petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 Hi all, I believe the new Airbus X is a brilliant and outstanding new peace of masterwork. But one thing is extremely weird: why can such an advanced and to the last detail authentically designed airplane not come with a simple but very realistic effect: wingflex. Wingflex makes a plane not only more beautiful inflight, but it is extremely realistic and gives so much more in this virtual world. That s what it is all about, huh - the virtuall world. We need it as realsitic as possible, as advanced as it only can be, we ask for all kinds of features - only to make the virtual world complete. And then we forget wingflex... It makes the bird alive on take-off, it looks graceful and stunning in the air, it just makes the whole picture complete. And now, I have to watch and see those wings of thew new Airbus X hanging stiff and gangling there, completely out of balance with the windspeed and I wonder: why? They dont need to flex out of proportion like other addons-wingflex. Just give them a few inch, a graceful gliding effect, subtile but effective... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BoeingNgx Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 yeah wingflex , like on the project airbus a319, would be cool...but a question, does the taxi still look so unrealistic?..that the wheels "slide" on ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankeesji 38 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 No way....OMG... There's always one...Please take 1.2 seconds and read a little bit of discussions. I've been waiting all day for this! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeroen Rutgers-Herenius 167 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 Hi all, It makes the bird alive on take-off, it looks graceful and stunning in the air, it just makes the whole picture complete. And now, I have to watch and see those wings of thew new Airbus X hanging stiff and gangling there, completely out of balance with the windspeed and I wonder: why? They dont need to flex out of proportion like other addons-wingflex. Just give them a few inch, a graceful gliding effect, subtile but effective... Hi mate, Somehow your the first person that makes wingflex sound dirty in a fetish kind of way 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hals1010 41 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 Yeah, and should you decide to add wingflex, please don't forget to add virtual toilets - it looks graceful and stunning in the air, it just makes the whole picture complete. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 No way....OMG... There's always one...Please take 1.2 seconds and read a little bit of discussions. I've been waiting all day for this! Look, sweatheart, what I want to say - what you seem not to understand - is that it is a shame that it is how it is! I don t need to read any of those discussions. All I need to do is NOT to buy the new Airbus X. And THAT is a shame. Nothing less, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankeesji 38 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 Look, sweatheart, what I want to say - what you seem not to understand - is that it is a shame that it is how it is! I don t need to read any of those discussions. All I need to do is NOT to buy the new Airbus X. And THAT is a shame. Nothing less, nothing more. OK peaches Not everybody can be pleased. It's a shame a little wing flex is so important for you, even considering the minimal flex with the A320/A321..Have a super duper day! 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 ok guys, at least I save money, that's true. Take it easy and don t make things worse! I only is my opinion, right?! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeroen Rutgers-Herenius 167 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 ok guys, at least I save money, that's true. Take it easy and don t make things worse! I only is my opinion, right?! Nothing wrong with that mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 Yeah, and should you decide to add wingflex, please don't forget to add virtual toilets - it looks graceful and stunning in the air, it just makes the whole picture complete. Oh honey, you re really sweet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel G. 14 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 The paintkit is really awesome. Fantastic plane,awesome paintkit,good framerates,earcandy sounds,stunning visual effects. Lets say one of the BEST Airplanes for FSX. Thanks Aerosoft:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert S 75 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 To all those people wishing for wingflex in this model: I fly (as a passenger) the A319/320 at least 4 or 5 times per year out of Denver, CO on the great Frontier airlines...and I always select a window seat, in or close to an exit row. So you can imagine I have a great view of the wings (and the cool winglets featuring the animals of Frontier!). Now, I have flown in all kinds of weather, and if you are flying East of Denver in the summer months there is always a good chance you will encounter turbulence of varying degrees. I've been through some rough air, where objects fly off of tray tables and your heart gets stuck in your throat. There is wingflex on