Good news for upcomming SP1

[Andy B. 40]

I don't think so, getting around that FSX bug takes a lot of programming and a lot of other existing systems would have to be re-coded around it too, its weeks if not months of work.

[ertan 31]

I don't think so, getting around that FSX bug takes a lot of programming and a lot of other existing systems would have to be re-coded around it too, its weeks if not months of work.

äh? which fsx bug?

[Andy B. 40]

Engine start surges well above 100% N1 for jet engines with manual starts.

[TB10 Driver 17]

Now that IS an interesting and positive development. TOGA at MSL should be in the 102-104% range I believe (from FCOM and stuff), and it actually providing 101.4% TOGA at 80IAS is a real step up...

If you do not mind, I wish to pose another question.

How is the FLEX takeoff now working? Do you get a reasonably reduced N1 calculated, whose actual value is similar after advancing to MCT/FLX, and do the engines deliver the TOGA thrust as displayed (or as you wrote, approx. 102%), and a drop to MCT (and not FLX) when the levers go back to that detent?

Thanks...

Andrew

Andrew,

It's still being tweaked and yet is not 100% perfect, but I'll show you a screenshot of my last flight. The load manager computed a flex tmep of 67 which the MCDU computed a N1% of 88.6. With the throttles in the TOGA position the engines spooled up to 87.6%. Setting the throttle levers to MCF/FLX for the takeoff run the engines spooled up to 78.9%.

Close, not yet perfect, but remember still being tweaked.

Bob

[TB10 Driver 17]

Engine start surges well above 100% N1 for jet engines with manual starts.

This issue was HEAVILY discussed in the beta forum amongst the devs and beta testers. I don't beleive there is much that can be done without a LOT of custom code.

Bob

[Andy B. 40]

Thanks for confirming Bob that's exactly what I said in my previous post before having to explain what I was talking about in my last post.

[Dave Lamb 9]

How about you buying a car you can't drive in because of some technical problems? Or whatever products in a shop that are useless untill you return them and have them fixed. You can't sell broken materials. I'm somewhat not getting why that should be okay with software. But I get that software is responding different at serveral computers. I just felt that aerosoft didn't take some problems seriously. I read a few threads that began with a problem and the first response is: you must have done this or that wrong. That is annoying since I'm a guy who is really reading well and is searching a forum when there is a serious problem. I read someone saying: my can't land manually. Response: your own mistake. Later: We will make a patch...

Anyway; I think the plane is great. Fantastic graphics, far better then I have seen so far. Response is excellent and flying is getting fun! Let the be no misunderstanding with that one. But the landing issue is very frustrating. I can't even do in manually, because the nose won't pitch. But I'll have my patience.

I was just annoyed by a post that said "Don't fly it until the fix" . That's a huge statement. Before I read that, I was having lots of patience. But this statement indicates that the plane is unflyable because of the landing issues. A beautiful plane that can't fly (in my fsx config anyway). I think that is pretty bad. But: GO AEROSOFT! Make my plane land and it will be the best plane I ever flown in!

Happy waiting in the hangar!

Martin

Martin

Martin, to be fair, you make valid points. I kind of laugh a little when you talk about a car, because my Audi A6 just has been in the shop constantly since I bought it and has cost me over $7000 to repair (to be fair to Audi, $3000 of that I knew I was going to incur when I bought the car). It's in the shop again and because this was a BIG repair - entire power steering rack had to be replaced...which had to be flown in from Germany, since there wasn't one in the USA. Actually I should be crying, but because the dealership has treated me so well since I bought the A6 (they've put me in free cars to drive even when they had to steal a new car to do it), I can't complain about their responsiveness.

That's a lot off subject, but I believe you understand the point. With software...ANY software, there are bugs. Some are big, some are little. On the ABX, there was things that the beta testers missed. It happens. I agree that not having SID/STARS for dep/arr management is a pain, but they told us about it before we bought it (you kinda had to read the fine print??). As far as that subject goes, as long as the waypoints are built into the FSX flight plan, you may not be able to fly them in managed mode, but you certainly can fly them in selected mode. It just takes a little more work.

The don't fly before it's fixed point...I can see your point that it would make you frustrated. However, they are also right. The problems with the bus are erratic enough (and enough inconsistent amongst reported users) that they need to pull together as much information as they can, duplicate it, then fix it, test it before they put it out. Until that time, it is pointless to fly a machine that you will crash 8/10 times. Am I frustrated...yes. However, in the grand scheme of things, this is a nit compared to the other stressful things in my life and I have no intention of letting this add to my stress...my advice to you and everyone reading is to do the same.

Hopefully, Aerosoft will get it mostly right the next time (I don't expect it to be 100% right on the SP1). I do expect 90%. Since you've parked your airplane, I've done the same, let's see what we see when we see it.

Cheers,

Dave Lamb

[ertan 31]

Martin, to be fair, you make valid points. I kind of laugh a little when you talk about a car, because my Audi A6 just has been in the shop constantly since I bought it and has cost me over $7000 to repair (to be fair to Audi, $3000 of that I knew I was going to incur when I bought the car). It's in the shop again and because this was a BIG repair - entire power steering rack had to be replaced...which had to be flown in from Germany, since there wasn't one in the USA. Actually I should be crying, but because the dealership has treated me so well since I bought the A6 (they've put me in free cars to drive even when they had to steal a new car to do it), I can't complain about their responsiveness.

That's a lot off subject, but I believe you understand the point. With software...ANY software, there are bugs. Some are big, some are little. On the ABX, there was things that the beta testers missed. It happens. I agree that not having SID/STARS for dep/arr management is a pain, but they told us about it before we bought it (you kinda had to read the fine print??). As far as that subject goes, as long as the waypoints are built into the FSX flight plan, you may not be able to fly them in managed mode, but you certainly can fly them in selected mode. It just takes a little more work.

The don't fly before it's fixed point...I can see your point that it would make you frustrated. However, they are also right. The problems with the bus are erratic enough (and enough inconsistent amongst reported users) that they need to pull together as much information as they can, duplicate it, then fix it, test it before they put it out. Until that time, it is pointless to fly a machine that you will crash 8/10 times. Am I frustrated...yes. However, in the grand scheme of things, this is a nit compared to the other stressful things in my life and I have no intention of letting this add to my stress...my advice to you and everyone reading is to do the same.

Hopefully, Aerosoft will get it mostly right the next time (I don't expect it to be 100% right on the SP1). I do expect 90%. Since you've parked your airplane, I've done the same, let's see what we see when we see it.

Cheers,

Dave Lamb

your car wasn´t brand new like the airbus x i think...so this compare is a little tricky

[alehead 126]

Andrew,

It's still being tweaked and yet is not 100% perfect, but I'll show you a screenshot of my last flight. The load manager computed a flex tmep of 67 which the MCDU computed a N1% of 88.6. With the throttles in the TOGA position the engines spooled up to 87.6%. Setting the throttle levers to MCF/FLX for the takeoff run the engines spooled up to 78.9%.

Close, not yet perfect, but remember still being tweaked.

Bob

OK, cool and thank you very much for the time to look into my question. I really appreciate the input.

One thing confuses me a little in your post though. TOGA at a certain OAT and pressure is going to be the same regardless of the FLEX temp calculated. TOGA is TOGA, and engine wear on takeoff or alpha floor is not an issue when it comes to safety... You do not physically derate the engines with FLEX, just trick the engines into thinking the outside temperature is different... Now, a physical derate (as is possible on the 737 Next Generation) actually affects the max cont. and TOGA thrust ratings, but that is NOT the case here with Airbus...

If the N1 at FLEX 67 is coming up at 88.6 (gut feeling says that is a little high for that temp, as 67 is only seen with lower weight and/or longer runway configurations), then I would want to see the MCT N1 at around 96-97, and the TOGA at 102-104...

Andrew

[TB10 Driver 17]

OK, cool and thank you very much for the time to look into my question. I really appreciate the input.

One thing confuses me a little in your post though. TOGA at a certain OAT and pressure is going to be the same regardless of the FLEX temp calculated. TOGA is TOGA, and engine wear on takeoff or alpha floor is not an issue when it comes to safety... You do not physically derate the engines with FLEX, just trick the engines into thinking the outside temperature is different... Now, a physical derate (as is possible on the 737 Next Generation) actually affects the max cont. and TOGA thrust ratings, but that is NOT the case here with Airbus...

