Aerosoft AIrbus 320 Review

[Guest tg272]

Thanks for a good review. However, I must say that everything you said in it further confirmed Aerosoft's current mindset favoring eye candy over functionality.Once a beta tester for Aerosoft, I still have the utmost respect for Mathijs Kok and the entire Aerosoft team. Very talented guys, but I can't share their production of eye candy-over-function philosophy that began IMO with the Aerosoft F-16. Perhaps one day in the future they'll get back to making the other end of spectrum, add-ons that function even better and more accurately than they look.

[Chock 17,769]

Personally I'd have bought the Aerosoft Airbus in a heartbeat if it would have been more than a 'lite' version, and I will do so when they bring out the one with the more detailed systems, and with that in mind... I think we have to remember that there are almost certainly more casual simmers than there are hard core types for FS add-ons, and so the creation of 'lite' products is often the funding foundation for making a more complex product a viable proposition. We'll just have to wait and see if that is what transpires for the A320, but in the meantime think about this: Aerosoft may have initially favoured eye candy over systems with this initial move on the A320, but there is no denying that publishing add-ons such as the marvelous SimCheck A300 and the truly excellent PBY Catalina indicates that they're certainly not averse to being patrons of more complex stuff.Al

[slait 169]

There may be more casual simmers than hardcore, but my argument to that would that they are also more fleeting. Many of the casual simmers that would fit this market also leave the market much more quickly than those of us that are in it for the long haul. Those that will do more than buy a single simplistic add-on and then move on to the next flashy whizzbang gadget never to make another purchase. The hardcores tend to seek out the next best add-on to crank up the enjoyment factor of their sim experience and return for more. My experience in the retail market has been one that relies heavily on return business, and the shorter attention span of many in the lite market (in general, not all, please don't get me wrong) may not be back again.It may be that they make more money catering to that ideal today, but in a niche market such as that with Flight Simulator where the developers have already been disbanded it seems to me that the lifers would be a more appropriate target for future endeavours.

[Chock 17,769]

That may be true, but to get your money's worth out of a hardcore simmer, you have to charge a lot, because they'll happily use that thing for years and potentially never spend another cent with you, after all, Level-D probably aren't making much money off the fact that hard core simmers bought their 767 five years ago.That's why almost all the developers are abandoning FS9, because they have to when there a bunch of hard core simmers who won't spend money on scenery because they've 'already got it'. Developers go where the money grows if they want to stay in business.Al

[slait 169]

That also may be true, but from what I know of successful companies, they tend to release more than one product every 5 years. Because you are catering to hardcore simmers does not mean you can rely on a single product to carry you for years at a time.

[Guest acezboy561]

It is true. I made sure I metioned in the Conclusion and compared it to the PMDG JS41, with seems to be the same as the Airbus X, but more complex. Aerosoft have said an Advanced Version is coming with a small fee, but there still not aiming for PMDG complexity, unfortantley.

[Paul_Smith 92]

Sorry, but not one of Avsims better reviews. Four groups of people might be interested in this product and in my opinion, none of them gained enough useful information from this review to help them make buying decisions.One group is interested in visuals. They want to know what it looks like. The review spoke highly of the VC but the pictures provided were too dark to show any of the details mentioned. There was talk of how it looked from the outside at 37,000 feet but nothing was said of the lack of a 2d cockpit or the lack of co-pilot functionality, or the stunning level of detail visible on the ground. (Check out the inside of the flaps and the wheel wells!)One group is interested in the Airbus A32x. Does this simulation have its own FBW model or does it use the FSX default FBW? Does it use the Airbus style auto throttle control, or the Boeing style manual throttle? One group having been dissapointed by other Airbus products will be interested to know if it is stable or buggy? Is there good support and updates? Do developers comment on forums?One group are experienced simmers. They want to know how simple or advanced this product is compared to other products they own or know. Does it have a fully functional FMC? If not, what are its primary limitations? How deeply are other systems modeled? How do the flight dynamics compare to published information? Is there a failure model? What makes this product different from other products?Finally, wing flex. Perhaps a paragraph could have been spared to explain the difference between flexing as an engineering term measured and observed from outside the plane and the apparent motion caused by the passengers head bobbing up and down during turbulence and on landings. I hope Avsim will revisit this product with another review in the not to distant future. Whether the user will be thrilled or disappointed by their purchase, or whether or not they will buy at all depends a lot on their preconceptions, and Avsim has a powerful role in setting those expectations. I believe that this is an interesting product from a number of perspectives and while significantly flawed in some areas, it sets new standards of excellence in others. As such, I think it deserves a more detailed and accurate review then the one provided here.

[Guest acezboy561]

Hi Paul-Thanks for your response.

One group is interested in visuals. They want to know what it looks like. The review spoke highly of the VC but the pictures provided were too dark to show any of the details mentioned. There was talk of how it looked from the outside at 37,000 feet but nothing was said of the lack of a 2d cockpit or the lack of co-pilot functionality, or the stunning level of detail visible on the ground. (Check out the inside of the flaps and the wheel wells!)

- The pictures used had the HDR plug-in used. Thats what my sim looks like, and I feel gives a more realstic representation of what I would see, I didn't really talk about it at FL370, but more of how I don't like looking at, quote: "an ugly object" at FL350. \- I see what you mean by no 2D cockpit, but I felt that the Glareshield panel was a 2D cockpit, if you get what im saying. - As for the Co-Pilot, I know it was very much focused on the Left seat, but I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the Left & Right Seat, the FMC wasn't working on the Right Seat, the Tray Table wasn't and no option to sit in the right seat. I don't really see how this was an issue to be pointed out.- Inside the flaps and wheels, I don't know why I would look there, that is a hidden place, if they were going to put that much detail into a hidden spot, why? I don't understand why your concerned about that also!

One group is interested in the Airbus A32x. Does this simulation have its own FBW model or does it use the FSX default FBW? Does it use the Airbus style auto throttle control, or the Boeing style manual throttle?

- In the "Flying Dynamics" Section of the review I metioned that the FBW was detailed to represent what a real A320/321 would fly like. Im not a real Airbus pilot, as quote from the review, but from flying on the actual aircraft for 6 hours in 1 week, I think it is fair to say that I can tell if they are accurate or not. - I will agree with you here, I did not metion that, it does use the Airbus style auto throttle, when thrust is near TOGA, the A/T kicks in.

One group having been dissapointed by other Airbus products will be interested to know if it is stable or buggy? Is there good support and updates? Do developers comment on forums?

- Again, if it wasn't stable, I would of metioned it. I only post about bugs, if im positive about the bugs found. I don't like to be a "parent" to the "child" and point out every little thing. People can judge to themself if support is good, and tell if developers comment on the forums.

One group are experienced simmers. They want to know how simple or advanced this product is compared to other products they own or know. Does it have a fully functional FMC? If not, what are its primary limitations? How deeply are other systems modeled? How do the flight dynamics compare to published information? Is there a failure model? What makes this product different from other products?

- I metioned about the MCDU in the conclusion that it is limited, also in the what I do not like about the product, again, all refered to the Airbus X product page.- Ive commented about the FBW above, but if you can link me to information regarding the flying dynamics, please email me at asandri@avsim.com- I also said this in the conclusion, comparing it to the PMDG JS41, same high quality material, less complex = IMHO overpriced.Im a bit confused about your comment regarding the wing flex, please explain?I was actually writing up my next review, after some motivation today, but that motivation has been lost now.... The past two months I have been under alot of stress, and im now not sleeping very well. I know it is no excuse, but I am trying my hardest.Have a great day/night (where ever your from!)-Aidan Sandri,

[Paul_Smith 92]

Hi Paul-Thanks for your response.- The pictures used had the HDR plug-in used. Thats what my sim looks like, and I feel gives a more realstic representation of what I would see, I didn't really talk about it at FL370, but more of how I don't like looking at, quote: "an ugly object" at FL350. \- I see what you mean by no 2D cockpit, but I felt that the Glareshield panel was a 2D cockpit, if you get what im saying. - As for the Co-Pilot, I know it was very much focused on the Left seat, but I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the Left & Right Seat, the FMC wasn't working on the Right Seat, the Tray Table wasn't and no option to sit in the right seat. I don't really see how this was an issue to be pointed out.- Inside the flaps and wheels, I don't know why I would look there, that is a hidden place, if they were going to put that much detail into a hidden spot, why? I don't understand why your concerned about that also!

Your photos do not show any of the features you say are worth looking at in the VC. Inside the flaps and wheels are visible when you do a pre-flight walk-around (so no, they are not hidden) and show the detail available in the exterior model far better, and far more realistically, then the locked spot view at altitude. Co-pilot functionality has not been implemented. And not only did you not think this was worth mentioning, you now say you still could not tell Left from Right seat.

- In the "Flying Dynamics" Section of the review I metioned that the FBW was detailed to represent what a real A320/321 would fly like. Im not a real Airbus pilot, as quote from the review, but from flying on the actual aircraft for 6 hours in 1 week, I think it is fair to say that I can tell if they are accurate or not. - I will agree with you here, I did not metion that, it does use the Airbus style auto throttle, when thrust is near TOGA, the A/T kicks in.

I think it is fair to say that I do not agree with you when you say 6 hours as a passenger tells you anything. As a passenger, did you get any feel for how the aircraft responded to the pilots inputs? If you closed your eyes, do you honestly believe that you could tell whether you were in a Boeing, an Airbus or any of the half dozen other regional jets? On the other hand, you could have said if the take off speeds, rate of climb, air speed, ceilings, fuel ranges etc, were close to real world published figures. By the way, A/T does not 'kick in' when thrust levers are moved to TOGA, TOGA does. The difference between the Airbus and the Boeing approach to throttle control is that the Airbus pilot moves the throttle to FLX to take off, and to 'CL' when off the ground. The next time they touch the throttle is when they hear the famous 'Retard' callout.

...Im a bit confused about your comment regarding the wing flex, please explain?

If you asked a passenger on an A320 who had never used FSX if they saw the wings flex, they would probably say no. They do not expect wings to move and would assume any effect they did see was caused by their own movement in their seats. If you asked an Airbus engineer how much the wings were designed to flex under load, they would tell you how many inches of movement and you could calculate how many pixels that would represent in the sim. You have seen wing flex in FSX on other aircraft and so you expect all wings to flex. So when you looked for it, that is what you saw.I have been harsh (you may feel I was too harsh), but I think this product deserves better. When you are doing your next review, keep asking yourself 'who is going to read this and why?' and you should find that you do a much better job.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

...If you asked an Airbus engineer how much the wings were designed to flex under load, they would tell you how many inches of movement and you could calculate how many pixels that would represent in the sim. You have seen wing flex in FSX on other aircraft and so you expect all wings to flex. So when you looked for it, that is what you saw.I have been harsh (you may feel I was too harsh), but I think this product deserves better.

Paul, with all respect - it seems to me that you are too focused on details here...Having written a few reviews myself, I know that a lot work goes into them. I own the Aerosoft 320 and agree that there is legitimate controversy over how much reality has been modeled by Aerosoft - but why not make a contribution to our hobby by adding the paragraphs that you feel would better describe the product?Or even signing up to write an entire Avsim review?

[raymar 969]

Bert, I totally agree with you. I was in Paul's position 3 or 4 months ago and being mostly negatiive about a reivew when finally someone stepped in and said to me just what you said to Paul. My first review was published about two hours ago.Ray