the real A319. OK, I'll repeat this: There is wingflex... BUT(!) in all my travels, even in turbulence, it's very little. I'd say that 95% of the time you never see it, even on hard landings. It's a relatively short wing and pretty darn sturdy, so it just doesn't flex much...and when you do see it, trust me - you can measure the distance the end of the wing travels in just a few inches. Here is a funny story - I flew just a month ago back and forth to Ft Lauderdale, FL. I had been reading the wingflex controversy here so I decided to film the wingtip with my video camera to record something which I could bring back to these forums...both there and back I just couldn't film anything that would make it worthwhile! So take it from a frequent traveller on the "bus" - once and for all wingflex is barely noticeable on the real plane, and even when it happens it's negligible. So for all of you demanding this feature to the point where if it isn't included you won't buy the product, you're doing yourselves a complete disfavor based on real world data. You just want an aesthetic property that isn't worth it. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themose 2 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 To all those people wishing for wingflex in this model: I fly (as a passenger) the A319/320 at least 4 or 5 times per year out of Denver, CO on the great Frontier airlines...and I always select a window seat, in or close to an exit row. So you can imagine I have a great view of the wings (and the cool winglets featuring the animals of Frontier!). Now, I have flown in all kinds of weather, and if you are flying East of Denver in the summer months there is always a good chance you will encounter turbulence of varying degrees. I've been through some rough air, where objects fly off of tray tables and your heart gets stuck in your throat. There is wingflex on the real A319. OK, I'll repeat this: There is wingflex... BUT(!) in all my travels, even in turbulence, it's very little. I'd say that 95% of the time you never see it, even on hard landings. It's a relatively short wing and pretty darn sturdy, so it just doesn't flex much...and when you do see it, trust me - you can measure the distance the end of the wing travels in just a few inches. Here is a funny story - I flew just a month ago back and forth to Ft Lauderdale, FL. I had been reading the wingflex controversy here so I decided to film the wingtip with my video camera to record something which I could bring back to these forums...both there and back I just couldn't film anything that would make it worthwhile! So take it from a frequent traveller on the "bus" - once and for all wingflex is barely noticeable on the real plane, and even when it happens it's negligible. So for all of you demanding this feature to the point where if it isn't included you won't buy the product, you're doing yourselves a complete disfavor based on real world data. You just want an aesthetic property that isn't worth it. Good post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 To all those people wishing for wingflex in this model: There is wingflex on the real A319. OK, I'll repeat this: There is wingflex... BUT(!) in all my travels, even in turbulence, it's very little. I'd say that 95% of the time you never see it, even on hard landings. It's a relatively short wing and pretty darn sturdy, so it just doesn't flex much...and when you do see it, trust me - you can measure the distance the end of the wing travels in just a few inches. So for all of you demanding this feature to the point where if it isn't included you won't buy the product, you're doing yourselves a complete disfavor based on real world data. You just want an aesthetic property that isn't worth it. You re right indeed. On the 737, you can hardly see it neither. But as I said, it doesn't need much. But this is just more a matter of seeing/feeling it or not.. Or you feel/know what I mean, or you don t. And that's fine, sure. People that come with a "virtual toilet" are that kind of people that just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 Or you can see or not. Nothing more, nothing less. But visually a huge difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodgerJohnson 11 Posted September 2, 2010 Share Posted September 2, 2010 Ummm you guys are telling me this Airbus X wont have wingflex? Thats amazing to me that a product thats been mainly focused on visuals, models, and looks will not have wing flex. I really dont care if the wing flex is an inch or 2, you can tell the difference when the wings flex or if they don't. Whenever I see a fs plane that flies with the wings drooping down... I want to puke and I dont care how much it droops down. To me wing flex is a huge part in realism and that is why I am not a huge fan of the PMDG 737NG (FS2004) and why im dissapointed at Simcheck for not modelling the wings of the Airbus better. Please add wingflex, this is crazy to me that wingflex was not added before. -Rodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petsumnets 37 Posted September 2, 2010 Author Share Posted September 2, 2010 To me wing flex is a huge part in realism and that is why I am not a huge fan of the PMDG 737NG (FS2004) and why im dissapointed at Simcheck for not modelling the wings of the Airbus better. Please add wingflex, this is crazy to me that wingflex was not added before. -Rodger people that come with such things, DO understand what I mean. See the difference, smarty (halsi1010)??