In this thread most posters are only talking about looks and eye candies, but what's about the really important things? What's about system depth - does it reach the Air Simmer's level regarding this? And I'm not talking about VNAV, FMS etc. only, but about Airbus specific features. Wolfgang

In this thread most posters are only talking about looks and eye candies, but what's about the really important things? What's about system depth - does it reach the Air Simmer's level regarding this? And I'm not talking about VNAV, FMS etc. only, but about Airbus specific features. Wolfgang

Since when are looks and eye candy not "really important things"? :(

Since when are looks and eye candy not "really important things"?

And since when was a comparison to Airsimmer relevant on an FSX forum?

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.

+1. This is actually one of the things that has amazed me the most about this aircraft.

Would I like an indepth and up-to-date simulation of an Airbus 320/321 for FSX? Sure...and while I wait for Flight Sim Labs to deliver one, I'll happily fly the Aerosoft Airbus X, which offers more than "sim lite" depth and terrific graphics for a reasonable price. And their support is actively squashing bugs as we read, type, and fly.

I managed to do my first complete flight today, all in selected mode btw, but including a perfect autoland. I love this plane! It's been a while since I flew a plane that had a manual of more than 20 pages and I like it. It's got the exact right depth for me!

I managed to do my first complete flight today, all in selected mode btw, but including a perfect autoland. I love this plane! It's been a while since I flew a plane that had a manual of more than 20 pages and I like it. It's got the exact right depth for me!

Ditto here! I've always liked the Airbus cockpit and there is much to like in this release!

In this thread most posters are only talking about looks and eye candies, but what's about the really important things? What's about system depth - does it reach the Air Simmer's level regarding this? And I'm not talking about VNAV, FMS etc. only, but about Airbus specific features. Wolfgang

If you want system depth then forget this... (a quick read of the specs on Aerosoft's site will answer your questions)It's a lot of beautiful eye candy and GREAT frame rates - but without that annoying system depth... sort of an "Airbus Lite!"I like it!! You'll hate it!

Scott - "How does autothrottle work?" - it has all of the detents - CLB, MCF, FLEX, TOGA and the logic for each - "How does side-stick work?" - not sure what you mean, but if you move the soide stick and let go it will hold bank to 33 degrees and if you exceed 33 degrees it will come back to 33 once the side stick bank is released."I assume normal law only, is stuff like alpha-prot implemented?" - alpha protection is modeled"How about autopilot? Managed modes?" - managed and selected modes"How much is implemented in ECAM?" - all pages.Bob

Thanks. something on Aerosoft forum suggested managed modes weren't 100% modeled.scott s..

Thanks. something on Aerosoft forum suggested managed modes weren't 100% modeled.scott s..

Scott,That is correct if you're looking for the bus to manage the speed for you during the approach. Currently you as the pilot will ned to manage your own speed during the approach. There is talk amongst the devs to implement this managed approach speed functionality.Bob

Sorry guys but it seems that Aerosoft missed the whole point to he Airbus. The BEAUTY of the Airbus is not in its detailed flap canoes but in its highly automated systems that greatly reduces the workload of the pilots. The BEAUTY of the Airbus is not in the shape of its nose but in its fully automated flight and protection systems that "idiot-proofs" the aircraft vs its Boeing counterparts. The BEAUTY of the airbus is in the technology of the Airbus that makes it unique.If you develop an Airbus "lite" that doesn't behave like an Airbus then it is NOT an Airbus representation no matter how accurately the outside skeleton is modeled. In the same way that a Ferrari replica built on a Honda chassis and Corvette engine is not a Ferrari no matter how accurately the body LOOKS like a Ferrari when sitting in the parking lot...its all in the systems and behavior that makes all the difference. I am so sad to see the recent trend that moves away from the beauty of the mechanics of aircraft to simply how photo-realistic the virtual cockpit can be. :-( Over the years this hobby has indeed moved away from being a "simulation" to being just a "game."

I am so sad to see the recent trend that moves away from the beauty of the mechanics of aircraft to simply how photo-realistic the virtual cockpit can be. :-( Over the years this hobby has indeed moved away from being a "simulation" to being just a "game."

Nah, there has always been addons with more focus on the "game" aspect.Aerosoft made it clear from day one what market they were aiming for with this product. Some simmers are just unable to understand or accept that.

If you develop an Airbus "lite" that doesn't behave like an Airbus then it is NOT an Airbus representation no matter how accurately the outside skeleton is modeled. In the same way that a Ferrari replica built on a Honda chassis and Corvette engine is not a Ferrari no matter how accurately the body LOOKS like a Ferrari when sitting in the parking lot...its all in the systems and behavior that makes all the difference. I am so sad to see the recent trend that moves away from the beauty of the mechanics of aircraft to simply how photo-realistic the virtual cockpit can be. :-( Over the years this hobby has indeed moved away from being a "simulation" to being just a "game."

Mike, Have you tried the Aerosoft Airbus? It may not be 100% the original, but I'm still working my way throughover a hundred pages of systems and procedures to figure out how to fly this bird correctly. And no, it does not fly likethe 737NG that I am familiar with. It is definitely more than an "Airbus Lite" and for many, I would think itprovides enough of a challenge to merit the $40 or so that they charge for it.

If you develop an Airbus "lite" that doesn't behave like an Airbus then it is NOT an Airbus representation no matter how accurately the outside skeleton is modeled.

for 99% of FS users the external 'look' is 95% of the game. system modeling and detail hold little interest for 'the average' FS user (example: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/295118-new-airbus-x-navigation/ ). if systems were the focus you would see a significant number of high-fidelity addon aircraft. the reality is there is not a customer base that can support the development of large number of high-fidelity simulations.

...moves away from the beauty of the mechanics of aircraft to simply how photo-realistic the virtual cockpit can be. :-( Over the years this hobby has indeed moved away from being a "simulation" to being just a "game."

the money is in the 'eye candy'. this is why FSX didn't focus on fixing the problems the 'hard core' simmers had with FS8 and FS9 (top two for me are: weather engine, flight dynamics).--

How is the "simple" VNAV function really working? In case of a flight level change is there a visible prediction when the new flight level will be reached?