1. No matter how complex some stuff is, a serious developer releases only when he is ready. NOT a day before

Then serious developers do not exist at all.

 

I think all of the developers you just mentioned had to make service packs to fix existing bugs after initial release, for example I heard that many people had some serious crashing problems with 737NGX before it got a patch.

 

Personally I'm perfectly happy with Aerosoft Airbus Extended, but then again I'm not exactly a "hardcore" simmer. I do basic startup from cold & dark, set up a basic route that I get from sites like routeplanner and euroute, but I don't then use exactly complex real life procedures to fly the complete flight. I use LNAV and also VNAV in some planes to fly that very basic route, that's it, don't really have time or interest to do things really hardcore way. I use ILS only when visibility is way too low for visual approach.

I'm struck by the fact that nobody asked about wingflex so far. ^_^

... or weather radar. :huh:

A working Galley perhaps? I do enjoy a coffee!

 

In all seriousness, great update from Lefteris, am really looking forward to trying this out.

 

The AXE is a good aircraft, and I think it was spot on for the audience it intended. It cost less to produce and therefore it was cheaper for those who found appeal with a "lighter" product, they never intended a fully integrated simulator and they delivered. The FSL, in contrast, always promised to up the ante from their wonderful Concorde and they have set themselves a massive challenge, and I truly wish they succeed.

 

I am also hoping, now that developers are starting to roll out the 'Buses, that a good, deep simulation of the A330 is in the horizon.

Click on the link in post 146 and see what Lefteris has to say about that... B)

ok

So briefly, where exactly is this project? Just curious!

So briefly, where exactly is this project? Just curious!

 

In development

In development

 

Haha okay. Will be interesting to see yet another attempt at an A320.. Meanwhile I'll overtake you all with 230,000lbs of thrust! B) :Peace: :LMAO:

The AXE is a good aircraft, and I think it was spot on for the audience it intended. It cost less to produce and therefore it was cheaper for those who found appeal with a "lighter" product, they never intended a fully integrated simulator and they delivered.

I totally agree with you, and that's exactly the reason I love the AXE. Of course, it would be nice if the TOD was calculated correctly, but on all of my flights it was so obviously wrong, that I was able to get it quite right with the 3-by-1 calculation. (I mean a TOD from FL360 to LOWI somehwere between SBG and RTT must be wrong, there's less than 50 miles to go at that point!)

And I will certainly buy the FSL Airbus, too as it promises to do everything as the real thing does it, and from the pictures I've seen (and the reptutation the team has) it'll be a great product!

 

Flo

Ladies and Gentlemen- Boys and Girls:

 

If developing a Cessna or a Boeing is no joke, imagine an Airbus. If developing and Airbus were equally "easy" o easier, I can assure you FSL would have already come-out with their A-320. I have a great respect for those who do their very best and come as close as possible to their counterpart- Such as Aerosoft, PMDG, and a few others.

 

--- Now, having said this, I would like to assure anyone (and everyone), that bashing one product will not (WILL NOT) make the other product we are waiting on, better. Even the developers will laugh at such assumption. So, let's not fall into spreading false (and yes, childish) feedback about a certain product, hoping this will add pressure on the next developer- IT DOES NOT WORK!

 

Are you on a lot of medication?...sorry I will say that again...Are you on a lot (A LOT)of MEDICATION?

 

Lets hope IT DOES WORK!

Just to stir you up a bit more...

 

I'm 55, been simming since before many of you were born. Love Airbus.

 

But deleted Airbus extended within a few hours of installation.

 

There's no way any sensible person would expect such a product to compete with the FSL Airbus. The time, effort, talent, and technology thats gone into the FSL Airbus is phenomenal!

Martin,

How dare you :lol: :wink: Johnny767 has said to people like you "So, let's not fall into spreading false (and yes, childish) feedback about a certain product",

 

I love the way he said "Such as Aerosoft, PMDG, and a few others" talking about airliner develorpers and puting Aerosoft and PMDG in the same sentence is just so wrong in IMHO ofc.

 

 

Tere's no way any sensible person would expect such a product to compete with the FSL Airbus. The time, effort, talent, and technology thats gone into the FSL Airbus is phenomenal!

yes and they have there Concorde to show that.

Everyone has been comparing FSL's 320 with Aerosoft's. However, Aerosoft targets a different audience. What about Blackbox Simulation (and let's focus on the AC potential, not on the company)? Like FSL, they talk about an immersive experience. I believe they are now in beta 0.6. Could anyone who's on FSL's beta team ánd has BBS' 320 comment?

You'll not get any comment from the FSL team as they are all under a NDA.

You'll not get any comment from the FSL team as they are all under a NDA.

I understand, but they would not have to go into detail.