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CX 747-400 19 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 Or you can see or not. Nothing more, nothing less. But visually a huge difference... Lets try that comparison with the correct aircraft. We can not talk about the A320, and show pics of B737. The Boeing 737 has a lot a flex to it, but I dont see enough in the A320 to in worry about it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodgerJohnson 11 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 I see enough to worry about it if Im giving away any of my money. -Rodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hals1010 41 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 Presenting a Boeing when we talking about an Airbus is indeed an argument. Are you sure you are not trolling here? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert S 75 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 I see enough to worry about it if Im giving away any of my money. -Rodger So let me get this right...by your logic, you will be forgoing ALL the other features and enjoyment this add-on could be providing you (And I'm going to quote Mathijs here on what effect adding realistic wingflex will provide the user) when in fact the wings "would move 1 or 2 pixels in moderate weather and 5 pixels in heavy weather."? 5 pixels makes that much of a difference, - forget all the other features, those 5 pixels are "enough to worry about..."? And let's not forget, those 5 pixels of movement will only occur in less than 5% of the time spent flying, and it's not like the Airbus even has much wingflex to animate! I mean, I could see a valid point if the Airbus 3xx HAD a lot of wingflex in reality...but it does not...sorry, just trying to understand some different perspectives here, and having a hard time of it I guess...but you are entitled to your opinion and luckily no one is forcing you to purchase this add-on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane 4 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 While I definitely would have preferred to have wingflex, I am not an FS modeller so I am unsre of what that would have entailed, therefore I trust Aerosoft to make the best decision with regards to that. I did find this screeshot though which shows quite a bit of wingflex (not trying to fuel the fire), just found it interesting as I too don't remember much Airbus wingflex (on many flights, on others the flex did seem noticable): http://www.airliners.net/photo/US-Airways/Airbus-A320-232/1763732/L/&sid=2faed3193d3c633d426020905db5fdc2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulPCPilot 11 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 hi robertS. you are spot on about the wingflex comment. I dont see why you are apologising toward the end of your comment. Some people arent worth communicating with, I just let them sit at home in a darkened room thinking about using SIDs/STARs and how move the wing will bend. For some reason stupidity is accepted in society...i like to make a stand. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy B. 40 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 @CX 747-400 It's against the terms of service to hotlink to pictures on Airliners.net, I suggest you remove the images before you get Aerosoft banned from accessing the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodgerJohnson 11 Posted September 3, 2010 Share Posted September 3, 2010 Robert I respect you on your post because while you express your thoughts you have respect towards mine. To me its not a matter of how many pixels a wing moves, its about the feel of realism. You will never see an airbus flying with their wings drooping down. It always has a stiff look with a slight upward bend like most other aircraft. It also has to do with who this Airbus is coming from... Aerosoft. I assummed ever since I heard about the production of this plane that there will be wingflex and the reason why I cared was because Wilco did not have wingflex and PA only included winglex on their A319/318. Most Aerosoft products in my mind has high standards whether its scenery, aircraft or other sims. Like I said before Aerosoft was focusing on looks, feel, sounds of the airplane and not systems. IN MY OPINION I believe wing flex is a huge part in looks and feel of the realism of a sim aircraft. Call me crazy but I can look at a pic of a C172 and tell whether it was on the ground or flying based on the flex and look of the wing, same with the Airbus. Paul beleive what you want but I was stating my opinions, I dont understand how you can classify someones opinion on wingflex and how it contirbutes to the realism of the sim to stupidity becuase its what I beleive in, not facts. I can assure you that most of the people on this forum whether they agree with you or me on this wingflex issue, do not agree with you on how my opinion can be classified to stupidity and I bet they are still thinking exactly what your taking a stand against cause you have not dealt with this issue specifically and your reasoning of this stupidity does not make sense. -Rodger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts