"Low price" is at least subjective.

USD 48 for a product I would probably use for no more than 3 months sounds expensive to me.

TCAS doesn't work on Vatsim so Ill be skipping it.

 

They've got the TCAS work on IVAO, and they are working this on VATSIM at this time.

Right on might be worth a look see then. Thanks for the heads up.

I'm put off by other things. I can wait, but not having an A319 is a major flaw. Makes me wonder why should i waste money on the Extended when FSLabs will be releasing the whole family (except the A318) and it'll have a complete simulation of the 'buses. I never understood why there is an A321 and not an A319...

 

This is my sentiment. And the answer regarding the omission is very thin.

They basically didn't want to waste more time on a low priced product. I'd pay $10 more for an A319

 

This makes me wonder, how much will FSL's A320 cost? $50? They're releasing the rest as addons if they ever come out.

Personally it's not just the lack of A319 that puzzles me. If you bothered to model the entire Airbus system logic (MCDU, Law's and so on), wouldn't it make great business sense to model the A330 and A340 as well? Basically what Phoenix (PSS) and later Wilco/Feelthere did.

 

The differences between the A319/20/21 and A330/40-200/300 are minimal both visually and technically. The A318 and the newer A340's (500/600) are a little more evolved but still very close to their older siblings.

To me this is a no brainer, but Aerosoft seems to be unwilling to consider it.

 

I suspect they will find themselves with a best-seller on their hands once the Airbus Extended is released. If I'm right maybe those sales numbers will knock some sense into them and they'll reconsider. I'd happily hand over up to $200 for the entire family, and I don't think I'm alone either.

I agree in full. If it's business, and they have a base model, just go for it. The hardest part is to get started, i bet people would buy the addons, specially when there is a lack of good Airbuses.

 

This is also valid for the A300B2 developer, the A310 is pretty similar to it, i hope it gets done someday (as well as the A300B4-600).

Look up in the Aerosoft and FSL forums, it doesnt appear to be a no brainer at all, it is far more complex than it sounds.

Indeed. Everyone's an expert despite having no insight whatsoever about what it would really take to pull off, or the business surrounding it. They've made a choice, which I'm guessing was grounded in a lot more than just conjecture, so we will all have to enjoy the products the choose to bring to market or search elsewhere for it.

'd happily hand over up to $200 for the entire family, and I don't think I'm alone either.

 

No you're not.

I would argue that there are significant differences between the different Airbus'. There's only a perception of similarity due to the steps the manufacturer took with regards to cockpit commonality and handling due to fly by wire. But as FSLabs chose to go hardcore with regards to details, (Ie. fuel sloshing around in the fuel tank) I'd hazard it's not as simple as just altering fuselage lengths, parasitic drag and fuel capacity.

I'll buy the new Blackbox Simulation and then the FSLabs....

Look up in the Aerosoft and FSL forums, it doesnt appear to be a no brainer at all, it is far more complex than it sounds.

 

I have. FSLabs have always stated that they may indeed add other models after the initial release, and as I stated above, both developers who have tackled this as a commercial project in the past have gone down this road. Only AS have ruled it out.

I find that strange.

 

Indeed. Everyone's an expert despite having no insight whatsoever about what it would really take to pull off, or the business surrounding it. They've made a choice, which I'm guessing was grounded in a lot more than just conjecture, so we will all have to enjoy the products the choose to bring to market or search elsewhere for it.

 

No insight whatsoever? I seem to have mistaken this for a friendly discussion. My bad.

Alepro,

 

I meant, "no you're not" the only one who would "happily hand over up to $200 for the entire family"

I think it is important to highlight that Aerosoft and FSLabs serve different markets. Aerosoft focusses on the hobby flight simmer where FSLabs are looking at the commercial market and the hobby flight simmer. So there is a financial incentive for FSLabs to do the 319/320/321. Aerosoft obviously made a commercial decision that they woud only do the 320 and 321.

 

While the flightcontrols etc are similar, to do the 330 and 340, they would need access to aircraft so they could take the pics so they could model the airframe and the cockpit. Then you need access to checklists, performance documents and other documents which would enable Aerosoft to model to the level of sophistication expected.

 

And finally, I guess they have a list of projects they want to complete and resources may be an issue.

 

Just my thoughts

 

Craig