Archived

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

Guest ted320

AXP320

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I'd rather wait for AirSimmer. They'll probably release soon, although no date is given at this time.I'm also getting tired of all those no-compromise-fly-by-wire Airbuses...Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really worth it to have yet another thread for this topic...?Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is forcing you to read it. And if AXP would get their forum up then you would probably see less posts like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>No one is forcing you to read it. >>And if AXP would get their forum up then you would probably>see less posts like this. ...and being locked by Lou Betti because he's probably too ashamed to talk about this 'issue'.Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if we've reached the point where, given the complexity we now demand from add-on aircraft, it is no longer possible for designers to meet our demands realistically within the life of a sim. I'm not saying that this is the case here - just wondering, that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have a good point Gavin....another reason why I am stretching the life of my sim. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gavin has a very very valid point.Demands are so high, that even the professional teams are having trouble making dreams a reality.I must say. I am also very sad about the current state of affairs at AXP. I would never have believed that it would turn out like this, after what went on last year.Tero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, developers really set the limit as to what is possible and what isn't ("raising the bar"). So far, the bar that developers have set has satisfied nearly everyone. If Devs/publishers (for example, Feelthere/Wilco) can't meet the standards set and yet price/advertise their product in the same class it is entirely their fault that they bit off more than they could chew. No one demanded that AXP raise the bar the way they did, in fact everyone was quite surprised at what they said they were capable of doing. I looked at all the old AXP posts in the forum and remembered how amazing everything was when they first announced the project, things I never even would have demanded as a customer or thought were possible were being worked on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>On the other hand, developers really set the limit as to what>is possible and what isn't ("raising the bar"). So far, the>bar that developers have set has satisfied nearly everyone. >If Devs/publishers (for example, Feelthere/Wilco) can't meet>the standards set and yet price/advertise their product in the>same class it is entirely their fault that they bit off more>than they could chew. No one demanded that AXP raise the bar>the way they did, in fact everyone was quite surprised at what>they said they were capable of doing. I looked at all the old>AXP posts in the forum and remembered how amazing everything>was when they first announced the project, things I never even>would have demanded as a customer or thought were possible>were being worked on. AlexFair point mate - can't argue with that.Personally I think AXP have just gone underground and that any day now will jump back into life with an available product. They're doing top secret beta testing as I type! I buy one lottery ticket each week ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question number 1 for me is what happened to Vauchez. He doesn't the even support his own sceneries...Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true - 'all' I want is an LDS or PMDG level A32x. That in itself would be revolutionary - no giant leaps required, not by me anyway. regards,Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wilco bus has the ELAC computers nailed as much as I would expect from a desktop simulation, and to me thats the only thing that really differs.All I would love is to have the OP and managed CLB/DES predictions, proper FLEX calculations and stuff that LVLD, Flight1 ATR give us for immersion, to be wrapped up and I would be haapy to buy the product. Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That in itself would be revolutionary - no giant leaps required, not by me anyway."The thing with an airbus is that modelling proper FBW is a giant leap in itself. A Bus that looks like a bus but flies like a Boeing is absolutely unnecessary, the ageing PSS does a decent job at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You shouldn't be upset against the developers who do their best to provide us a good Airbus simulation. Give them the necesary time for this. As an Airbus product developer, I can tell you the Airbus aircrafts are much more complex than Boeings just because they are more recent aircrafts. They have more automated systems, such as fly-by-wire, FADEC, and others... and all the systems are linked together. This makes the simulation complex, especially if the failures are also simulated.But I'm not saying Airbus are more advanced aircrafts than Boeings... Look at the most recent Boeing aircrafts (777 and 787). I'm sure they are as complex as the Airbus, and this may be why they have never been modeled completely for FS.Eric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think people are upset as such. More like confused and maybe also disappointed at the state of affairs.I find it somehow unrealistic that many times when problems arise in development, that the people experiencing disappointment or even anger should simply shut up. The human mind does not work that way. I am sure everyone appreciates the work of the developers, on many fronts. But at the same time it's a complex play where everyone plays a role. Developers provide stuff, that customers then purchase. Without one side, the cake would collapse. Both sides need each other.In that respect I am all for honesty and direct statements of things. And I also understand and respect the frustration of many simmers who eagerly wait this and that. I have been there myself, and am, all the time.It's life. Tero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"That in itself would be revolutionary - no giant leaps>required, not by me anyway.">>The thing with an airbus is that modelling proper FBW is a>giant leap in itself. >That basically is my point - an 'LDS or PMDG level' A32x means 'advanced and accurate representation of the aircraft being modeled' ie fbw and other A32x characteristics.Other advances like uber-stunning graphics and smoother than greased liquid displays running at 40fps or more (as was advertised by AXP) would be great, but not required... by me.regards,Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think performance would be right behind realism. I would place it very high on that list of needs. Look at FSX... there is almost zero headroom for complex add-ons. There obviously has to be a new approach to squeeze add-ons in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites