Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

kagstrom2100

Why was A320/321 not fully modeled?

Recommended Posts

Hey, I love the airbus A320/A321 and just have to say thank you Areosoft for doing such a great job with re-creating it in FSX!

But I've always wondered why it was never fully modeled? With working fire extinguish system and the ability to operate the FTL CTL so you can get the controls back in case of an emergency.

Would be cool to try some emergency scenarios with it!

Just a question, hope someone can answer it :)

Thanks in advance!

Share this post


Link to post

Aerosoft modeled the buses to simulate the daily work of a pilot. Emergencies are (fortunately) not part of the daily life...

Share this post


Link to post

Aerosoft modeled the buses to simulate the daily work of a pilot. Emergencies are (fortunately) not part of the daily life...

Yeah, that's what I suspected. But if you for example look at the Pmdg 737, that got a emergency pack expansion.

Would be nice if the Airbus devs did the same thing for the airbus!

Share this post


Link to post

Airbus aircraft are much more complex than Boeing aircraft and Airbus themselves are not interested in supporting addon developers like Boeing does.

Basically it is impossible with the limitied possibilities of our common flight simulator plattforms to simulate an Airbus completly with all systems, etc.

Taking our Airbus to the level it is right now took 5 years already... taking it to a complete simulation of all systems would easily take another 5 years or more. Not to talk of the face that most users are simply not interested in simulating emergencies.
Some may touch these things once or twice, but then never again. It is just not what our average customer wants.

Share this post


Link to post

It would raise the price to PMDG levels and we are not sure that's a correct thing to do. When we do our market research and ask customers how often they use a fire extinguisher system they might say they used in one time to see how it works but never after that. You are paying a lot of money to have that included. We focus on simulating the work of the pilot, not the aircraft systems. It's a flight simulation after all and not a systems simulator. It's just a different way of handling things and proving to be extremely succesful for us. It might not always get all the headlines, but it sure seems to work with customers.

Or put in another way. While fire systems are vital in an aircraft it is hundreds of times more likely a flight is cut short or aborted because of a problem with the toilets then because of a fire. And I have never seen any developer model that. I have had two (!) flights not landing at the destination because of a medical emergency and I never seen that modeled in a aircraft.

Or put it in another way. We secretly have included all those emergencies, we just did not tell you. They will happen in realistic intervals. So an engine will fail every 500.000 hours and you might get a double engine failure every few million hours (it happened only one time in the real aircraft after all). Emergencies have very little to do with realism. While I find it cool that PMDG models a stall of all four engines on a 747 it never happened, not in the many many millions of hours flown.

Share this post


Link to post

It would raise the price to PMDG levels and we are not sure that's a correct thing to do. When we do our market research and ask customers how often they use a fire extinguisher system they might say they used in one time to see how it works but never after that. You are paying a lot of money to have that included. We focus on simulating the work of the pilot, not the aircraft systems. It's a flight simulation after all and not a systems simulator. It's just a different way of handling things and proving to be extremely succesful for us. It might not always get all the headlines, but it sure seems to work with customers.

Or put in another way. While fire systems are vital in an aircraft it is hundreds of times more likely a flight is cut short or aborted because of a problem with the toilets then because of a fire. And I have never seen any developer model that. I have had two (!) flights not landing at the destination because of a medical emergency and I never seen that modeled in a aircraft.

Or put it in another way. We secretly have included all those emergencies, we just did not tell you. They will happen in realistic intervals. So an engine will fail every 500.000 hours and you might get a double engine failure every few million hours (it happened only one time in the real aircraft after all). Emergencies have very little to do with realism. While I find it cool that PMDG models a stall of all four engines on a 747 it never happened, not in the many many millions of hours flown.

Thank you for a quick and good reply!

And I have to agree it's not a systems simulator after all, even though it's fun to try emergencies too :-)

Just another quick question. Do you have any plans today to update the A320 more? Like adding new features, or are considering that project finished?

Share this post


Link to post

I'd pay quite a lot of money for such an add-on. I'd probably pay in the region of £100 of I could simulate real emergency scenarios with all of the OHP fully functional. I was quite sad when I discovered that I couldn't spice up my flight by turning off the FACs :-)

Share this post


Link to post

I'd pay quite a lot of money for such an add-on. I'd probably pay in the region of £100 of I could simulate real emergency scenarios with all of the OHP fully functional. I was quite sad when I discovered that I couldn't spice up my flight by turning off the FACs :-)

I also believe there is a market for such a product. But it's not a market large enough for us. That's why we are leaving that to others.

Share this post


Link to post

I also believe there is a market for such a product. But it's not a market large enough for us. That's why we are leaving that to others.

Fair enough. There's probably several thousand airline pilots who would use this for practice before their recurrent sims, but it would be an issue of marketing it to them. That's what I would use it for, to relieve the stress of my sim every 6 months :-)

Share this post


Link to post

Fair enough. There's probably several thousand airline pilots who would use this for practice before their recurrent sims, but it would be an issue of marketing it to them. That's what I would use it for, to relieve the stress of my sim every 6 months :-)

That kind of marketing needs serious insurance and licenses. We got a professional department who handles these kinds of things. But then we are not talking about $99 products but more in the many thousands of dollars.

Share this post


Link to post

That kind of marketing needs serious insurance and licenses. We got a professional department who handles these kinds of things. But then we are not talking about $99 products but more in the many thousands of dollars.

I'm talking about people buying it for their personal home flight sim to prepare for their licensing exams - individuals. Not a company purchasing it. Also, aviation is a small community. The best type of marketing is word of mouth. Get a few First Officers to buy it, you'll have hundreds of sales within a month.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm talking about people buying it for their personal home flight sim to prepare for their licensing exams - individuals. Not a company purchasing it. Also, aviation is a small community. The best type of marketing is word of mouth. Get a few First Officers to buy it, you'll have hundreds of sales within a month.

But even then, if you ever even slightly market it for that market as you suggested, you got to back it up.

And to be honest, I dare to doubt a pilot would use an uncertified tool for any kind of training. We worked with a lot of Airbus pilots on this project and they all see it as fun, not a serious tool even though our simulation is pretty accurate for day to day use. We have delivered several aircraft products for real training but there were all specially made. The only exceptions are the OV10 Bronco and thre ASK21 that I know are used for actual training.

Share this post


Link to post

Airbus aircraft are much more complex than Boeing aircraft...

I'm sorry... That may have been true quite some time ago, but these days, both sides of the fence are equally as complex, the way they get to that complexity just differs somewhat.

The second part of your statement,which I didn't quote, still holds true, sadly.

Share this post


Link to post

HAL-9000,

But do we all fly FWC H2F5? I fly the F7 at the moment. EIS1 pilots would be out of luck all together.

It would be nice to have an abnormal add on but to use it as a preperation for a simcheck will not happen anytime soon, if at all.

Wasn't there a greek company busy on that end? ;)

Share this post


Link to post

I'm sorry... That may have been true quite some time ago, but these days, both sides of the fence are equally as complex, the way they get to that complexity just differs somewhat.

From the pilots point of view I can agree. From a development point of view doing a 737 and a A320 in the same complexity is very different and has very different costs. The way Airbus systems interact is often very hard to find out (also for Airbus engineers btw) and even harder to simulate in FSX.

Share this post


Link to post

Indeed, but that's why I included the statements "a while ago" and "these days", Mathijs. A 737, even the NG, is fairly simple under the hood. Though, even that rather simple plane can be surprisingly tricky to troubleshoot from time to time. However, these days (as in: the current generation of Boeing planes, the 777, 747-8, 787,...) are just as complex as their European counterpart.

Share this post


Link to post

If you want complexity, then for ~€500 you can have this..

http://www.a3xxflightdeck.com/

This is fantastic! Just what I was looking for. It's in Swiss Francs, so only about £330. This might have to be my next big purchase.

Share this post


Link to post

I can only disagree with what has been argued so far.

If Aerosoft has choosen not to simulate emergency systems and procedures for marketing reasons, that's fine. However, considering what is available on the market, the price of this Airbus is horribly high.

Many developers has realesed hardcore add ons, including emergencies, for years and for more or less the same price. There is no reason Aerosoft cannot do the same.

Hardcore simmers expect hardcore simulation, including failures and malfunctions. So I do not consider this Airbus as a hardcore add on as it is below the standard of the market.

