Aerosoft Airbus X - Preview

[Finn 873]

Regardles how long we hold it back in order to get it right, bugs will always be found once released to a bigger audience.

That is not due to sloppy work, we could test from now on and until christmas and then believe that all bugs has been found, but truth is we definitly wouldn´t have found them all.

Even a "simpler" addon like this is actually very complex. The easy thing about the Airbus for the user is that most systems are automated, but this put more compex work into the code.

When 100th (hopefully ) start to fly our Airbus, each one using it in their own way, new bugs will be revealed.

So at least a SP1 must be done.

Finn

[simon747 98]

1 week to go before September, I wouldn't hold my breath for an August release.

It's better to get it right, than to get it out early I guess. But then again I've never seen any big payware release that didn't need a patch or 2 later on.

Looks like some quality time with Mafia 2 this week

It was told a few days ago the download will be the 30th of august. So unless you are waiting for the boxed version you should ok with mafia for this week only. Lol

[Guest Wing]

will there be airway entries within the FMGS?

[Paul_Smith 8]

Well, that's why I don't dare to fly online right now nor in the future and that's why so many people don't dare either... I simply am scared off by the hardcore simmers... I am sure there are a lot of friendly people online who won't mind helping out newbies, but overall I always get the idea you need to be a fanatic hardcore simmer who sleeps with charts under his pillow to even THINK about flying online...

I am more of a Airbus X kind of guy, I guess...

Are you scared by the hardcore guys, or are you worried about what the other simmers "might" think. All the online outfits let (even encourage) you to sit on the sidelines and watch how others do it. If you try that and it is still not for you then fair enough, don't do it, but at least you won't be missing out on something simply for being afraid of what "might" be.

[AA777-200ER 543]

Mr. Kok, it would be nice to have a new "Signature" featuring the new Airbus. Could you or your team consider creating one like PMDG has done in the past?

Can't wait for my late birthday present...Darryl

[Danny E 15]

Gents, Ladies, I removed a bunch of posts (most from vibraman) and some who were a bit to personal.

Let me say it one more time, we did not include SID and STAR loading because we decided this would make the project to complex for some users. A controversial decision obviously but one we stand behind. As you read from many people it does not matter a whole lot because (a) you can still insert and fly them (or just fly them) and ( because in a crowded environment they are not so important (as actual pilots explained here time and time again).

I know it's been done to death, I don't want to rehash it all again so I won't comment on the "not being important part", but a few other things here confuse me. First, regarding the complexity issue, surely it's easier for people to just enter a SID or STAR instead of manually inserting the waypoints (putting in coordinates/radial and dme distances from a beacon might be a little too much for the "user in mind"). What I can't match up is that if SIDs and STARs are "too complicated" how on earth are people going to get their heads around Flex temperatures - a feature apparently included in this product?

From the features pdf it says the target audience are "people who want a realistic experience without having to spend many hours preparing for a flight." It'll take a lot longer to enter in every waypoint on a GORLO Rnav sid out of Amsterdam compared with pushing a couple of buttons to select the SID. I appreciate what you say - if we don't like it then don't buy it, that's a fair and valid point. I said before that I've come to associate Aerosoft with good quality products and I think a few people are just a little disappointed that this will fall short of the high standard that Aerosoft usually set. Clearly you've done your market research and homework, but I don't understand how if SIDs and STARs are too complicated, why Flex temperatures are considered a-okay for the amateur

[cbd80 258]

I know it's been done to death, I don't want to rehash it all again so I won't comment on the "not being important part", but a few other things here confuse me. First, regarding the complexity issue, surely it's easier for people to just enter a SID or STAR instead of manually inserting the waypoints (putting in coordinates/radial and dme distances from a beacon might be a little too much for the "user in mind"). What I can't match up is that if SIDs and STARs are "too complicated" how on earth are people going to get their heads around Flex temperatures - a feature apparently included in this product?

From the features pdf it says the target audience are "people who want a realistic experience without having to spend many hours preparing for a flight." It'll take a lot longer to enter in every waypoint on a GORLO Rnav sid out of Amsterdam compared with pushing a couple of buttons to select the SID. I appreciate what you say - if we don't like it then don't buy it, that's a fair and valid point. I said before that I've come to associate Aerosoft with good quality products and I think a few people are just a little disappointed that this will fall short of the high standard that Aerosoft usually set. Clearly you've done your market research and homework, but I don't understand how if SIDs and STARs are too complicated, why Flex temperatures are considered a-okay for the amateur

No wonder you are confused with all the advanced simmers pushing for something that this product is not; an advanced version.

It is aimed at the basic simmer who wants a little more to do in the cockpit than the default aircraft offer.

It is not a cause of 'wouldn't it make it easier to include SID/STARs?'. No, because the intended user of this product won't know what they are or be concerned with them. So no issue.

Adding SID/STARs for basic user would present the issue of 'how do I include them in my fsx default flight plan, or programme it in the MCDU?', and also, 'how do I know what procedure to fly'. Default fsx ATC isn't going to help the basic simmer with procedures and constraints.

I think it's a positive that Aerosoft has enabled the MCDU to recognise waypoints; this allows the more advanced or advancing simmer to use procedures, either as part of an imported flight plan or entered manually. This isn't ideal for the advanced user but I'm sure they can manage. I can. After all this product isn't intended for the advance simmer. Sorry.

Flex isn't too big an issue to explain and it's a case of reading the temp off the chart. I would have to check, but it maybe that this as many other values is automatically calculated for you in the MCDU.

I hope that adds some clarity.

Chris

[Danny E 15]

It is not a cause of 'wouldn't it make it easier to include SID/STARs?'. No, because the intended user of this product won't know what they are or be concerned with them. So no issue...Flex isn't too big an issue to explain and it's a case of reading the temp off the chart. I would have to check, but it maybe that this as many other values is automatically calculated for you in the MCDU.

I hope that adds some clarity.

Chris

I'm still not really following this part. Calculating a proper Flex temperature is quite an involved business if you don't have a program to input things such as the airfield, runway, temperature, QNH etc. You can read a temperature off of a chart, but each runway at each airfield requires its own chart because each runway has a different TORA/TODA/ASDA and a different elevation, that's without the variables of temperature and QNH and take off weight. If a straight-forward SID is going to confuse someone, Flex temperatures are going to be a total minefield.

I'm clearly not the target audience though, so I'll give up and lay it to rest. Just understandably disappointed and a little confused with Aerosoft's choices.

[TB10 Driver 17]

I'm still not really following this part. Calculating a proper Flex temperature is quite an involved business if you don't have a program to input things such as the airfield, runway, temperature, QNH etc. You can read a temperature off of a chart, but each runway at each airfield requires its own chart because each runway has a different TORA/TODA/ASDA and a different elevation, that's without the variables of temperature and QNH and take off weight. If a straight-forward SID is going to confuse someone, Flex temperatures are going to be a total minefield.

I'm clearly not the target audience though, so I'll give up and lay it to rest. Just understandably disappointed and a little confused with Aerosoft's choices.

The Load Manager contains a Takeoff Sheet where, if you choose, you can select the airfield, runway, enter temp, QNH, , runway conditions (wet, dry,etc.) engine anti-ice on/off , wing anti-ice on/off, packs on/of, etc. (also takes from the load manager page the aircraft weight (paylod & fuel)and it will calculate V speeds and Flex Temp value.

Bob

[Guest Wing]

regarding the GPWS and other general systems... can we expect to enter a landing DH or minimums (BARO), as well as hearing "hundred above" and "minumums" on the callout?

[Danny E 15]

Thanks Bob, that makes a little more sense. I don't envy the person creating that database though

[Aprilia 4 Ever 35]

the checklist seems a bit short to me?! there are no points like battery/on and much more....or is there a checklist included which will guide you through cold&dark to shutdown?!

best regards

[Finn 873]

My last comment on this.....

When we started this project we didn´t even plan adding a MCDU with the option to insert waypoints. It should merely display a default FSX flightplan and be used for Navigation radio tuning.

There are many terms and procedures wich will be very usefull to learn flying Airliners like it is done in real life.

But none of them are necessary in order to use this product.

To fly the Airbus X from A to B, using a flightplan, all You have to do is load a FSX flightplan, either build with FSX' own flightplanner or any 3rd party flightplanning utility like FSBUILD or FS Commander - both have SID´s and STARS btw.

SID`s are most often known before departure, and can be included in the initially build flightplan.

STARS are more troublesome, cause they are given when near the arrival airport.

But often they don´t consist of that many waypoints.

Entering a SID or STAR the "real" way isn´t that easy either.

You need to got into "Lateral revision" page, den chose "SIDS" or "STARS" then choose Your runway, then the SID or STAR given by ATC (FSX ATC knows nothing about SID/STARS btw) or the one most suitable for Your departure/arrival, and then the transition to use.

You might even have to scroll down the SID/STAR page to find the one You need and then confirm them.

Thats at least 6 actions before they are included to the flightplan.

Now asking why we included flex temp and not SID/STARS...

Adding code for selecting SID/STARS and airways are alot more complex than adding code for Flex temp.

Note that our Flex temp code is kept rather simple. It will affect take off power and thats it, but for procedural purposes for those trying to learn that term in works fine.

I need to say that You do not need to know anything about what Flex temp, transistion altitude, V-speeds or anything else that can be set in our Airbus.

Flex temp can offcourse not be automatically calculated.

V-speeds are automatically calculated, setting them according to aircraft weight and a Flaps 1 departure.

If You like to set Your own V-speeds according to real charts, then You can do just that.

Transition altitude is pre-set to 18.000 ft, wich is what FSX ATC uses for the entire globe. But You can set it Yourself for more realism.

Again there is no need to set any of those values inorder to use the Airbus X.

I agree that some of the documents we ship with Airbus X isn´t easy understandable for newbies.

Infact it would take a very large manual to go through all aviation terms used by Airliners.

What we hope with this product is to give newcbies a stepping stone into the world of flight simming, something the default FSX airliners don´t do, because they are nothing but scaled up Cessna 172's in terms of aircraft systems and avionics.

We hope that newbies, buying this addon, will get "blood on their teeth" to dvelve deeper into how aircraft functions and are operated, both technically and procedurally. Note that the systems simulation in Airbus X goes rather deep, again without the need to know how to oprate them, cause most systems on an Airbus are automated.

There are tons of information on the internet if You like to learn about that.

Both VATSIM and IVAO haves some great turorials that can be downloaded without actually having to fly online (and don´t be scared at that either).

We simply cannot deliver an addon + a complete guide about how to operate a complex aircraft that will be easy understandable for newbies.

When I started flightsimming (FS5.1) it was very easy, cause You could not buy addons with FMC's, IRS',VNAV etc.

There was no need to know anything about SID/STARS, Airways, transistion altitude etc. etc etc. cause it was simply not featured.

I was lucky to start at that time, cause I could grow alongside how FS developed through the various versions (FS for windows, FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS2004).

Not before FS2002 was there any ATC available, that was also the time where I bought my first highend addon (Dreamfleet 737).

Being a newbie today will put You on a very steep learning curve.

I think that if they buy a PMDG 747 or Level-D 767, then they will quit very fast and not return again.

This product is aimed at them, giving something they can use, having succes and grow with until they find themselve ready for more complex stuff.

It is also intended for those who don´t have much time for this hobby. people who can shedule maybe 2-3 hours a week. Using highend addons for them would simply end up in frustration. Note the average simmer is in the mid 40th, having wife, children and a house to keep.

I have flown the higend stuff for many years and still don´t regard myself as very good at it.

Doing it "Real" means that You need alot of suplementary applications, like weather programs and flightplanners.

Before even thinking on the take off run, You must do a weather briefing, find out wich runway and it's associated SID to expect. Also checking enroute weather, expected arrival runway, STAR, transition and then select Your route.

Then You must do proper weight calculations and find out how much fuel to take. Last not least You must get take off parameters, like V-speeds and flex temperature.

If You bypass any of the above items, then Your flight will be as unrealistic as when not using SID's and STARS.

I doubt that any newbie or casual flightsimmer will spend his/her time on that.

I even doubt that many of those demanding SID/STARS in this forum go into this depth very often.

Problem is that alot of those hardcore flightsimmers seems to believe that it is normal procedure to fly the entire SID, STAR, Route, yeah even using VNAV from take off to ILS capture.

I really think that we have been 100% honest right from the start about what this Airbus will feature and what NOT.

Many has tried to urge us doing it more hardcore - partly they have succeeded, cause we added a MCDU with alot more features than we planned at the start of this project.

The Airbus X is not "as real as it get's", nor have we ever stated that.

But we still hope that those, at wich this project is aimed, will find many ours of fun in it, and will use it as a stepping stone to more complex stuff.

Finn

[Scout59 7]

 Hello Finn,

I totally agree with your statement 

"This product is aimed at them, giving something they can use, having succes and grow with until they find themselve ready for more complex stuff.It is also intended for those who don´t have much time for this hobby. people who can shedule maybe 2-3 hours a week. Using highend addons for them would simply end up in frustration. Note the average simmer is in the mid 40th, having wife, children and a house to keep."

I'm in the 50's and fly for fun and to relax. I haven't got the time and the nerve to spend hours reading manuals how to get a bird into the air. I have a few more complex aircraft in my sim, and I use them when I have time to set up all systems. But for a 1 to 2 hour flight after work a addon like the AirbusX ist just right.

PS:  I have a trick to use SIDS in FSX for myself. Its not legal in real aviation, but its fun and works:

I get my bird running with my flightplan loaded with all my waypoints and a SID, roll to the runway and take off. After the SID has been flown, I open the ATC window and request flight following. Works everytime!   

Keep up the good work and Cheers,

[CRM320 41]

I know it's been done to death, I don't want to rehash it all again so I won't comment on the "not being important part", but a few other things here confuse me. First, regarding the complexity issue, surely it's easier for people to just enter a SID or STAR instead of manually inserting the waypoints (putting in coordinates/radial and dme distances from a beacon might be a little too much for the "user in mind"). What I can't match up is that if SIDs and STARs are "too complicated" how on earth are people going to get their heads around Flex temperatures - a feature apparently included in this product?

From the features pdf it says the target audience are "people who want a realistic experience without having to spend many hours preparing for a flight." It'll take a lot longer to enter in every waypoint on a GORLO Rnav sid out of Amsterdam compared with pushing a couple of buttons to select the SID. I appreciate what you say - if we don't like it then don't buy it, that's a fair and valid point. I said before that I've come to associate Aerosoft with good quality products and I think a few people are just a little disappointed that this will fall short of the high standard that Aerosoft usually set. Clearly you've done your market research and homework, but I don't understand how if SIDs and STARs are too complicated, why Flex temperatures are considered a-okay for the amateur

Danny, you can fly the 320 without a SID or STAR but you can't without a Flex temp (SOP: Use of reduced thrust levels is optional but will ensure operating efficiency, reliability and engine service life). That might answer your question. If you want realistic, there is your answer.

Regards

D

[yankeesji 38]

Is there going to be a update later with Sids and Stars?

Sorry, I just haven't seen one of those today...

[Danny E 15]

Danny, you can fly the 320 without a SID or STAR but you can't without a Flex temp (SOP: Use of reduced thrust levels is optional but will ensure operating efficiency, reliability and engine service life). That might answer your question. If you want realistic, there is your answer.

Regards

D

That's not strictly true, you can do a full power takeoff, you don't require an assumed temperature. You're right that reduced thrust takeoffs prolong engine life but you don't require a Flex temp. to fly an Airbus any more than you need a SID/STAR function. However, in reality, unless there are over-riding performance reasons a flex temperature is used for departure and if your flightplan contains a SID and a STAR then pilots will load these into the FMC/FMGC. I do want realistic, but it's been explained that Aerosoft won't provide that, I was just wondering about why certain features had been selected over others, that's all. Apparently it just comes down to an easy function to program, that's fair enough.

[guenseli 76]

PS: I have a trick to use SIDS in FSX for myself. Its not legal in real aviation, but its fun and works:

I get my bird running with my flightplan loaded with all my waypoints and a SID, roll to the runway and take off. After the SID has been flown, I open the ATC window and request flight following. Works everytime!

thats my practise, too

Maybe I have wrote that before: there are many flightplanning tools out there, where you can define SIDs and STARs and save them as a FSX flightplan. These will than exactly show up in the Bus' ND.

So, the only difference will be, that you don't enter the SID into your FMC but in your Flightplanning-Tool.

I can highly recommend AivlaSofts EFB, a chart program with the ability to select SIDs, STARs, appraoches etc. You can hit one button in EFB and it will load the just selected SID into your FSx Garmin or the AS AirbusX. So you are able with it to fly a SID with a Cessna if you want

Beside all that automated stuff: take a chart anywhere from the net (or in AivlaSofts EFB) and fly a SID by hand what is 100% much more fun than any automated way....

[curt1 23]

I have a question from the owner's manual, something that's significant in any aircraft addon. It discusses the ability to save the aircraft in various states (cold and dark, take-off, taxi state, etc..) but goes on to say the flight plan is excluded due to technical reasons. How does one resume a flight from the cruise state if the flight plan isn't loaded in the MCDU? I guess you can import it back in from your flight planner, then do a 'direct' to the next waypoint to re-initiate the flight? If that's the case, I guess no major problem exists. Still, it's unfortunate that it couldn't have been retained with the rest of the settings.

Curt

[Knightrider6000 0]

High all! New member from France. Sorry for my english.

I totally agree with finn's statement. Everything he said is true. But I think that Aerosoft's reputation in FlightSimulation should be raised by this Addon.

I'm CPL IR student pilot. Simulation is often an entertainment but also a training tool for procedures or flight management. Since many years, I'm surpised that no serious addons have been performed concerning Airbus family. WILCO? Full of Bugs. Airsimmers? Just getting news 2 times per year and nothing about fsx since the beginning . I won't speak about the other one.

So when a school friend told me "Aerosoft is about to release a 32 for FSX" . Great hapinness . Because when I think about Aerosoft, I see CDG, ORLY, IBIZA... In fact, I think about quality! Still regreting there isn't any Aerosoft ground texture for France. London , Germany , Switzerland

Your position about newbies is relevant but it shouldn't close the other door.

Just remember there are a great quantity of hard simmers waiting for a true simulation of the 32. Would it be possible for you to release your actual 32 as a Beta version and let us dreaming about a next version or extension or professionnal pack? Its true, there are numerous newbies and a few hard simmers but for me and many others I think, the AIRBUS page on fsx is still blank. Do you think it could be possible to satisfy twice customers categories?

Here is my opinion. And everybody's free to get one. Don't want to Impose it. It's inadmissible to realise something as beautiful as your 3d model and VC and new features (like doors in the cdu) without exploiting this beauty to the end.

thanks for time

ps; I know a scene is different from a plane to create.

[simon747 98]

High all! New member from France. Sorry for my english.

I totally agree with finn's statement. Everything he said is true. But I think that Aerosoft's reputation in FlightSimulation should be raised by this Addon.

I'm CPL IR student pilot. Simulation is often an entertainment but also a training tool for procedures or flight management. Since many years, I'm surpised that no serious addons have been performed concerning Airbus family. WILCO? Full of Bugs. Airsimmers? Just getting news 2 times per year and nothing about fsx since the beginning . I won't speak about the other one.

So when a school friend told me "Aerosoft is about to release a 32 for FSX" . Great hapinness . Because when I think about Aerosoft, I see CDG, ORLY, IBIZA... In fact, I think about quality! Still regreting there isn't any Aerosoft ground texture for France. London , Germany , Switzerland

Your position about newbies is relevant but it shouldn't close the other door.

Just remember there are a great quantity of hard simmers waiting for a true simulation of the 32. Would it be possible for you to release your actual 32 as a Beta version and let us dreaming about a next version or extension or professionnal pack? Its true, there are numerous newbies and a few hard simmers but for me and many others I think, the AIRBUS page on fsx is still blank. Do you think it could be possible to satisfy twice customers categories?

Here is my opinion. And everybody's free to get one. Don't want to Impose it. It's inadmissible to realise something as beautiful as your 3d model and VC and new features (like doors in the cdu) without exploiting this beauty to the end.

thanks for time

ps; I know a scene is different from a plane to create.

I think if you go back and read just through the Aug update you will see Aerosoft has made it clear they are not making any announcements on a possible updated or extended unit until after the release of this version. They may consider it at a later date from what I have read, but nothing has been promised and we won't get an update on their plans for that one until year end.

[Knightrider6000 0]

Yes I know! I Just hope this is not a final decision, even if it is for the next year. I'm dreaming about something great like they're able to do. As I said, I believe, it would be some waste. Its so beautiful for an Airbus on FSX!!! Perhaps in a few month, they could see diffrently...

BYe and good Flight

[Guest Wing]

for the more advanced users, i would also highly recommend the aivla electronic flight bag (EFB) for FSX with SID/STAR entry, transitions, charts, checklists, PMDG support (.rt2 import), fully updatable navigraph cycles, a neat/organised product for any aircraft with or without a FMS - more importantly, it's easy to use (both visually and theoretically)... looking forward to flying the 320 with the EFB/FMS/everything

[CRM320 41]

for the more advanced users, i would also highly recommend the aivla electronic flight bag (EFB) for FSX with SID/STAR entry, transitions, charts, checklists, PMDG support (.rt2 import), fully updatable navigraph cycles, a neat/organised product for any aircraft with or without a FMS - more importantly, it's easy to use (both visually and theoretically)... looking forward to flying the 320 with the EFB/FMS/everything

I Echo that one, Flight Bag is a fantastic piece of software and indeed a perfect companion to the Airbus X.

Regards

D

[CRM320 41]

That's not strictly true, you can do a full power takeoff, you don't require an assumed temperature. You're right that reduced thrust takeoffs prolong engine life but you don't require a Flex temp. to fly an Airbus any more than you need a SID/STAR function. However, in reality, unless there are over-riding performance reasons a flex temperature is used for departure and if your flightplan contains a SID and a STAR then pilots will load these into the FMC/FMGC. I do want realistic, but it's been explained that Aerosoft won't provide that, I was just wondering about why certain features had been selected over others, that's all. Apparently it just comes down to an easy function to program, that's fair enough.

Indeed but I am yet to come across an SOP who will let you do that. Or I really would like to know. Taxiing on single engine is one of the things we got to adhere to (assuming some other restriction are met) and there are many more. These days cost saving is a priority. An airline has got to be safe but it has got to be profitable. We don't make the rule book I'm afraid. Anyway, we are drifting off course, let's get back to Airbus X!

Regards

D