Beyond 1.20

[Sharrow 107]

As far as I am aware the advanced version will be a small extra cost for those who already own the AirbusX. No one is suggesting you would have the buy the whole package again just to get the advanced version. That would be silly. Just as silly as expecting it to be for free in fact...

[Waleed 29]

Believe.

I think the Airsimmer did well to warn customers about the two versions Basic and Advanced.

I do not recall having seen this particular time to buy the Airbus X.

If there was a warning about basic and advanced version, I expect to buy advanced. Now if you think is right to buy 2x, 3x, 4, 5 times the same product, okay, I do not agree, even if the price is 1 euro.

Mathijs gave very clear and precise information in regards to the project, and mentioned there "Might" be a more advanced upgrade for a small price a very long time ago.

That you did not bother to read that part is your issue, but to turn around and insinuate that they are not telling the truth, or are deceptive is just ridiculous. Sorry if I am wrong, but that is what I got from reading your post.

I apologize if I sound rude, but they have been nothing but honest and forthcoming in regards to this, and all other projects as best they can.

I suggest you sift through the original posts, and find out for yourself (search engine), and once you do you can gladly come back here and apologize.

[Kestrel 16]

Ability to move landing lights up/down/left/right.

I do not think the landing light can do that on the Airbus

Roger that, fair enough!

Increased taxi light region.

Okay but that's what the Taxi way turn off light are for. Are you sure you have those activated?

The" turn off" ones are good, its the front taxi light that's the problem. I think its needs a larger V shape for a little more frontal coverage.

VC rain with washing effect (wipers).

We can do it, if you are okay with 50% less FPS.

No thanks, barely get 25FPS as it is, hehe! - but maybe an on/off feature for the people that do get good FPS, I may in the future when I can afford to upgrade again.

Working side sun blinds.

Okay, we'll check on that. Not a real big issue as you can not be blinded by sun in FSX, but still,

It will match the front one

Ground crew/animations. - Talk to ground crew on push back, maybe a few custom service vehicles.

Get AES!

I would, and I was very interested but I was confused with the pricing and I was put off by the "pay per airport". I'd rather buy one package.

More call-outs.

You mean include a full co-pilot? We rather not as in conflicts so easy with other addons.

Disregard this, I was actually referring to GPWS call outs but I have added some additional ones myself. I wouldn't like co-pilot call outs since I generally fly with a friend and he does the call outs on take off or vice-versa.

[ual1819 3]

For me, it's all about beefing up that F-PLAN page in the MCDU.

1. As you already mention, departure runway, approach selection and arrival runway (with ILS auto-tune?) in addition to SIDs, STARs and airways.

2. Waypoint entry in lat/lon, fix/hdg/dist and fix/hdg/fix/hdg formats.

3. SPD/ALT constraints. This implies the whole set of (T/C) (T/D) (LIM) and (DES) virtual waypoints as well. Please handle these better than [other Airbus publisher] did.

Essentially I would love the ability to enter and follow a flight plan in the MCDU per existing tutorials like Ray Smith's (http://www.utem.com/shop/index.php?l=product_detail&p=21). As you probably know, Ray Smith's books are among the de facto "bibles" for advanced simmers.

In my opinion the simplified F-PLAN page is the only major feature gap preventing Airbus X from becoming the hands-down killer Airbus for FSX, even for hard-core simmers.

I'd pay an extra 20 Euro or so just to get an F-PLAN page that works closer to real life. All the other goodies like curved lines in the ND will just be icing on the cake here.

[simon747 98]

Yea hopefully there will be some sort of support for using default FSX drawn flight plans; I am happy with those:)

And working side blinds would be AWESOME!

[Kostap 19]

Hi

I guess that depends on how you are going to package the new version. If it will be an upgrade of 1.x with a limited price then you can limit the additions. If it is a complete separate product with full pricing then I would have more expectations as to what should be put in.

I personally am not so interested in the outside looks but more in what the cockpit offers me and the behaviour of the plane. The closer you can get to a good compromise of simulated flying and reality the better. After all consider that there are other products out there (Airsimmer...) and you should have something that differentiates you apart from good looks.

Try and keep simmers in mind that fly via generated or online ATC. The MCDU should offer more support of changing flight plans such as Direct or Holdings. I guess you could look at the Feelthere Airbus (and what Eric Marciano has created as an upgrade to the PFD and ND) and vasFMC.

I find the VC views a bit difficult. Often I end up in one of the VC views with no outside and have to quickly press A until I am back in the standard VC. Sometimes the standard VC view does not accept any mouse clicks, only the other ones... You should consider to have some aspects of the cockpit as 2D views (e.g. the MCDU) which can then be put on a second screen, preventing too much of view switching.

The FBW doesn't really work that well. Flight-envelope protection isn't there apart from the ATHR going into FLOOR but the current bus will happily shoot up vertically or go into a nose dive with roaring engines (I speak of experience... )

The throttle thing needs to be reworked - I know you keep telling us that there is no alternative but I cannot believe that. Look at the Wilco bus - they work with keys and joysticks happily. I never had a plane that took me so long to get started just because the throttles wouldn't work. On a more general note, a commercial plane that only installs effortlessly on a standard FSX with no additions makes live hard for people with extended hardware or other tools and add-ons. The Beta test of the new version should include some more exotic environments.

I know it is easy to complain about weaknesses but it should also be said that the AirbusX is one of the more beautiful planes in my hangar. Once the most pressing problems have been fixed it will become one of my regulars. If you need testers for the next one let me know.

Kosta

[Andiehuk 7]

A330 would be nice

Oh Yes!!!!

I third that along with an A340. Plenty of A318,19's in the pipeline already.

I would pay full price again for those models.

[JusJ 2]

Mathijs,

If you build this, I'll buy it - no question!

The most important things for me in an advanced version:

• proper managed VNAV;
• realistic and stable FBW (I really have to work hard with the existing version for stable flight when hand flying);
• more MCDU functionality - SIDS, STARS, runways etc;
• very accurade aircraft flight dynamics using autopilot and manual flying (speed, climb, descent - the flight performance of the basic version does not seem to be totally accurate to me)
• good frame rates (please don't sacrifice this too much - I don't care about landing gear animation, wingflex and vc raindrops if they decrease the frame rates too much; autopilot, FBW and MCDU functionality are most important).

Thank you for your Airbus X product. I love it as it is already, but it has the potential to be a classic up there with my Level D 767 and PMDG JS41. Please don't waste the opportunity to fulfil that potential.

Regards,

Justin

[CaptainMike707 6]

Here is what I feel to be meaning, not that my opinion carries any weight around here... as I am unknown. Regardless.

1. A more complex FMGS. SIDs, STARs, etc., which you already have on your list, so good show.

2. A more complex loading system. I'm sorry, but the Airbus connect thing was a nice try, but it doesn't cut the mustard. Pilots need to be able to have more precise values when setting loads.

3. 2D panels, at least to a limited extent. A 2D overhead and FMS would be the most useful, for people that have second monitors or use different tools (like an iPad) to extend things like the FMGS over to other screens.

4. Some kind of multimedia "co-pilot". At the simplest, speed callouts at V1 and whatnot. Preferably, a checklist type feature similar to Wilco's Call! products (the best thing Wilco's made, IMO)

5. Better cockpit sounds. The "speed" and TCAS warnings sound like a teenage boy whining in his room; I can't imagine them to be the real sounds one hears in an Airbus cockpit.

[JPL19 11]

My thoughts:

Would be nice :Drooping flight surfaces when hydraulics pressure is low during a longer period

Would LOVE TO SEE THIS - Possibly adding the A319/A318 (Especially Steep approach mode.) FWIW as a curiosity - there is a A318 flight from JFK to LCY most weekdays. Flying a 318 to LCY would be a visual / flying treat.

Please More pages included

Very important - Selection of SID's, STARs, Departure and Arrival runways, Airways

Very important Possibly handling of route database

I like Navigraph . . . Option to use non Navigraph databases

YES - w/ some refinement sharpening - Smoother flight plan lines (curved)

If you can do it - great - Potentially a complete new FBW system

Do not need- any type of cabin. Wing flex no big deal - do not see it from the cockpit

OH, and do all this and improve the frames too . . .

Thanks

Joe

[markadeane 2]

Personally I'd like to see some attention given to the engine start modelling in a future release. Asides from spool-up being too high on startup (already well documented) the speed at which the engine spools up is too fast, especially after lightoff but even the initial motoring of the engine is a little quick.