However I admit that as the only acceptable Airbus simulation on the market, it gives the best experience of flying an A320 on Flight Simulator

Share this post


Link to post

Allow me to counter your argument with this:

The Aerosoft Airbus has an extremely complex representation of the systems on board, far more complex and more realistic than any other Airbus out there. However, some developers (that I dare not name to save the guilty) that have developed an Airbus A320 series aircraft in the past have been able to model emergencies. Despite that, their modeling of the systems in the Airbus under both normal and abnormal situations are substandard, to say the least.

The Boeing 737 has independent systems, so you can tinker with one system and not affect any others directly. Modern Airbuses don't have that luxury; everything is interconnected and you have an EICAS that also literally tells you what to do in abnormal procedures, and the plane is intelligent enough to diagnose itself (See the following video):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEf35NtlBLg

Think of how much it cost to write up all the software to get the Airbus where it is now, and that's just an extremely basic amount of software in the Airbus, just that required for everyday flight. To further reprogram the software to get it to include that much detail and that much intelligence would cost about that much too.

The joy of flying the Airbus is that it's ALMOST PMDG-level quality, while still being affordable, because I don't want to pay 4 times the price of the base game for DLC; the FS addon market is already ridiculous enough compared to any other DLC market. And besides, Emi does have a point; I would only use emergency procedures on the Airbus just once or twice, then never quite again.

Share this post


Link to post

Many developers has realesed hardcore add ons, including emergencies, for years and for more or less the same price. There is no reason Aerosoft cannot do the same....

okay, name those add-ons that are so "value for money". Until you prooved it, what you just wrote is pure fiction.

Share this post


Link to post

okay, name those add-ons that are so "value for money". Until you prooved it, what you just wrote is pure fiction.

Sure,

Level D 767

Maddog Leonardo

Dash 8 Majestic Software

Flight One ATR

etc...

The prices of these are pretty similar. PMDG is a bit higher but the difference is not so big.

I totally admit that the Airbus design of the system is very special and difficult to modelize, but hardcore simmer still expect THE Airbus add on that could come one day....

I am not saying that this Airbus is bad, it's even the opposite. What is included in the Aersoft Airbus is great and I enjoy using it. Grapics are excellent and the global atmosphere aboard is stunning. I juste hope that one day Airbus add on will meet the level of complexity of the Boeing for a more hardcore experience, includind failures.

Share this post


Link to post

This topic is really curious and quite misleading. In my understanding the focus is the utility/opportunity to completely model or simulate a behavior of an aircraft in an home personal computer, especially for training purposes, in the conviction that the more pop-up screens concerning a peculiar electric or hydraulic system and its related failure is a sufficient way in learning to fly or how to recover from an abnormal situation. The Airbus from Aerosoft is considered a minor creation compared with other software simulating other and more complex models of aircrafts.

This is an unrealistic frame. The price you can pay for a software is out of question. The very problem is the personal computer and the screen in which you are under the illusion to be driving a plane, what you miss is the plane behind the cockpit door, the wind lateral to your flight path, the sudden changes induced by an engine stop, the slippery of a runway, and so on. I intend you miss almost completely the physical motions your sense receives from the real flight in a peculiar situation. The goal of a very complex software in emulating the physical sensations, is the most "realistic" illusion your eyes can receives in simulating the flight. Nothing to do with reality. Accepting this banality can lead you to enjoy the flight simulation, learn important aspects of aviation, spend time and money in a fantastic hobby.

I was an old pilot and I am a young simmer. I love Aerosoft's Airbuses, and consider their "philosophy" to shows how to fly a modern aircraft very honest; the level of automation in maintaining the flight envelope (fbw ) is effective, the auto throttle is unique in operating. Pay attention to the A/T behavior in a leveled turn, it is very realistic, you can "feel" the augmented pressure under your feet. You can fly in direct law or try an hands down approach and landing, with the possibility to measure your ability in terms of feet/min at touchdown. You must react to the gravity induced acceleration if your final is not stabilized. And, finally, you are seated and the cockpit is around you, all the levers, the buttons and knobs are in their natural place, within reach!

It is possible to achieve more? Affirmative in terms of immersion in graphic quality of sceneries or gauges complexity, simulated procedures, flows in cockpit management (the shared cockpit can be a fantastic opportunity to emulate the life in a real flight). Driving a real plane need a completely different program in life, it start moving your ass from your desktop and open the door of a flying school.

Simulation is a dream and an hobby in which Aerosoft have a very important role.

Share this post


Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...