Forums
-
Aerosoft | House Of Simulation
-
- 1.8k
- posts
-
- 1
- post
-
- 469
- posts
-
- 20.3k
- posts
-
- 272
- posts
-
- 27
- posts
-
-
Hardware
-
- 146
- posts
-
- 1.7k
- posts
-
-
Aerosoft Flight | Flight Simulation Support
-
- 15.4k
- posts
-
- 5.8k
- posts
-
- 52.8k
- posts
-
- 13.4k
- posts
-
- 38
- posts
-
- 85
- posts
-
- 232
- posts
-
- 264
- posts
-
- 59
- posts
-
-
Aerosoft Move | Game Support
-
- 1.5k
- posts
-
- 53
- posts
-
- 264
- posts
-
- 343
- posts
-
- Updates
- By Mathijs Kok,
-
- 59
- posts
-
- 15
- posts
-
-
Aerosoft Friends
-
- 960
- posts
-
- 541
- posts
-
![Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account]](https://forum.aerosoft.com/uploads/monthly_2023_09/Aerosoft_Social_Media_Profilbild_Neu23.thumb.jpg.03721825e6a434ed4af0c8b2b73a5898.jpg)
-
Recent Achievements
-
-
Recently Browsing
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Posts
-
By Heinz Flichtbeil · Posted
Hallo Helmut F., wir arbeiten an dem Problem. Möglichwerweise gibt eine einfache Erklärung für diese Sache. Das hat nicht unbedingt mit FlightFactor zu tun... Andere FlightFactor Flugzeuge funktionieren ja mit dem X-Updater.... Im Moment kann ich aber nicht sagen, woran es liegt. Ich werde das bei uns (Aerosoft) nocheinmal ansprechen.... Wir sind auf jeden Fall am Problem dran. Gruß Heinz -
Nach vielen Jahren bin ich nun von Flight Factor sehr enttäuscht. Der FF A320U war 2018 mein erster Sim-Flieger. Er war damals nicht der billigste unter den Angeboten in der XPlane-Welt, dafür aber technisch sehr weit fortgeschritten, und ich habe den Kauf bei AEROSOFT lange nicht bereut. Neue Versionen wurden jahrelang recht schnell im Download-Bereich von AEROSOFT bereitgestellt. Als dann XPlane 12 erschien war der FF A320 so ziemlich das einzige Flugzeug, für das man einen Update-Preis bezahlen musste und in der Folge einen neuen Code bekam. Ich habe das Flugzeug bei AEROSOFT erworben und neue Versionen stets von der DownloadPage bei Aerosoft heruntergeladen. Dort wird aktuell als Version 1.7.5 immer noch „A320 Ultimate Extended XP12 BETA“ versehen mit dem Datum „19.09.2020 10:34:00“ (was sicher auch nicht stimmt) angeboten. Aus verständlichen Gründen verweist AEROSOFT nun auf den X-Updater. Dieser arbeitet bei mir mit mehreren Produkten einwandfrei. Im Falle des A320 aber wird mein Lizenzcode als falsch bezeichnet, und das Flugzeug lässt sich daher nicht in die Update-Liste aufnehmen. Heinz Flichtbeil hat die Richtigkeit meines Lizenzcodes bestätigt und freundlicher Weise versucht, mein Problem mit Flight Factor zu klären, erhält aber offensichtlich auch keinerlei Unterstützung mehr. Ich habe mittlerweile 2 Tickets bei Flight Factor eröffnet. Die einzige Reaktion war jedoch die automatische Bestätigungsmail – sonst NICHTS. Ich werde nun trotz langjähriger positiver Erfahrung künftig Grund keine Produkte bei Flight Factor mehr erwerben, denn ein mehrjähriger Support ist dort nicht zu erwarten. -
Ich hatte lange Jahre auch nur Linux. Das schöne ist, für viele Dinge, die unter Windows nicht gelöst werden konnten, habe ich mit kleinen Scripts erledigen können. Mittlerweile habe ich mich an den Mac so gewöhnt, im Moment möchte ich nicht wechseln, aber wenn, dann wäre es wieder Linux.
-
weitere Baustelle erledigt: der FF-Java- X-Updater für Linux kann zwar nur über das Terminal aufgerufen werden. Auch muss die Java 8 Laufzeit zwingend installiert sein (andere Versionen scheitern). Die Bedienung kommt mir noch eine ganze Ecke userfreundlicher vor als bei Windows -
Die von FF angesprochenen Themen 787 und A350 interessieren mich.
-
-
By JakobFerdinand · Posted
Exactly! Simbrief is certainly more "pilot" oriented and tailored towards quick planning to "get off the ground" as fast as possible. It's great for many uses, but the philosophy is completely different than PFPX and in my opinion, the two are barely even comparable. Regarding dumbing-down areas of the hobby, I have to completely agree. I've seen instances of a what seemed like a developer misleading customers to justify simplified and unrealistic results in a tool. Real life aviation, especially when it comes to flight planning and performance is extremely complex and complicated, and for many areas expensive programs (and deep knowledge) is required, but the simplification that we are seeing now will intentionally stop people from diving deeper and learning more about these subjects (and I believe, even for commercial purposes). In no way do I intend on "gate keep" flight simming - It's a hobby for everyone, but that shouldn't stop developers from aiming to bring realistic and deep simulations/tools. Unfortunately, I suspect the finacial incentive to keep things simple, and maybe not be very vocal about the fact that they are, is just much larger than catering for those who are interested in deeper/more realistic tools. I hope we will see another in depth flight planning tool some time in the future, but incredibly still, as long as the server and subscription system is kept running, PFPX actually does an incredible job. I really hope this isn't the end for it - flight simming will be much less fun without it. I will try reaching out to Christian through some alternate channels, but currently the chances aren't looking great. I really liked the idea by @EnQof sending flightsimsoft a letter. Perhaps we could gather some signatures from the community to see if we can get them to keep the server and subscription system alive? PS: I wanna give quick shout out to Virtual Performance Tool, which is a developer that is going in the direction of more depth and complexity for flight sim. Those who enjoy PFPX will certainly enjoy their performance tool! -
Could someone please tell me, the (unboxed) dimensions for the Honeycomb Foxtrot Stick (L x W x H)? I can only find 40cm x 13cm x 27cm, what I think are the box size.. Thank You
-
I have done some reading and I can't seem to find an answer to this. Pardon my ignorance if this is pilot error. I am using the CRJ v2 in MSFS 2024 SU4, and when I am dialing in an altitude, either higher or lower, with no other logic modes enabled (either SPEED or VS) the plane will automatically climb or descend. This is especially noticeable on descents from cruise. As soon as I begin dialing in a different altitude from ALTS (in green), the plane will just pitch nose-down. I do not have coupled VNAV enabled in the EFB. As I understand it, the plane should not begin a climb or descent when a new altitude is selected until a mode is enabled (SPEED or VS). Yes, as soon as I touch the ALT knob, the plane just automatically climbs or descends. Are there bindings that might inadvertently cause this? A setting in MSFS 24 that I am missing? Any help or insight is appreciated.
-
As I wrote as a reply to a previous post, I am currently working on support for MSFS2024 scenery-scan via navdatareader (made by Alexander Barthel - the developer of Little NavMap). The reason for this is because MakeRunways (by Peter Dowson) was only able to scan scenery via BGL-files, which are no longer in use for MSFS2024), hence Flightplan Viewer was not able to show the gates matching your active scenery for MSFS2024. I am currently working on having Flightplan Visualizer import the database generated by navdatareader, and I still have a few changes to do, and things to check. But hope I will be able to release a new version within a month or so. To use this new feature you will have to run navdatareader (while MSFS2024 is running, as it extract scenery-date via SimConnect). Basically you "should" run navdatareader whenever you have updated your scenery (e.g. installed a new airport) - just like you in the past "should" run MakeRunways each time you had made changes to your scenery. FlightPlan Visualizer will still default to be using the MakeRunways files you have made yourself, or those bundled with the installer. However in settings you can in the following version specify a path to where you have a database generated by navdatareader. If this database is specified the navdatareader-db will take priority over the MakeRunways-files. There will be a few benefits using the navdatareader-DB over the MakeRunways-files. First of all it can scan your installed MSFS2025 scenery, but it can also scan scenery purchased via the Markedplace within MSFS (MakeRunways couldn't do this, as this scenery was encrypted). MakeRunways didn't fully support unicode, so I had to put in extra code trying to catch when it did something "bad" to the airport-names, which is not an issue with navdatareader. Also as visible in the screen-shot below, hoovering the mouse over a gate, the tooltip will show if a jetway is associated with the gate.Please login to display this image.
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics121.8k
-
Total Posts841.6k
-
-
Files
-
