The 3D model is not too bad but the PA and others are better. Textures are not that good and are rather dull. This is why I definitely recommend merging with the PA Airbus model.

Thank you, Tom. That is all I needed to know. I have successfully merged the A321 VC with the Project Airbus (FSX) model, and it seems to be working fine. The only problem I am experiencing is this....When I reduce the fuel load to 50%, and remove all of the passengers from the cabin, the plane starts moving forward on the runway when the engines are at idle. This is obviously annoying, so I am curious to know if there is a solution? The Enigma Simulations ATP also seems to exhibit this problem (without changing anything), so perhaps it has something to do with running FS9 aircraft in FSX?

Thank you, Tom. That is all I needed to know. I have successfully merged the A321 VC with the Project Airbus (FSX) model, and it seems to be working fine. The only problem I am experiencing is this....When I reduce the fuel load to 50%, and remove all of the passengers from the cabin, the plane starts moving forward on the runway when the engines are at idle. This is obviously annoying, so I am curious to know if there is a solution? The Enigma Simulations ATP also seems to exhibit this problem (without changing anything), so perhaps it has something to do with running FS9 aircraft in FSX?

Are you using the e-brake? If so, you might want to try Lennart Vedins FSFixedPos Utility

What is the "e-brake"? I just use the standard brakes, which I have mapped to my front joystick button.

Thank you, Tom. That is all I needed to know. I have successfully merged the A321 VC with the Project Airbus (FSX) model, and it seems to be working fine. The only problem I am experiencing is this....When I reduce the fuel load to 50%, and remove all of the passengers from the cabin, the plane starts moving forward on the runway when the engines are at idle. This is obviously annoying, so I am curious to know if there is a solution? The Enigma Simulations ATP also seems to exhibit this problem (without changing anything), so perhaps it has something to do with running FS9 aircraft in FSX?

In real life a jet like the A320 will happily taxi in a light load with ground idle thrust. Try single engine taxi if you don't like it.

What is the "e-brake"? I just use the standard brakes, which I have mapped to my front joystick button.

The hand / parking brake

Thank you, Tom. That is all I needed to know. I have successfully merged the A321 VC with the Project Airbus (FSX) model, and it seems to be working fine. The only problem I am experiencing is this....When I reduce the fuel load to 50%, and remove all of the passengers from the cabin, the plane starts moving forward on the runway when the engines are at idle. This is obviously annoying, so I am curious to know if there is a solution? The Enigma Simulations ATP also seems to exhibit this problem (without changing anything), so perhaps it has something to do with running FS9 aircraft in FSX?

That is exactly what the real aircraft would do, even a 747-400 will roll forward at idle thrust unless operating near it's MTOWRegards

So, if an aircraft of this type was making a short "re-positioning" flight between two close airports, presumably the pilot would need to keep the "brake pedal" depressed to stop the plane from moving forward on the runway if he was told to "move into position, and hold"?

yep, most aircraft taxi quite fine without the need to add power in real life....MSFS tends to have a bit of "square tires syndrome" for lack of a better term (not an issue with x-plane at all...and if its not the thrust, its the gentle slope in the runway/taxiway :(

So, if an aircraft of this type was making a short "re-positioning" flight between two close airports, presumably the pilot would need to keep the "brake pedal" depressed to stop the plane from moving forward on the runway if he was told to "move into position, and hold"?

The fact of the matter is I never said the AirSimmer bus did or didn't do anything though, did I? I offered and still offer no opinion, no promotion or desire of association with AirSimmer while here, I seperate my work and play have you noticed?.I've observed It to be a fact that the Wilco barely scratches the surface of the A320, I think it would be rediculous to claim otherwise.I also think it would be rediculous to claim that the Basic Edition is a deep systems simulation, or that it doesn't have CTD issues for many users which are crippling until a patch is released that fixes them. This is (Or rather was) a thread about wilco, and thus my comments. The idea that the Wilco is Complex (In comparison with offerings from Level-D/PMDG's boeings) is false. If you further include that the A320 as an airliner is much more complex than either the McDonnel douglas, or Boeing Offerings from both the above mentioned "Premier" developers You may understand that it actually is very simplistic in the scheme of a very complex airliner (The wilco), but it gets the job done. This further goes to say Nobody's Released a "high fidelity A320". The AirSimmer Basic is just that, Basic (And buggy - people are waiting to see how the patch will be, this is known). The feature set on the Wilco is what many may seem to consider complex (There's an overwhelming emphasis on the airplane having an MCDU/CDU which is good for navigation and sids stars etc.(Navigation functions) which isn't even half the meat and potatoes of what's to see in the real deal, and the heavier side of systems simulation and subsystem interactions (LSH, PMDG, LDS, A2A, etc. who've gone high fidelity with their respective simulations). I'd also be curious to hear your personal claims of the AS "Trainwreck" (Since you're very vague in your desciription), but I don't think this is the thread for that.Since I am biased though (as of your opinion) Discredit what I've said and take it with a grain of salt. as that's all it can be worth in a bias matter. :( Ryan

