161]

hey,

a question about the viewpoint of the pilot:

for what size of the pilot is it made? (i hope you understand what i mean "how big is the pilot who is simulated")

and i hope he sits in the middle of the seat!!! (not like in the wilco airbus ore in the wilco emb170/190)

a tool with what you can choose your size would be great, but i think this isn't possible right?

[hero93 27]

you can change your Position with:

"Shift" + "Enter"/"Backspace",

"Ctrl" + "Enter"/"Backspace" and

"Shift" + "Ctrl" + "Enter"/"Backspace"

[Emi 5161]

you can change your Position with:

"Shift" + "Enter"/"Backspace",

"Ctrl" + "Enter"/"Backspace" and

"Shift" + "Ctrl" + "Enter"/"Backspace"

thx for your answer but there is one point i can't do with that:

where can i get the information where i must turn my viewpoint for the view i would have in reallaty? and how much centimeters is the viewpoint going up when i go up one step?

i think it would be very difficould to get the correct point that way. but an developer who gets payed for making an tool which takes that work for you, should have no problem with that because he has time for that, because it's his work, if you understand what i mean.

but anyway thanks for your answer.

[Emi 5161]

The Aerosoft Airbus X cannot depart due to the volcanic eruption

PS: I am refering to the release date

well, but the eruption is not making so much problems any longer and we could fly the bus already (when even under 9000ft), but i still can't see the bus on the market.

[hero93 27]

thx for your answer but there is one point i can't do with that:

where can i get the information where i must turn my viewpoint for the view i would have in reallaty? and how much centimeters is the viewpoint going up when i go up one step?

i think it would be very difficould to get the correct point that way. but an developer who gets payed for making an tool which takes that work for you, should have no problem with that because he has time for that, because it's his work, if you understand what i mean.

but anyway thanks for your answer.

OMG