V 1.21 coming out?

[Guest Pkay]

I have nowhere read that a new version is developed. The Airbus X ist not flyable. I have already given up that I expect to fly an airbus with "system insinuation ", but i can not fly with this airplane. sorry, that is not acceptable!

[Fabian Boulegue [old] 213]

Hello,

maybe you could explain why it is not possible to fly the aircraft for you?

[cbd80 258]

Hi. Unfortunately there does seem to be a minority that are struggling with Airbus X and your comments are being noted.

V1.21 is in the works but I think it will be done in slower time and not as a hotfix.

I haven't had any major issues flying the aircraft manually or using autoland. It largely only gies wrong when I don't do things right.

Perhaps you could explain the difficulties you're having and maybe the guys on the forum could advise you.

Hang in there

Chris

[Finn 873]

I´m one of the developers of this project.

We are working on 1.21 right now.

Sorry, but is "unflyable" not an overstatement ?

We know there are some issues with nosedrop etc also in 1.20

I have now flown under all kind of conditions:

-Full loaded + Autoland

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Autoland

-Full loaded + Manual flight with FBW On

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Manual flight with FBW On

I had no troubles with any of the above configurations.

Passing 100 ft on approach causes a slight "wobble", but still managable with no risc of crashing.

Pitch up/down on AP disengagement occurs, but nothing that can´t be managed.

This is with my current 1.21 alpha files.

Finn

[bionicCrab 7]

Finn: It's unbelievable how easy it is to fly this bird... I guess if you don't have a clear idea what to expect from an airbus it can be a very challenging.

[Bizzy 20]

I´m one of the developers of this project.

We are working on 1.21 right now.

Sorry, but is "unflyable" not an overstatement ?

We know there are some issues with nosedrop etc also in 1.20

I have now flown under all kind of conditions:

-Full loaded + Autoland

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Autoland

-Full loaded + Manual flight with FBW On

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Manual flight with FBW On

I had no troubles with any of the above configurations.

Passing 100 ft on approach causes a slight "wobble", but still managable with no risc of crashing.

Pitch up/down on AP disengagement occurs, but nothing that can´t be managed.

This is with my current 1.21 alpha files.

Finn

hello finn

i hope you can resolve the issue with full autolanding and the nosedive due to FBW i think

and i hope in this new update we can smooth landing in fspassenger !!!

Thanks so much

Ps: you know when it coming out ? or it's very soon for this moment ?

[UlfB 2]

I wish that the release of 1.21 won't be too early

I hope that developers and testers really take the time they need to get rid of the issues without creating new issues. I would be happy if the next version could be released within two months.

[Bizzy 20]

I wish that the release of 1.21 won't be too early

I hope that developers and testers really take the time they need to get rid of the issues without creating new issues. I would be happy if the next version could be released within two months.

hum personaly i wait this airbus since 1st august and now we are 1st october and this airbus it's not perfect

In 2 months or before there is boeing pmdg out and i think if aerosoft not resolve the issue before most of people will abandon aerosoft and this airbus!

You can see many people angry with this airbus on this forum...

So it's challenge for aerosoft team !

[Pao13 32]

A new FBW and SID/STAR... that's all we need.

[klimchuk 5]

hum personaly i wait this airbus since 1st august and now we are 1st october and this airbus it's not perfect

In 2 months or before there is boeing pmdg out and i think if aerosoft not resolve the issue before most of people will abandon aerosoft and this airbus!

You can see many people angry with this airbus on this forum...

So it's challenge for aerosoft team !

I have impression the Aerosoft is using too much stuff from FSX like engine's logic, FBW etc. It should be overrided with custom implementation to provide experience similar to real Airbus. Correct me if I wrong.

Also waiting for 1.21 too and literally pushing myself to fly on 1.20 It's just not that comfortable as LevelD 767 or PMDG747 because of missing SID/STAR functionality and strange problem with air conditioner when start from cold&dark cockpit.

[KAPTEJNLN 237]

Well in the main time mabe a look here would be a good start as hopefuly found a way to stop nosedive as for mee it works whit this fix: http://www.forum.aer...pic=39313&st=20

[Martin Pampiermole 26]

I´m one of the developers of this project.

We are working on 1.21 right now.

Sorry, but is "unflyable" not an overstatement ?

We know there are some issues with nosedrop etc also in 1.20

I have now flown under all kind of conditions:

-Full loaded + Autoland

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Autoland

-Full loaded + Manual flight with FBW On

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Manual flight with FBW On

I had no troubles with any of the above configurations.

Passing 100 ft on approach causes a slight "wobble", but still managable with no risc of crashing.

Pitch up/down on AP disengagement occurs, but nothing that can´t be managed.

This is with my current 1.21 alpha files.

Finn

Well, in my case the plane flies great, until I'll have to land. Every landing is a crash because of the nosedive. If you cannot land, you can say that the plane is unflyable. I'll have to agree with that statement. I'm a huge fan of aerosoft software. Truly amazing in general. But the airbusx is a big disapointment so far. Since all these weeks there no solution for a part of the buyers. I cannot see how that could have happened.

[Francisco S 4]

Great News Finn Thanks!

[balus 43]

hum personaly i wait this airbus since 1st august and now we are 1st october and this airbus it's not perfect

In 2 months or before there is boeing pmdg out and i think if aerosoft not resolve the issue before most of people will abandon aerosoft and this airbus!

You can see many people angry with this airbus on this forum...

So it's challenge for aerosoft team !

I disagree, PMDG is aimed at a different market to the Aerosoft Airbus; PMDG is for the hard core simmer, Aerosoft is for the casual flier who wants a little more than the default aircraft without having to spend an hour preparing for a flight.

[simon747 98]

Flies great on my machine. Never had a nose dive or crash on landing! Frame rates are less with 1.2, so went back to 1.0. But happy; tried the pmdg 747 last night, and find this aircraft to smoother and overall feels more real to me. I am not systems-focused. So this plane has been good from the start for me. Just wish they would make an a330!!

[Guest Pkay]

I haven't had any major issues flying the aircraft manually or using autoland.

You have no problems, but we have: http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=39444

[alehead 126]

I am sorry, but to say that the airbusx feels more real than the pmdg 747 is, well, frankly ridiculous. Opinion is one thing, but that statement is nonsense. It will need a totally reprogrammed fly by wire module for this to simulate flight as performed by an Airbus even vaguely.

As I mentioned, opinions are fine, but keep it real or lose credibility.

Andrew

[balus 43]

I am sorry, but to say that the airbusx feels more real than the pmdg 747 is, well, frankly ridiculous. Opinion is one thing, but that statement is nonsense. It will need a totally reprogrammed fly by wire module for this to simulate flight as performed by an Airbus even vaguely.

As I mentioned, opinions are fine, but keep it real or lose credibility.

Andrew

You see it is all in the perception - if you come to the Airbus X looking for a heavy systems focus then yes you will be disappointed, but that is not the market that it was pitched to, By the same token if you look to the PMDG 747 for a jump in and fly process then you would most likely be disappointed too. The PMDG 747 VC is very tired and FPS poor (not surprising for an add-on of it's age) and I think that this is what the poster was commenting on - hence his/her mention of smoothness. If the comparison had been to the MD11 then I would disagree with them.

The last line of your post is unnecessary, others are entitled to their opinion just as much as you are, however they may form their opinions based on different criteria.

[alehead 126]

You see it is all in the perception - if you come to the Airbus X looking for a heavy systems focus then yes you will be disappointed, but that is not the market that it was pitched to, By the same token if you look to the PMDG 747 for a jump in and fly process then you would most likely be disappointed too. The PMDG 747 VC is very tired and FPS poor (not surprising for an add-on of it's age) and I think that this is what the poster was commenting on - hence his/her mention of smoothness. If the comparison had been to the MD11 then I would disagree with them.