If the N1 at FLEX 67 is coming up at 88.6 (gut feeling says that is a little high for that temp, as 67 is only seen with lower weight and/or longer runway configurations), then I would want to see the MCT N1 at around 96-97, and the TOGA at 102-104...

Andrew

Andrew,

Airport was KPHL runway 09L which is 9500ft and TOW = 48452KG, temp 64 degree F with an altimeter setting of 30.03.

From everything I've been reading the computed FLEX Temp and N1% values on the surface, to me, are correct. I'm not an airbus pilot so I do not have access to real world performance documents.

Bob

[Andreld 3]

Greetings Finn

There is the possibility to fix (enable) the FMGS so that it is possible insert IAS and Altitude in the fixes?

This would undoubtedly be a big step.

Thx

[johnxk 2]

Greetings Finn

There is the possibility to fix (enable) the FMGS so that it is possible insert IAS and Altitude in the fixes?

This would undoubtedly be a big step.

Thx

+1,

In order to manually enter a correct SID/STAR (that Airbus X does not support automatically) altitude and speed constraints are NEEDED. On the other hand, it would be nice if Aerosoft implements SID/STARS and Runway selection in FMGS (this would make Airbus X the best Airbus in the flight sim market).

John

[Andy B. 40]

Deleted

[Tomaz 10]

FS passanges sucks ass with their stupid tire blowing; I kept blowing them on the default 737; now use fdsfsx panel for cabin sounds and could not be happier as I chose what when and who I play!! Plus I gain 1-2 fps as that program aint running in the background calculatuing crap! I HATED FS Passanegers; they should really allow users to disable that whole tire thing. What a joke! I'm on 1.0 on the bus and always land 300-500fpm autoland and have done 15+ now. She lands awsome for me:)

I also use FSPassengers and my tires blew just once when I made a crappy landing. If you'd land properly your tires wouldn't blow. And I made a couple of hundred flights with FSPax, one blown tire.

[simon747 98]

I also use FSPassengers and my tires blew just once when I made a crappy landing. If you'd land properly your tires wouldn't blow. And I made a couple of hundred flights with FSPax, one blown tire.

Your landing skill is better than mine:)

I simply don't like it reguardless of my landing ablity! Sometimes cabin sounds are played sometimes not! Its annoying, sometimes for the sake of a desktop game due to slowish fps on app, it is hard to get below 500 fps; so its gone now and I am happy!! That program is overpriced and the the only add-on that I regret buying! But its whatever works for you so have at it! Back to subject though...

[alehead 126]

Thanks again Bob. It feels as though we are having a personal conversation amidst the other stuff on this thread. The info you provide is a real insight into how things appear to be progressing here.

I meant that, at a FLEX of 67, 88.6 N1 feels a little high. FLEX 67 sounds right for a TOW of 48.5T, 9500ft, and 64F/30.03 In/Hg, though 48T is only 6T over the min. operating weight. AirbusconnectX has the min. weight as 37T, but the plane would never fly at that low weight. The min. operating weight is around 42T for the A320...

Cheers for the feedback in this thread. I hope I am not the only one appreciating it.

Andrew

[william.m 13]

FS passanges sucks ass with their stupid tire blowing; I kept blowing them on the default 737; now use fdsfsx panel for cabin sounds and could not be happier as I chose what when and who I play!! Plus I gain 1-2 fps as that program aint running in the background calculatuing crap! I HATED FS Passanegers; they should really allow users to disable that whole tire thing. What a joke! I'm on 1.0 on the bus and always land 300-500fpm autoland and have done 15+ now. She lands awsome for me:)

It's kind of fun how some of you guys always talk in "absolute" terms (eg: This is a piece of c**** or this sucks and so on) and never try to put things into perspective. FS Passengers is an awesome add on for FS that has sold thousands of copies and made lots of accomplished pilots very happy. You could say: Ehi guys, guess what, I don't really like it or I'm having some difficulties with it and don't use it anymore, but nope, no way, you love to be absolute & exteme:. It sucks a**, it's not worth it and that's the truth spoken !!!

Ai ai ai, sorry, but that's not the way to do it especially when right after you state that you did more than 15 Auto lands (which reveals that you probably always auto land) and that she does awesome for you. Well, first of all, if she does so awesome you shouldn't have any problem with FS passengers and secondly and most important, Auto land it's rarely used in RW, only in 0 or extremely low visibility situations and we don't have other options. Instead it's the pilot duty to be in charge of the APP & landing 99% of the time (mostly visuals weather permitting). I personally think you should reconsider that arrogant attitude and spend more time working (and learning) how to correctly perform your approaches and improve your landings skills and less criticizing the work of people that have spent hundred's hours on those software that you liquidate in 15 seconds as sucks a**.

Think about it for a second............. Cheers

Will

[Travis 7]

It's kind of fun how some of you guys always talk in "absolute" terms (eg: This is a piece of c**** or this sucks and so on) and never try to put things into perspective. FS Passengers is an awesome add on for FS that has sold thousands of copies and made lots of accomplished pilots very happy. You could say: Ehi guys, guess what, I don't really like it or I'm having some difficulties with it and don't use it anymore, but nope, no way, you love to be absolute & exteme:. It sucks a**, it's not worth it and that's the truth spoken !!!

Ai ai ai, sorry, but that's not the way to do it especially when right after you state that you did more than 15 Auto lands (which reveals that you probably always auto land) and that she does awesome for you. Well, first of all, if she does so awesome you shouldn't have any problem with FS passengers and secondly and most important, Auto land it's rarely used in RW, only in 0 or extremely low visibility situations and we don't have other options. Instead it's the pilot duty to be in charge of the APP & landing 99% of the time (mostly visuals weather permitting). I personally think you should reconsider that arrogant attitude and spend more time working (and learning) how to correctly perform your approaches and improve your landings skills and less criticizing the work of people that have spent hundred's hours on those software that you liquidate in 15 seconds as sucks a**.

Think about it for a second............. Cheers

Will

well said Will. If i get more than 100FPS on touchdown i'm not happy. I have never blowin out my tires... until this bus came out. If you are getting 400FPS and up your doing somthing wrong and its not FSPassengers fault.

-Travis

[Marcel G. 14]

Lets stay focused on the Service Pack guys.

I see that this topic is going in the wrong way.

Any news Finn?

Regards

[Apoca7 6]

I spend $40.00 I bought the box too,and this product can be fix for aerosoft!, why they lunch the product if they didn't finish yet?. reply went the SP1 would be released.

[Finn 873]

SP1 beta03 has been send out to the beta testers today.

Let´s see how they find it

We are planning to release SP1 on monday.

We MIGHT make a public beta available during the weekend, but no promise on that !!

Finn

[SahinCe 24]

SP1 beta03 has been send out to the beta testers today.

Let´s see how they find it

We are planning to release SP1 on monday.

We MIGHT make a public beta available during the weekend, but no promise on that !!

Finn

Great news Finn.

I,am now fly with Airbus X and this is an nice Aircraft.

Cheers

[Kestrel 16]

Hi,

I'm glad I found this thread. I was going to ask support about the "nose dip" during a manual landing. I figured it was a problem with the aircraft and I'm very happy to hear the problem has been resolved. Another problem I have noticed which is kind of annoying is that there doesn't appear to be a "HDG" bug displayed on the ARC ND. Any chance it could be added?

Thanks for your wonderful efforts Aerosoft. - I'm really pleased with my Airbus X.

[Andy B. 40]

Another problem I have noticed which is kind of annoying is that there doesn't appear to be a "HDG" bug displayed on the ARC ND. Any chance it could be added?

Someone on the beta team said that has been fixed too.

[Marcel G. 14]

I spend $40.00 I bought the box too,and this product can be fix for aerosoft!, why they lunch the product if they didn't finish yet?. reply went the SP1 would be released.

Download versions are to provided Feedback and fast bug encounter so their can fix all of them and then release the finished BOX version.

No Release no Money = No money no Development thats easy dude.

Thanks Aerosoft for their really Impressive and Fast Support.

And Finn thanks, are great news.

Regards