theres really no reason to have all 3 airbuses...

 

black box, airbus X extended, FSL A320

Great thread !!

And I fully agree it's a bit pointless to buy anything but the best ..

You just forgot to mention the Airbus addon from BASE-Simulations.

Without a doubt, the best A320 addon for FSX ever (to be) made; hands down.

Why not wait until they've all been released and then decide?

 

That would be to easy for this crowd.

Great thread !!

And I fully agree it's a bit pointless to buy anything but the best ..

You just forgot to mention the Airbus addon from BASE-Simulations.

Without a doubt, the best A320 addon for FSX ever (to be) made; hands down.

 

Base simulations? Is it released already? I havent heard of it man!

Great thread !!

And I fully agree it's a bit pointless to buy anything but the best ..

You just forgot to mention the Airbus addon from BASE-Simulations.

Without a doubt, the best A320 addon for FSX ever (to be) made; hands down.

Base simulations? Have never heard about such developer.

You just forgot to mention the Airbus addon from BASE-Simulations.

Without a doubt, the best A320 addon for FSX ever (to be) made; hands down.

 

Have to agree on this one!!

You just forgot to mention the Airbus addon from BASE-Simulations.

 

I have to say I'm lost on this one, can you provide a link? A Google search on BASE Simulations only results in a company that makes hardware simulations for race cars.

please someone provide a link to the base simulations airbus so I can download it lol.

This better not be a trick

http://www.airbuscockpit.de/web/

please someone provide a link to the base simulations airbus so I can download it lol.

This better not be a trick

Not a trick, just a practical joke :)

 

Before making my first reply, this was the 5th thread I read on various flightsim forums comparing aircraft addons; either available yet or not.

 

IMO, most comparisons of addons are rather biassed, because it strongly depends on what one is looking for in an addon. Framerate, accuracy of the visual model, liveries, VC, systems, price, etc etc. Hence I doubt there will ever be a "best" addon for a certain aircraft type, even at one point in time.

This applies to available addons, let alone when comparing addons which are not available yet. Then it becomes completely pointless.

 

By the way, you obviously didn´t grasp the irony in my post, nor the acronym BASE : Best Airbus Simulation Ever.

Next time I'll be less criptic; sorry :)

 

Rob

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting comments, but they appear to be based on assumptions of what the final product will be like, rather than facts related to the FINAL RELEASED product. I accept that it is easy (or perhaps, even worse - downright lazy or foolhardy) to make assumptions based on hearsay or past records, BUT is it right to formulate an opinion on what you do not know at a certain time in space when all the facts are still not known?

 

Don't you judge / formulate an opinion, on people, on the basis of their former actions?

 

When Aerosoft for example published the original Airbus X, it was a product with so many showstopper bugs (aircraft running off the runway to the left/right during take off roll, nose diving on short finals), it was a product that should never have gone to market, in the state it was (is). It shows complete lack of even the most basic quality testing & control for aircraft (because their sceneries are good). So for aircraft, how can you trust them again?

 

The official report is out on the airbus south Atlantic accident.......you folks should read it. It's an interesting read. It separates fact from some of the fiction being discussed here. It's approx 240 pages.

 

 

 

Can't agree. The 777 pilots would never have pulled back on the stick at any point. Who in their right mind would pull back at 37000 feet, right in coffin corner? Only Airbus training can explain it. The Airbus pilots were reacting as if they still had all the protection, which they didn't. All the automation and "protection" was no doubt a big element in the human factors that resulted in them forgetting the most important thing: Fly the plane. Nobody on the flight deck flew the plane because they thought they were still flying the computer, and they are trained to pull back because the computer will just sort it all out for them.

 

Since the very beginning in 1988 I was never a fan of the Airbus philosophy. I'm not saying Airbus makes unsafe aircraft at all, but it is becoming more and more obvious that in attempting to eliminate one major cause of accidents, they've created another, and the end result is no difference to safety and a generation of pilots who technically haven't "flown an aeroplane" in years. Just the fact that you don't even need to apply back pressure in a turn is the kind of thing that over the years, in my humble opinion, surely sucks all the basic handling skills out of even the best pilots.

 

I have immense respect for Airbus and its aircraft, they are technological marvels, and some of the ideas are very very good. I will however never be comfortable with the fact that they can, and will at some point, disobey the pilot in command, or the fact that the nature of their everyday operation breeds the kind of gross incompetence displayed by the pilots of AF447. I'm absolutely sure that the flight crew of a 777 would have simply flown pitch and power, as you do on every aircraft in the world except those made by Airbus, and as taught by lesson 3 of every PPL course in the world. Just fly the damn plane.

 

Of course, the 777 crew could get into all sorts of trouble that the Airbus crew couldn't. But give me a plane that tells me why I'm dying over one that doesn't any day.

 

 

 

No it doesn't, another thing that goes well with my post above.

The official report is out on the airbus south Atlantic accident.......you folks should read it. It's an interesting read. It separates fact from some of the fiction being discussed here. It's approx 240 pages.

 

I've read thousands of pages about it over the last couple of years! And I maintain my dislike of the Airbus philosophy. I'll be getting one of these addons though. I find them very interesting and they should be a blast to fly. I get the impression that people don't really understand how an Airbus handles so it would be interesting to see people's reactions when these addons finally arrive. The fact that, for example, you don't command a certain amount of aileron deflection with the stick but rather a certain amount of roll, no matter the conditions, is a really strange feeling that is very different to flying traditional aircraft.

The official report is out on the airbus south Atlantic accident.......you folks should read it. It's an interesting read. It separates fact from some of the fiction being discussed here. It's approx 240 pages.

 

Could you post a link to that report, please?

 

Sorry, was able to find it myself after I've had the idea to google it. Thanks, though.

Could you post a link to that report, please?

 

For anyone interested:

 

http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf

When Aerosoft for example published the original Airbus X, it was a product with so many showstopper bugs (aircraft running off the runway to the left/right during take off roll, nose diving on short finals), it was a product that should never have gone to market, in the state it was (is). It shows complete lack of even the most basic quality testing & control for aircraft (because their sceneries are good). So for aircraft, how can you trust them again?

 

I probably should let this pass, but since I've got a little time now and because I feel this charaterization is a bit unfair, here goes.

 

Yes, one can trust Aerosoft for their aircraft. Cases in point include the OV-10 BroncoX, the Discus GliderX, and the PBY CatalinaX, among others. I enjoy these aircraft, and while all have been patched (and what payware add-on hasn't been?), they've performed very well even from the initial release.

 

I also own the AirbusX, and while it's not been among my favorites by a long shot (lacks too many features which the Extended edition will have), I haven't experienced all of the issues that some have with it. It's beautiful visually, and it does fly well, at least on my machine. And of course, the patches made it fly better.

 

So let's be fair to Aerosoft and their efforts to bring a somewhat complex airliner to the FSX market, which was something they initially stated they wouldn't do. And now they're adding a lot more complexity and functionality to it while rewriting big pieces of the FBW code, etc...I'm looking forward to Sept 3 (and I hope they're able to meet that target release date)!