The "western world" and its culture have passed their zenith and have entered the phase of decadence.

You are joking?! That's exactly what a really bad dude used to say...And more recently militant Islam.I'd take modern technology and flight simming a bit less seriously... :( Just my decadent two penceIan

"Form over function, gadgets rule, life and the things therein should be as easy as eating and drinking, thinking is obsolete, not wanted and avoided by people".Let's see, the "whole point" of the Airbus, according to some above, is that pilots don't have to work, or think, or do manual stuff to fly the airplane.  Why, it's even the Airbus core for being--to build an airplane where the gadgets rule, and flying is as easy as eating and drinking, and typing in that STARS, so the computers can do all the work.I wonder how many Airbus accidents have occurred precisely because when the computers get confused, and give the airplane back to the "pilots"---they can't do much with it.Please--at least strive for some consistency of thinking.  The real Airbus, according to your logic, is the peak manifestation of "thinking is obsolete"...Don't get me wrong, I feel as comfortable in the real world as a passenger in an Airbus or a Boeing--but really--to equate a complex piece of software that models an extraordinarily complex aircraft to a "middling" degree, hardly signals the downfall of western thinking.Bill

i agree with you .... in realty, todays world is much more complex that yesterdays .. just ask some of the 55+ yr olds.  They can attest that the world is more complex than say 30 yrs ago.

i agree with you .... in realty, todays world is much more complex that yesterdays .. just ask some of the 55+ yr olds.  They can attest that the world is more complex than say 30 yrs ago.

Yes..............it is, but it depends on who's doing what..If I had to design and build a DVD player, I'd be over whelmed, but it's much easier to use than changing reels on my old 8 mm projector to watch a movie.If I had to design and launch a GPS satellite system, I'd again be over whelmed, but it's sure easier and better than using VORs & ADFs.L.Adamson

You are joking?! That's exactly what a really bad dude used to say...And more recently militant Islam.I'd take modern technology and flight simming a bit less seriously... :( Just my decadent two penceIan

Agree.

Ditto that.The "western world" and its culture have passed their zenith and have entered the phase of decadence. Just my 2 cent.

doesn't Microsoft Flight Simulator represents "Westernworld" in it's fullest. And is sitting in a cockpit with all kinds of instruments you bought to help you pretend you're a pilot, not decadent? And don't we all love it?*Crosses his legs and lets out a Hummmmmmmmmmmmm) *

I'd hate to take this thread off course from the debate regarding Western World decadence, but has anybody tried to merge the Wilco panel with the Airbus X Model?

Passing on the airbus X, not impressed by the reported lack of systems detail compared to the offerings from PMDG, LDS et al, plus, as also reported, hassles with FSUIPC. I was really put off by the developers reason for not including SIDs and STARs that, in effect, it would freak out simmers accustomed to default flight planning! Also seems to have a lot of bugs at present but this concerns me less as in time I expect they will be addressed its the things that wont be addressed that is the problem.Bruceb

Does it auto trim?

No, not at all. The fly-by-wire is straight from the default FSX a321 and uses elevator to control pitch. In fact trim and rudder are completely inop over 100ft radar alt.

If you are expecting something with the depth of the Wilco offering, you'll be disappointed. It is gorgeous, no doubt, and not a bad flier, and since I only occasionally get the urge to fly a bus, it might be just the thing for me. But there are strange bugs like no TC / TD if there are more than five waypoints involved. Still working my way through this one, but can't say I'm 100% delighted at this point. Seems underpowered, too. After they get the kinks worked out it will be a better airplane. Just some initial thoughts. Oswald Spengler

Tim,Oswald...thats funny........The Decline of The West. :(

Tim,Oswald...thats funny........The Decline of The West. :(

What a literate group AVSIMmers are!

I really enjoy the Airbus X for what it is, but I can't help but feel disappointed in what "could have been". I would have paid more for, well, more.It was designed for beginner/intermediate users, but how many beginner users really buy a $40+ add-on? Honest question as I am no FS marketing expert.Here are a few things that sort of get to me:Systems-No way to delete/add SIDs/STARs on the fly (or is there and I don't know how?).-No way to really fly a Hold.-An overall lack of MCDU functionality in general.-Gauge refresh rate is not to hot.-Gauge graphics have aliasing.**Most of the above culminates into me not being exactly sure how I would use this online. I originally planned for this aircraft to be my "start in online flying" since it is a little bit easier to wrap your mind around systems wise, but it appears some of the systems it is lacking would be rather crucial for successfully flying online. As stated, I have not really flown online so if I am incorrect in my assumptions here somebody please feel free to correct me.-The copilots side of the VC canot be used, i.e., none of the switches are clickable including the MCDU on that side.Model-No wingflex - Yeah, the subject has been brought up adnauseum, but I could have done without the moving tray table and chair in favor of wingflex. More of a preference on my part.-There are multiple Airbus types painted, but none of them have different models. I am pretty sure the various Airbus aircraft have different antennae configurations and whatnot (something Project Airbus is known for getting right).Sounds-The CFM and IAE engines use the same sound.-The thrust reversers are way too quiet.FDE-The CFM and IAE aircraft have the same FDE.-Climb seems really slow.-Below 100ft on approach, my aircraft starts to bank left for no reason.Other things have already been mentioned by folks here and elsewhere, some are bugs being looked at while others were left out of the add-on.These are a few things I noticed after a short time. Having said that, I do enjoy the Airbus X and definitely appreciate the time and effort that went into creating it. However, without most the "bells and whistles" so to speak, I don't see it having much longevity for me. Granted, I do have a good time flying and doing CAT III landings, there just doesn't seem to be enough of an intellectual investment to maintain my interest over the long haul (no pun intended)...i.e., I don't really get that much satisfaction after a flight like I do with other add-ons. Now, this is not to say others won't have a grand ol' time with an add-on like this, I am sure there are loads of people out there who will, but I think I was hoping for a little more. I did go into the purchase with the knowledge that it would be lacking in some regards, so i can't really blame anybody for what I view as a shortcomming. I do remember Aerosoft mentioning that this would be a great aircraft for online flying, but I just don't see how.Perhaps an advanced version will come out. I would really like to see that. In the meantime, maybe there is a way to merge the Wilco panel with the Airbus X. Anybody tried a merge like this yet?

I wonder why fadec requires bypass of throttle control from fsx for proper simulation, are there any workarounds possible to re-enable the mouse wheel?

What does Wilco have that Airbus X doesn't?

What does Wilco have that Airbus X doesn't?

Lateral and vertical revisions, SIDs and STARs, selection of departure and arrival runways... if you want, you can pretty much make the whole flight automatically with the Wilco. I'm not really a bussie so someone else can comment on everything Aerosoft missed (or didn't aim at). I'm having fun with it nonetheless. I think there is a lot of pent-up desire for a fully simulated Airbus and some people are disappointed that's not what Aerosoft intended to deliver. Aerosoft made a marketing decision that the vast majority of people who buy airplanes are not represented by the hard core simmers who tend to post on forums.Let me put it this way. The dogs got me up at 5:30 this morning. I could have gone back to bed, but I think I'll do a short hop in the AirbusX.