I don't understand your anger towards me? if you don't like my topic, don't respond in it. I spelled it airbii as a play on words, I'm sorry you are taking this topic too seriously. As I said before, if you can't add to my topic then please exit it

No need to play victim of a nonexistent crime. If you don't like airbus, don't buy it or fly it. If you can't get over this, then at least accept it that when you make a thread complaining about somebody making airbus addons, many people who have been waiting for years for one will sort of tell you: don't ask don't tell, or in other words, don't like it, don't post. cheers

>you can only go more than 30 degrees if you turn off a>hal-like computer but are limited even after that as you>mentioned to 67.Wrong.If you want to bank more than 33 deg, you simply have to KEEP your hand on the stick, and you can go up to 67. If you release pressure on the stick when at > 33 bank already, it will automatically return to 33. If you had A/P on during the bank, passing 45 deg, the A/P will automatically disconnect.And this is NORMAL LAW, the "default" mode, no need to turn off anything.

so people have been waiting? good for them? I have been waiting just as long for a short-medium range freight hauler. Others can probably chime in with other requests they've been wanting. What happened to the learjet25/35 by flight1? So people wanted airbii and now they get how many? 4? 5? and you all still complain?exactly, dont like it, dont post. so please feel free to take up that offer in my topic

Difference is we don't make threads about it.

Dont know what all the fuss is about .. im looking forward for the A320 as im still using fs9 and the fact that they will be doing the A330/A340 will be icing on the cake. If anyone here can direct me to a "correctly" modeled airbus with all or 95% of the airbus flight systems and FBW laws accurately represented then ill respectfully retract my statement. otherwise our opinions on the matter are wholly divergent.Cheers

>Difference is we don't make threads about it. you make a comment about ignoring posters and yet you fail to follow your own advice. if you don't like it, don't comment on it. if you don't like my topic, don't personally attack me but keep your mouth shut. thanks for playing

>(for what it's worth, as clearly you have little respect for>other peoples opinions, I have read said article in the past.I disagree, so therefore I have no respect for your opinion. I see...Your initial position on the FBW was sarcastic in its own right...apparently it's only OK for you to be sarcastic? Nope, don't work that way, sorry.>I have also read many other accounts / articles SUPPORTING the>FBW system. It's swings and roundabouts. Either you like the>idea of it or you don't.If you did indeed read the article, you know that it neither supported nor argued aginst FBW per se. It did conclude with some strongly cautionary verbage about systems with hard protections as in the 'bus.>Let's not even mention how if this system had been rolled out>in a US airliner first it would have been the greatest>invention in aviation history!) No, the US chose to put FBW into ejection-seat equipped fighters first, before passenger jets. Much better to learn the necessary lessons when the pink flesh involved still has another way to get home after the FBW fails. And fail it did, a number of times in the early days. But the US had FBW jets flying more than 10 years before the A320 or any other FBW european aircraft flew. So spare me the misguided chest-beating about how it was all invented in Toulouse.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

error

Sorry Bob, But I treat as I find. You didn't just disagree. You tried to belittle the opinions of people who disagree with you.The term 'Scarebus' is sarcastic in it's own right as used in your original post. I responded in kind.If you bothered to notice, I already mentioned the F-16 in a previous post so no chestbeating required. Where did I mention that FBW was invented in Toulouse?? The A320 was the first civil airliner with FBW, no? You read what you want to read it seems. I'm certainly not French either so I have no vested interest in Airbus or EADS. If anything, I have a more personal interest in Bombardier if you catch my drift...............Best wishes

>Sorry Bob, >>But I treat as I find. You didn't just disagree. You tried to>belittle the opinions of people who disagree with you.Cry me a river. Since when did the opinions of others become sacred ground? Belittling opinions (but not the person who holds them) is what debate is all about.Your third post in this thread...quoted below...was a sarcastic shot at those who don't care for FBW. It came before mine and was the reason I posted here in the first place. Glenn wrote:>>Yes, must be really 'scary' when that #### FBW system won't allow >>you to put the aircraft in a stall situation or any condition >>outside of it's known flight envelope.>>>>I don't know how the pilots cope....... >The term 'Scarebus' is sarcastic in it's own right as used in>your original post. I responded in kind.Yep. Never made any claim I wasn't a real sarcastic guy. I am.>If you bothered to notice, I already mentioned the F-16 in a>previous post so no chestbeating required. Where did I mention>that FBW was invented in Toulouse?? The A320 was the first>civil airliner with FBW, no? Let's start with your previous quote:>>Let's not even mention how if this system had been rolled out in a >>US airliner first it would have been the greatest invention in >>aviation historyFBW systems were "rolled out" in US aircraft first, but not in an airliner to start with. But the invention of FBW systems was indeed American. You mentioned the F-16, but not in the context of it being the first production FBW aircraft in the world and, of course, the greatest invention in aviation history. ;-)RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile