Aerosoft airbus x released!

[Ben Johnson 3]

Thanks Bob.So if I am understanding this correctly, the assignments match in FSX and FSUIPC but the calibration is handled by FSUIPC only?Here is the hiccup in my mind:I am flying the Airbus. Axis Y is mapped to engine 1 and axis Z is mapped to engine 2. The assignments are done in an airbus profile in FSUIPC and in FSX.Now I switch to a single engine prop. In FSUIPC, Axis Y is now mapped to throttle and axis Z is mapped to prop pitch in FSUIPC with a single engine prop profile. In FSX, however, axis Z is still mapped to engine 2. Won't this cause a bunch of problems? Since FSX doesn't do profiles, won't FSX continue to send Airbus assignments to my single engine prop? FSX and FSUIPC will conflict and I will end up with strange results?

Jeff,No. I just tested it with the default C172 as follows - In the FSX controls I have the Aerosoft Airbus X set for the X Axis Rotation from the Saitek Throttle as Throttle1; Y axis Rotation from the Saitek Throttle as Throttle2. In FSUIPC I have an Aircraft specific profile for each Aerosoft Airbus X livery for axis and joystick calibration assignment for these axis'. Now for the default C172 I have the X axis rotation set for throttle 1 and the Y axis rotation is set to the throttle 2. Now in FSUIPC again I have a aircraft specific profile for the C172 for axis and joystick calibration where the X rotation from the joystick is set to the throttle1 and the Y axis rotation is set to the mixture 1. When using the C172 and I move the Y axis rotation (joystick throttle lever) the mixture knob moves in and out. The X axis works the throttle as usual.Bob

[n4gix 4,947]

You do know that you can save multiple FSX configurations as well, right? Granted, you would have to load the one you want to use manually, but at least it is a way...

[Arklight1 140]

At the same time though, you should be able to handle all of that! Pilots did all of the flying we do now without any of the technological assistance. It's there as a convenience, not because it can't be done otherwise! Anyway, that's not aerosoft's reasoning but my own opinion..If you have all of the charts ready to roll and get re-assigned at the last moment, get the first one or two waypoints in there so you are on-course. If you have pressing duties take care of them and then finish the addition of the STAR/SID. It's not ideal, but it is in no means a deal-breaker.

Real Airbus pilots have a co-pilot. lol

[duckbilled 310]

You do know that you can save multiple FSX configurations as well, right? Granted, you would have to load the one you want to use manually, but at least it is a way...

If you are referring to the fact that I can load different FSX.cfg's - yes. If there is another way, please enlighten me. If am sure I have seen the setting over the last 10 years but I have probably ignored it since I use FSUIPC.

[Arklight1 140]

One thing that sort of bugs me was the portion I read that stated:

•CFM and IAE engines (though the flight model and displays are based on the CFM)

No wingflex, ok. But not having different flight models and cockpit/gauges for the different engine types?

[duckbilled 310]

Jeff,No. I just tested it with the default C172 as follows - In the FSX controls I have the Aerosoft Airbus X set for the X Axis Rotation from the Saitek Throttle as Throttle1; Y axis Rotation from the Saitek Throttle as Throttle2. In FSUIPC I have an Aircraft specific profile for each Aerosoft Airbus X livery for axis and joystick calibration assignment for these axis'. Now for the default C172 I have the X axis rotation set for throttle 1 and the Y axis rotation is set to the throttle 2. Now in FSUIPC again I have a aircraft specific profile for the C172 for axis and joystick calibration where the X rotation from the joystick is set to the throttle1 and the Y axis rotation is set to the mixture 1. When using the C172 and I move the Y axis rotation (joystick throttle lever) the mixture knob moves in and out. The X axis works the throttle as usual.Bob

Are you the same Bob that I am replying to at Aerosoft?Either way, it sounds like I have nothing to be concerned with. As long as I can use my hardware as I have with everything else, it looks like the Aerosoft Airbus is a go for the weekend.

One thing that sort of bugs me was the portion I read that stated:No wingflex, ok. But not having different flight models and cockpit/gauges for the different engine types?

I am in to the eye candy and would have liked the wing flex but the difference in performance between the engines would have gone unnoticed with me.Despite what they say, the wings do flex on the A320 - I have been on enough of them to know. Try landing in MMUN on a typical day - those wings will be bouncing all over the place (QW gave the same argument with their 757 - it has flex but not enough IMHO)

[Arklight1 140]

Are you the same Bob that I am replying to at Aerosoft?Either way, it sounds like I have nothing to be concerned with. As long as I can use my hardware as I have with everything else, it looks like the Aerosoft Airbus is a go for the weekend.I am in to the eye candy and would have liked the wing flex but the difference in performance between the engines would have gone unnoticed with me.Despite what they say, the wings do flex on the A320 - I have been on enough of them to know. Try landing in MMUN on a typical day - those wings will be bouncing all over the place (QW gave the same argument with their 757 - it has flex but not enough IMHO)

Yeah, I have been on Airbus flights where the wings have not flexed much, while on others it seemed quite noticable.It would also appear that both engine types have the same sound as well.

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

1. How does it compare to Wilco Airbus?2. What's up with VNAV?

[cenkcnk 24]

what about fps? compare to other payware aircrafts. can you give some information?

[MindYerBeak 73]

1. How does it compare to Wilco Airbus?2. What's up with VNAV?

I just bought it and didn't fly it yet.I'm reading the pdfs what come with it. But the I think I know the answer to your question #1 and that would be that imo this is much better.The vc is really nice.Look at the pictures on their site.Gotta go read now :-)

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

I just bought it and didn't fly it yet.I'm reading the pdfs what come with it. But the I think I know the answer to your question #1 and that would be that imo this is much better.The vc is really nice.Look at the pictures on their site.Gotta go read now :-)

I'm interested in systems comparison and overall "feeling" in general. I know the Aerosoft model is very nice and Wilco is not. But Wilco has SID/STARS, working VNAV (is VNAV working with AirbusX also?),.. I have Wilco Airbus, that's why I'm asking.. I won't buy this one just because the model is so nice, if everything else is not (I don't know, that's why I'm asking).

[MindYerBeak 73]

I'm interested in systems comparison and overall "feeling" in general. I know the Aerosoft model is very nice and Wilco is not. But Wilco has SID/STARS, working VNAV (is VNAV working with AirbusX also?),.. I have Wilco Airbus, that's why I'm asking.. I won't buy this one just because the model is so nice, if everything else is not (I don't know, that's why I'm asking).

I just tested it.No sid/stars no nothing.You cannot even choose the dep/arr runway.Maybe they will make an advanced version but for now it just only looks way nice.My 0.2

[Ben Johnson 3]

Are you the same Bob that I am replying to at Aerosoft?Either way, it sounds like I have nothing to be concerned with. As long as I can use my hardware as I have with everything else, it looks like the Aerosoft Airbus is a go for the weekend.I am in to the eye candy and would have liked the wing flex but the difference in performance between the engines would have gone unnoticed with me.Despite what they say, the wings do flex on the A320 - I have been on enough of them to know. Try landing in MMUN on a typical day - those wings will be bouncing all over the place (QW gave the same argument with their 757 - it has flex but not enough IMHO)

Jeff, "Are you the same Bob that I am replying to at Aerosoft?" - Yes.Bob

[Guest]

what about fps? compare to other payware aircrafts. can you give some information?

I've only done the start of the tutorial twice, but it seems the Airbus X is as light on fps as the Ultralight...! I was really, really surprised at how well performance is! I am used to planes like the MD-11 which have a clear impact on performance, but this one seems to run as smooth as a default Cessna. Honest. Well, at least on my computer. But I think you won't hear a lot of bad words about performance: compared to other similar addons this one is the best when it comes to performance.

[cenkcnk 24]

I've only done the start of the tutorial twice, but it seems the Airbus X is as light on fps as the Ultralight...! I was really, really surprised at how well performance is! I am used to planes like the MD-11 which have a clear impact on performance, but this one seems to run as smooth as a default Cessna. Honest. Well, at least on my computer. But I think you won't hear a lot of bad words about performance: compared to other similar addons this one is the best when it comes to performance.

OMG that is great news!!!