Ryan:You discredit yourself by being an EMPLOYEE of one firm and criticizing the competition of another firm. I have the Wilco Airbus and I find it extremely disappointing since half the overhead panel is inop and many of the systems aren't even modeled even though Wilco is touting it as a complex simulation. Compared to PMDG and LDS it is not even close.With that said, I absolutely will not beat the dead horse that is the Airsimmer "Airbus". You know better than I the criticisms that have been levied at your company and your product and the number of returns and disgruntled customers you have, therefore I will not pour more salt in Airsimmer's wounds. So when I say that your product is a train wreck, do you REALLY need me to elaborate? Simply review the anger on your own forum because that illustrates my points better than I ever could.My point however, is this. If I am a am a house builder and the only house I've ever built was promised to be a gleaming and spectacular mansion but what I actually delivered was a run down shack.... but still I in turn decided to criticize another home builder's design I'll look pretty silly since I can't even get my own house to not collapse but I find it within myself to criticize someone else's house wouldn't I? Wasn't it ******* who said, to pull the plank out of your eye before you try to pull the speck out of mine?I don't like the Wilco Airbus but seriously, a person from Airsimmer criticizing it is pretty funny. Ya gotta at least admit the irony of that is a bit overwhelming!

Is he really an Airsimmer employee tho, or is he just a volunteer moderator at their forum?

Althought Im so excited, but I can't see anything on Wilco's website ? :(

If Wilco can do for the airbus v1 and v2 what their developer partner Feelthere did to the ERJ v2, I can imagine the rush of orders they will get, especially after the whole Airsimmer fiasco. I hope they really do the FMGS some justice (like improved VNAV mode, and the ability of the pseudo waypoints to adjust themselves in real time with changes to STARS/runway selection in midflight). The visual model ain't the worse I've seen but surely could use improvement, especially since lite products and freeware airbus models look so excellent!I'm rooting for Wilco this time, they appear to be responding to past criticism and are getting their house in order finally. But I really also hope that Airsimmer will eventually fix their basic product, and give the advanced model to those who bought the basic (like me) at a nice discount as a sign of goodwill. I am hoping for a proper systems intensive AND visually accurate Airbus, and I am among many who have their credit card ready to reward whoever will bring that to us in FSX!

If Wilco can do for the airbus v1 and v2 what their developer partner Feelthere did to the ERJ v2, I can imagine the rush of orders they will get,

The good news is Wilco's Airbus is developed by Feel there. Im sure they improve their model making skills, just have a look at the E-Jets. Some new features are the only one I have seen in FS, such as Vertical Profile Indicator. Hope they give us the best presents for this summer! :(

Mike,The Product:You mention it's a train wreck, but the product has nothing to do with customers. Do you know what it is, and what it isn't?. Train wreck is vague, not only is it vague but very derogatory, and so that's why I ask. You've made no specific mention as to opinions, dislikes, or issues with the product in question (The AS A320). or for that matter, what might be intriguing or good. Just that it's a trainwreck. (Which makes it all bad). So yes, I'd be fine with hearing about that (Shoot me a PM about it, since this isn't the thread)Irony? Sure possibly, but I'm an owner (Who purchased with his own money). I would only find the matter comical if I were here to sing AS Praises.I don't compete with wilco, so it doesn't bother me.Ryan.(Honestly, I think this conversation needs to go PM if it continues, this was and should have been a thread about wilco, which is where it should continue to go in direction)

Ryan:You discredit yourself by being an EMPLOYEE of one firm and criticizing the competition of another firm. I have the Wilco Airbus and I find it extremely disappointing since half the overhead panel is inop and many of the systems aren't even modeled even though Wilco is touting it as a complex simulation. Compared to PMDG and LDS it is not even close.With that said, I absolutely will not beat the dead horse that is the Airsimmer "Airbus". You know better than I the criticisms that have been levied at your company and your product and the number of returns and disgruntled customers you have, therefore I will not pour more salt in Airsimmer's wounds. So when I say that your product is a train wreck, do you REALLY need me to elaborate? Simply review the anger on your own forum because that illustrates my points better than I ever could.My point however, is this. If I am a am a house builder and the only house I've ever built was promised to be a gleaming and spectacular mansion but what I actually delivered was a run down shack.... but still I in turn decided to criticize another home builder's design I'll look pretty silly since I can't even get my own house to not collapse but I find it within myself to criticize someone else's house wouldn't I? Wasn't it ******* who said, to pull the plank out of your eye before you try to pull the speck out of mine?I don't like the Wilco Airbus but seriously, a person from Airsimmer criticizing it is pretty funny. Ya gotta at least admit the irony of that is a bit overwhelming!

Is it possible to update AIRAC for Wilco Airbus Vol 1. for FSX? Navigraph is just for FS9 version (PIC).