IF SID/STARS get introduced, the ability to code our own procedures would be great, in addition to those SID/STARs included with the package.

[mauriat 0]

everyone have great idea, for me i just wondering if the update including better cabin passenger view with real A320 passenger's cabin or even with cabin view from window that's just my thoughts:) but overall i fully support with all users idea;)

[aviateur22 3]

hello , and very happy to see taht it will have perhaps an advanced version for this great plane

why i we please to see is a far more complex FMGC like other customers

where you can file alternate airport / trip fuel for the flight / full irs simulated /

a 2nd flight plan where we can enter an other RWY for departure or arrival of the active flight plan

it will be nice , if we could also have a complet test of all the system(like APU fire test / engine fire test ...)

have a good night

[frester 6]

A properly functioning communication second radio and RMP

The ability to pull test and discharge APU and engine fire systems

Functioning ECAM switching panel

A functioning ADIRS panel with align time

A 20% discount for those who purchased the basic edition

More ECAM messages such as in A\T climb mode pulling the throttles out of climb will result in message to put throttle back in climb gate

[n!ke 29]

Oh bevor i forget please fix the Multiplayer bug, and no that is no FSX bug, all other Aircraft works fine (He is already flying but i´am stand on the Ground, in the same Cockpit lol)

[golli 2]

MODELING / GRAPHICS

• Slight changes to the gear animation (will cause some additional load on FPS for the external model but still acceptable)
• Drooping flight surfaces when hydraulics pressure is low during a longer period
• Possibly adding the A319/A318
  YES YES on the drooping flight surfaces !!
  I do hope that you rather spend the extra time on a A330 !!
  
  
  MCDU
  
  • More pages included
  • Selection of SID's, STARs, Departure and Arrival runways, Airways
  • Possibly handling of route database
  • Option to use non Navigraph databases
    Looking good, but hope to have navigraph support
    
    PFD / ND
    
    
    • Smoother flight plan lines (curved)

  AUTOMATED FLIGHT

  [*]Potentially a complete new FBW system

  Everything looks good. Hope you dont get into/waste precious time, on FPS killers like weather radar and such.

  And again, I really would like to have A330-200HGW & A330-300 from you, rather then the little short hoppers

  Feel free to send us more ideas and suggestions here.

  GPWS call-outs are a must, in my view. But FO call-outs ?? I'd rather have you make a pitch to FS2Crew with this thing. He has the version ready (in the Wilco fiasco) only needs to port it over to this version.

  Golli

[NicholasB 6]

Hi,

Good news about the upcoming latest release, lets hope it works. As for an advanced version, id like to see:

Realistic VNAV

Airways with altitude contraints

Realistic FBW

Personaly the A330 / A340 series rather than the A319/18.

2D pops ups for the NAV dispaly, flight display and FMC

Thanks,

Nick

[rolle 6]

Hello,

most of these points already wrote.

My 'wishlist':

- An Advanced Version

- Sid/Stars

- VNAV

- editable F-Plan (Alt, Speed)

- Navigraph Database

- keeping up the good FPS, insofar as possible

- proper FBW-model

- fair price for the standard-version customers

Grz

[Joshua Che. 1601]

Hi,

I would like to see

1. MCDU

Mininum Wilco FMC functionality: SID,Stars,Holding,Direct to,Perf pages like Wilco one

Better VNAV expected from the MCDU.

2. NEW FBW system

Don't use fsx FBW! It Sucks!

But if it will slice my fps by more than 35%, I would stick to the default one

3.New FADEC/Autothrottle

I think Feelthere has done a good job on this their Throttle detend moddeling is rather good. Can use F3,F4 somemore

4. Smoother flight plan lines (curved) for SID,STAR and for after seleting direct to.

5. A318 & A319

Better still Include STEEP APPROACH for operation at London City.

Refer to smart cockpit about steep approach

Modeling wise i think just leave it. Besides the drooping surface. Maybe make the advance modeling more optimised for extra system functionality?

Thank you aerosoft for everything this far. You should give yourself a pat on the back.

Joshua

[Simholic 3]

..With the 1.20 (and boxed version) of the Airbus X almost done we now started to think about the more advanced version that was discussed before..

Very good Idea.Better a Basicversion with a Potential to modify,as a never ending Story like Airsimmer or Products like Wilco where the progress is stopped after a few "insignificant" Updates

It would be foolish to give up that Bus after SP1 or 2

@Aerosoft

That is a correct calculation

[TomA320 0]

I'd really like to see ENG OUT SID's being a possible in the MCDU.

[jbucholz 1]

This is great news! I'm not sure if it's been posted already, but a 2D pop-up version of the MCDU and keyboard commands would be nice for cockpit builders.

[smokeyupahead 3]

With the 1.20 (and boxed version) of the Airbus X almost done we now started to think about the more advanced version that was discussed before. We like to know what customers would like to see in that version. Keep in mind that we are still not aiming for the very high complexity (PMDG like) level but something between the current Airbus and the highest complexity. This version will loose compatibility with the default flight plans, one of the main goals of the current version.

MODELING / GRAPHICS

• Slight changes to the gear animation (will cause some additional load on FPS for the external model but still acceptable)
• Drooping flight surfaces when hydraulics pressure is low during a longer period
• Possibly adding the A319/A318
  MCDU
  
  • More pages included
  • Selection of SID's, STARs, Departure and Arrival runways, Airways
  • Possibly handling of route database
  • Option to use non Navigraph databases
    PFD / ND
    
    • Smoother flight plan lines (curved)

  AUTOMATED FLIGHT

  [*]Potentially a complete new FBW system

  Feel free to send us more ideas and suggestions here.

  This is the best news I've heard so far!

  I love you guys!

  I forgot to say but I would love a 2d panel for the mcdu,I have a little touchscreen for it,and another thing I left out is better taxi lights.I can't see anything the way they are now,they look like a torch light!

  Thank you,

  David Di Domizio

[Shane 4]

IMO, if Aerosoft wants to do an "Advanced" add-on, I say bring out all the stops. VNAV, SIDs, STARs, Airways, new FBW, Wingflex, vc rain effects, hydraulic droop, Navigraph support, etc..etc.. Make the add-on a force to be reckoned with. Create an add-on that will make all fans salivate, not just Airbus fans. Create an add-on that won't just peak the interest of current Airbus fans, but an Airbus that will draw new fans in. The Airbus X already has phenomenal graphics, why not go one step further. Will performance be affected? More than likely. But that goes with the territory. "Greatness" isn't free and it always favors the bold. Don't create an Airbus add-on, create THE Airbus add-on. Eveyrbody already knows that Aerosoft has one of the strongest development teams around, and if anybody can do the Airbus justice, it's Aerosoft.

"We have the best looking most feature rich and functional Airbus sim for FS. Backed by one of the best groups in FS with one of the strongest customer service groups in FS. If you want the definitive Airbus for FSX, step it up and get the Airbus X : Advanced, or get less elsewhere."

It's a market just waiting to be tapped. So many people are/were waiting for the Airsimmer bus. So many people are waiting for the Airbus from FSLabs. So many people throughout the last couple of years have asked if PMDG will do the Airbus. The market is there...who is going to take it? Boeing seems to be PMDG ad iFly land. Airbus is...?????

I tell you, if Aerosoft put out an announcement stating they were going to create an Advanced Airbus simulation and were going the distance, they would crush the competition. Why, and I know a lot of people will agree with me, because Aerosoft is not only known for very good add-on products, but also for having a strong community and great customer service. Strong add-on development + Strong Community + Strong support = Success.

For folks out there that want it all and "stellar" performace in every situation, guess what, it isn't going to happen. Advanced systems, advanced animations, advanced graphics, etc.. come at a price. You will either pay to ride or watch from the park bench. Yes, it sucks that FSX is real bear on systems, but if you want evolution, you have to put up with the growing pains. It costs a lot of money (relatively speaking) to run FSX well when employing in-depth add-ons. If Aerosoft decides to go the route with the hydraulic droop, vc rai effects, wingflex, high fidelity systems, etc.. I would recommend doing what PMDG and Feelthere did by adding in a "Configuration Tool" that essetially allows each user to "choose their performance hit" so to speak. Nowadays, it is almost a must with regards to an advanced add-on. Not having something such as this, in the end, essentially negates one of the groups.

My .02c

[Simholic 3]

This is the best news I've heard so far!

I love you guys!

Right I Love Aerosoft now 2 haha ^ ^