The last line of your post is unnecessary, others are entitled to their opinion just as much as you are, however they may form their opinions based on different criteria.

I can see where you are coming from. The poster mentioned "overall feels more real to me". I feel that it is an incorrect comparison, apples and oranges if you like, to pitch the PMDG 747 against the AirbusX. In terms of reality, the flight model of one essentially a default in new clothes and the other a hand programmed custom model fully tested...

I wouldn't describe the PMDG 744VC as tired, it may not be the most performance oriented I agree with your idea of sim smoothness.

I would defend anyone's right to their opinion, but as I said, it is just as necessary to keep it real. Failure to do so will just end up in the opinion being ignored, or at worst, criticized...

Please accept my apologies. The tome comes across a little more harsh than was actually intended. I feel that is too much fanboyism here on this subforum, which has led to me posting a fair bit less than I have in the past.

Andrew

[balus 43]

.....

Please accept my apologies. The tome comes across a little more harsh than was actually intended. I feel that is too much fanboyism here on this subforum, which has led to me posting a fair bit less than I have in the past.

Andrew

There are examples of both fanboy and blatant trolls in these forums. To date Aerosoft appear to be handling both quite well - it just makes it hard to understand the real issues sometimes. I'm like you, I've held back on commenting lately although given that I am flying this add-on reasonably happily I have to add a little support now and then as counter to the negativity. I just wish people would read product descriptions and check out support forums before they buy, a lot of the more vociferous commentary would not be needed.

regards

Scott

[ual1819 3]

I have now flown under all kind of conditions:

-Full loaded + Autoland

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Autoland

-Full loaded + Manual flight with FBW On

-Totally empty apart from a few drops of fuel + Manual flight with FBW On

I had no troubles with any of the above configurations.

My biggest problem with 1.20 and manual takeoffs is that FBW doesn't maintain pitch after rotation. Rotate, wait for pitch to get to +15 degrees and let go of the stick. In theory FBW should hold pitch at +15, but around 700-800 feet AGL there's a severe nose drop that requires a very strong correction to maintain +15 degrees pitch. You haven't seen this? Because I don't think it's expected FBW behavior.

[airlinejets 0]

My biggest problem with 1.20 and manual takeoffs is that FBW doesn't maintain pitch after rotation. Rotate, wait for pitch to get to +15 degrees and let go of the stick. In theory FBW should hold pitch at +15, but around 700-800 feet AGL there's a severe nose drop that requires a very strong correction to maintain +15 degrees pitch. You haven't seen this? Because I don't think it's expected FBW behavior.

I surely have not seen this behavior. That's all I do when testing the Bus, manual take-offs and landings. Upon rotation, I just pull back on the stick to activate the system, then on positive rate of climb I adjust to 15 degrees hold it there a second or two and let the joystick go. The Bus will climb at that rate until the cows come home or I run out of thrust. I'm trying to figure out what might be causing the fault on your system. What are your realism settings at in the sim?

[balus 43]

Could there be a joystick calibration problem involved here?

[Francisco S 4]

My biggest problem with 1.20 and manual takeoffs is that FBW doesn't maintain pitch after rotation. Rotate, wait for pitch to get to +15 degrees and let go of the stick. In theory FBW should hold pitch at +15, but around 700-800 feet AGL there's a severe nose drop that requires a very strong correction to maintain +15 degrees pitch. You haven't seen this? Because I don't think it's expected FBW behavior.

Same here After rotation a nose drop and not to mention the nose dive after disconnecting the AP for landing, I`ll just wait for V 1.21.

[mike81 7]

Agree with the above posts , I have the same problem, Rotate to 15 degrees on takeoff , at a couple hundred feet unless im pulling hard back on the yoke she nosedives.