Criticism of Airsimmer A320 review

[Guest Longyear]

In my honest opinion, this is quite a poor review.Mainly because it is clear that the reviewer does not correctly understand A320 operating philosophies.In her 1st flight test, she makes clear references to thinking that the pitch of the aircraft is being controlled with reference to Vertical Speed (VS) and that the A/T should be referenced to IAS. This is absolutely not how any A32X aircraft is flown in real life, or in the Airsimmer model. When Angelique engaged the throttle into the TOGA detent (assuming she did in fact do this correctly), the airbus will have set a reference N1 thrust which will have been maintained. When instructed on the PFD, Angelique should have pulled the throttle into the CL detent (which she may well have to be fair), however, she should then have got a CLB indication on the FMA, and at this point, the aircraft's speed would be controlled by PITCH changes, NOT by throttle control as Angelique clearly thought, in her 'attempts to get the A/T to adjust the speed'. It truly seems that Angelique was unfairly comparing this complex aircraft's flight function with default aircraft, which only use VS for climb and descent.As a further example, on her 3rd flight, Angelique is confused by the "IGNITION" annunciation on the ECAM, this occurs when the Ignition mode knob (positioned behind the 2 x engine knobs on the pedestal) is left in 'IGNITION' mode. A320 pilots leave this knob in the 'IGNTION' position after engine start, if weather dictates that constant ignition is desired (eg... during climbout into clouds, moisture, rain, low temperature etc).The Airsimmer A320 correctly annunciates 'IGNITION' on the ECAM display and to remove this notification, all Angelique had to do was turn the Ignition knob back to it's central (normal) position.There are many other examples that demonstrated limited systems and funtional operating knowledge of the A320 in this review, and as technically minded as Angelique clearly is, I feel her lack of knowledge of A320 systems operation unfairly portrayed 'problems' that just don't exist in this product.When used properly and within it's published contraints, this is an amazing simulation. I believe Angelique was influenced by the tide of negative comments on the Airsimmer web-site. Much of the issues people have, stem from 2 sources;-- Lack of operating knowledge, such as the 2 x examples above.- People with hugely customized FS9 installations (many dating back 7 years), which have become incompatible with a FS9 product released in 2010. Some people are using 5 year old versions on FSUIPC in their FS9 installations and wonder why they have control problems!As I have said time and again, I installed a completely fresh FS9 install ready for the Airsimmer A320 release and use no other addons other than traffic, weather and scenery - and I have not suffered a single CTD, nor any incident of AP control issues. In fact the only bug I have ever suffered is the 'pause' in sounds that occurs during engine start up. That's it. Nothing else!Airsimmer have produced the best ever simulation of a A320 and have done an amazing job - I have clocked up 300+ perfect hours in this add-on, without issue. to suggest the product is not up to the Wilco Airbus Series is nonsense!Most other developers concentrate on the predictable Boeings and Cessnas and developers who take on a complex A320 project deserve support and encouragement, otherwise we won't see Aibus products in the future for us to enjoy.Thank you,Henk(No disrespect intended to Angelique personally but I believe reviewers of complex aircraft, NEED to have a thorough understanding of how the aircraft should be operated, to at least the same degree as the typical user of these level of aircraft simulations).

[tf51d 284]

I think the mistake she made, was continuing the review of the test flights with V1.0 when the current release version was 1.1. Mixing the reviews like that just muddies the water. What I got from her 1.1 flights, was that most of known bugs in 1.0 were corrected. I can't judge for myself whether the AS A320 is better or not than the Wilco A320 since I'm an FSX'er. (I do have the Wilco model) Graphically the AirSimmers is definitely better, especially the external model. When compared though to the Project Airbus model, which I swap out the Wilco model for, the difference is much closer. I would have liked to see more testing of the Airbus Flight control protection systems, which is one of the things that differentiate Boeings from Airbus! The Wilco handles all but the overspeed protections well, would be interesting to see how the AS A320 behaved in this flight regime.

[shafs 0]

is this because she is a woman?

[tf51d 284]

is this because she is a woman?

I don't know where you got that from what either Henk or I posted? I'm waiting for the FSX version, but I'm interested in how this start up company is responding to reported (and in this case) known problems, so I can get an idea of the kind of customer service I can expect if I do purchase their product when available. Like most their announcement of releasing a "Basic" version with known bugs before the Advanced (presumably more debugged version) didn't sit right with me. Especially with all the preliminary hype both from the company and others that this was going to be the best thing since sliced bread. So far the SP1 patch seems to have fixed a number of issues. So now that gives me an idea, of how they will respond to problems with the FSX version when released. All I stated about this review, was that it's generally not a good idea to review a previous version along with the current released one. This makes it confusing to the reader of what issues are in what version. Mainly because the previous versions issues are no longer relevant if fixed in the new patch. Although of these types of reviews where this is done, this one isn't too bad. The only other thing I would have liked to have seen is the Flight controls of the FBW system tested more.

[shafs 0]

is this because she is a woman?

i got a warning from avsim for this comment. i was just haveing a bit of a joke so sorry if i offended anyone.

[Mike... 7]

(No disrespect intended to Angelique personally but I believe reviewers of complex aircraft, NEED to have a thorough understanding of how the aircraft should be operated, to at least the same degree as the typical user of these level of aircraft simulations).

Since when is the (bug ridden) AS A320 Basic Edition a complex aircraft?From their own site:"The Basic Edition is perfect for Flight Simulation enthusiasts who are just introducing themselves to flying the A320 and want to learn the basics without the pressure of having to read extensive documentation."Let's keep things in perspective.

[tf51d 284]

Since when is the (bug ridden) AS A320 Basic Edition a complex aircraft?From their own site:"The Basic Edition is perfect for Flight Simulation enthusiasts who are just introducing themselves to flying the A320 and want to learn the basics without the pressure of having to read extensive documentation."Let's keep things in perspective.

I obviously don't have it, being an FSXer, but from what I read about it, it has a FMGS (simplified I guess) can handle LNAV and VNAV flight modes, how is that not complex? Or am I missing something?

[Mike... 7]

I obviously don't have it, being an FSXer, but from what I read about it, it has a FMGS (simplified I guess) can handle LNAV and VNAV flight modes, how is that not complex? Or am I missing something?

I wouldn't call some basic LNAV and VNAV support complex. See the ISG1 gauges, certainly offers more than a default panel, but it's hardly complex. Complex is PMDG, complex is hardcore.I am an FS9 user, but don't have it either, nor will I ever get it, so I'm not sure for a fact how far this addon goes. But if a product is being advertised as Basic and with that description I quoted earlier, then there's really no doubt about the level of complexity, or lack thereof... Consider the target audience of the product and of the review, then read Henk's post. In my humble opinion it's unfair criticism.