I keep trying to get on to the page to find out more info about the a320, will it be akin to PMDGs or Captiain Sims boeing series, or will it be a "lite" aircraft?

It's looking likely that it will be the first extremely accurate simulation of an A320. The main dude at Flight Sim Labs is Lefteris Kalamaras, who was the lead developer at PMDG for many years, which ought to give you some idea of where FSL are coming from. The FSL version of Concorde for FSX may also give you an idea of the kind of quality FSL are aiming at, since it is quite possibly the most complex add-on you can get for FS and certainly on par with anything A2A or PMDG have ever produced.Reading between the lines, when PMDG suggested they were going to make and A320 some years ago, I should think that idea went out the door when Lefteris did, and although PMDG have said he was 'easily replaced', I think that is somewhat unlikely given the man's pedigree in developing stuff for MSFS, much of which is in fact PMDG's present catalogue of products.Quite obviously, creating a realistic add-on A320 for MSFS is not easy, but if anyone can pull it off, I should think it would be FSL.Al

The best chance right now of a highly accurate fly-by-wire Airbus simulation is definitely with FSL. Their Concorde is incredible, and if Wilco can pull off a somewhat decent Airbus, then I think that shows that FSL stands a good chance of coming through with a quality Airbus A320.

http://www.flightsimlabs.com/aircraft/a320/

We had the honor of having Lefteris at our annual FlightSimmers conference here at Athens some weeks ago. Hiw presentation was about HOW they develop an aircraft for FS. It was a breif but full of details presentation, that gave us an idea of what is happening under the hood.It is a great deal HOW the code is written for an aircraft ..You can have 2 equally functionaing aircraft but depending on the code behind (about gauges e.t.c) to have in the good one 30FPS and in the other 10....If their work for the Airbus is like the Concorde, then my upgrading to FSX will be worth doing...:)))

So you've bought that fine Concorde X from them but never started it because "it looks like it's a lot of work to learn to fly"? :( Wasn't the high detail there foreseeable? I mean, you've spent 60 Euro or so on it, in my eyes a good buy but one should use it then to achieve the same view.I really respect any personal preferences but this looks like a very unique approach on detailed addons and especially their actual buying. Do you expect the Airbus to be less detailed so that you will buy and fly it eventually?But seems like you are not alone, some guys in the Captain Sim sales action thread state that they will buy some birds the never use for 10 Euro then. I'm wondering if I ever bought stuff I never intended to use. Apart from a fire extinguisher (which I will be forced to use then) nothing comes to my mind. As for the Concorde, there is a tutorial included, a really good one. Maybe you'll find some time on the calmer days coming now to enjoy the reading and the flying then. You'll surely miss something if you let her in the hangar much longer.The forums over there also include some startup and first step infos, so don't hold back there.

Would you claim that the Concorde provided by FSL is more detailed than say, the LSH Maddog 2008?

I keep trying to get on to the page to find out more info about the a320, will it be akin to PMDGs or Captiain Sims boeing series, or will it be a "lite" aircraft?

I noticed their site loads once then times out on all subsequent connection attempts. Either they have connection problems or their firewall is way too aggressive.

Would you claim that the Concorde provided by FSL is more detailed than say, the LSH Maddog 2008?...

I would. And I love the Maddog, infact its my favorite plane. But the ConcX is more advanced. Easily. After all, it requires a flight engineer. There is very little automation and the systems are many and detailed. Its a great plane. The biggest problem for me is the lack of versitility, its not a plane I would take on a short hop from New York to Miami or anything, only properly published routes ala KJFK - EGLL.

I'm not so much a fan of ranking aircraft addons by complexity. Some have details the others don't have or simulate at all, while their "competitors" offer more of this or more of that.I own the Maddog and the Concorde and both are modeled to very good detail. But as wims said, we are looking at different ages there. They flew together in the skies but Concorde was .. Concorde, always at the edge of falling apart because some too high temperatures could cause some trouble for example. Staying ahead of your CG is another checklist item the Maddog doesn't have because she only needs it at preflight and then you can forget about it (roughly spoken).FSL did a very good job on the Concorde with all its character of a fast living lady. Fly an approach with her the first time and you may get in trouble because of the drag curve of that delta thing while normal planes "just land". Lets say that these are both very complex addons and you may hate both at the beginning because even small things are taken into account. I remember those hydraulic pumps on the Maddog. Forget them for whatever reason and your gears stays very streamlined while you see the radar altitude coming up. :biggrin:Good point from wims. Taking the Concorde on a short after work flight is less likely to happen than with the Maddog, even if you are used to both addons. Engine start with debow phase takes some time, the INS has to be aligned and managed later and there's no useful map in front of the pilots to tell them even more useful information and schematics. So you really see some of that glass cockpit enhancement in the Maddog while the actual workload in the Concorde stays steam age high and even gets expanded by the tricky sub- and supersonic ways of traveling with completely different do's and don'ts.Seeing my reporting about such details maybe clarifies my "dumb" asking about the "unforeseeable" need of reading some stuff on the Concorde X. There wasn't offense intendend. I hope nobody got this wrong.I expect their Airbus to be on the same detail side like the Concorde. Far away from any Aerosoft offer and the current Wilcos (which are currently the most detailed FSX Busses) and with a spot on technical details. Following some technical and detail related discussions at their Airbus forum section will give you a good impression I think. Sadly, the section there is quite calm.I did some beta testing on their Concorde but I'm not involved in the Airbus project. So I'm exited just like you about the outcome their. But, I'm somehow biased as I really liked their work on Concorde X. I also see them to be able to take some challenge on the developing side. As you see, they don't tease, they don't merchandise and they don't even stress viral marketing, they just concentrate and then present some final products. Nice and sympathetic approach in my eyes. Sadly, a not so common one.I'm sorry, what's your current problem with the FSL forums? I never had problems there so far and just checked it. All fine. Can't see anyone complaining here http://forums.flight...-general-forum/, so maybe you guys post a brief description over there if somethings is wrong.