You see the problem with the axe is it doesn't actually simulate the real aircraft when it comes to indepth systems logic, and that statement is in no way meant to bash the product, I bought it when it first came out. I am not talking about failure modelling, the core of the aircraft is the ELACS & SECS.. FADEC logic.

 

I just cant suspend my belief enough using the product because I know so much is wrong, it really is a lite to medium product, again I'm not trying to bash it, I actually enjoyed testing the product.

Rob, I know you genuinely have very advanced knowledge of the 'buses (I mean that sincerely, not off the cuff!), but I would honestly suggest that the vast majority of users would find this a very convincing representation of the A320. Does it have working Open and Managed Climbing (utilizing proper pitch changes to hold speed, not fudging the default FSX autothrottle as the original Airbus X did); yes, does it have a largely functional overhead, MIP and pedestal; yes. Does it employ a reasonably realistic representation of FBW in that envelope constrainst can largely be seen, and the autotrimming effect works; yes.

 

I don't disagree with your view - of course not - it's your opinion, based on your experience trying the plane.... but for 95% of users I believe this plane offers a really great, immersive representation of the A320.

Rob, I know you genuinely have very advanced knowledge of the 'buses (I mean that sincerely, not off the cuff!), but I would honestly suggest that the vast majority of users would find this a very convincing representation of the A320. Does it have working Open and Managed Climbing (utilizing proper pitch changes to hold speed, not fudging the default FSX autothrottle as the original Airbus X did); yes, does it have a largely functional overhead, MIP and pedestal; yes. Does it employ a reasonably realistic representation of FBW in that envelope constrainst can largely be seen, and the autotrimming effect works; yes.I don't disagree with your view - of course not - it's your opinion, based on your experience trying the plane.... but for 95% of users I believe this plane offers a really great, immersive representation of the A320.

+1

(...), but I would honestly suggest that the vast majority of users would find this a very convincing representation of the A320. Does it have working Open and Managed Climbing (utilizing proper pitch changes to hold speed, not fudging the default FSX autothrottle as the original Airbus X did); yes, does it have a largely functional overhead, MIP and pedestal; yes. Does it employ a reasonably realistic representation of FBW in that envelope constrainst can largely be seen, and the autotrimming effect works; yes.

(...)

 

 

That's why I find it hard to state exactly what the AAX is all about:

 

- good pitch for speed: yes

- overhead panel: mainly SDK and "faked" switches for the ELACs and stuff

- pedestral: radios are absolutely default, flaps/configs are good

- FBW including autotrim: absolutely great stuff (has been so since not-yet-developer Joshua released his user mod for the not-extended AX)

 

Not consistent, but fascinating ...

Rob, I know you genuinely have very advanced knowledge of the 'buses (I mean that sincerely, not off the cuff!), but I would honestly suggest that the vast majority of users would find this a very convincing representation of the A320. Does it have working Open and Managed Climbing (utilizing proper pitch changes to hold speed, not fudging the default FSX autothrottle as the original Airbus X did); yes, does it have a largely functional overhead, MIP and pedestal; yes. Does it employ a reasonably realistic representation of FBW in that envelope constrainst can largely be seen, and the autotrimming effect works; yes.I don't disagree with your view - of course not - it's your opinion, based on your experience trying the plane.... but for 95% of users I believe this plane offers a really great, immersive representation of the A320.

Hi Dave,

 

Yes you are correct, the levell of detail & immersion they have included is brilliant I was really just speaking from the point of view of someone who is familiar with the real machine, it would likely leave them feeling disappointed once they began to look deeper into the addon. I take it they are working on a more complex version?

 

Cheers

(...) I take it they are working on a more complex version?

 

Cheers

 

 

Nope. They're working on selected items, but they'll stay in mid-level development. No full systems simulation.

 

Actually there's nothing wrong with that. Any new features to be implemented until, and including, v1.20 don't change the price of the aircraft.

...and allows them to put resources towards other products in the range, including the forthcoming A319/A318, and after that, the very popular and awaited A330.  :smile:

 

Some may see some nice new features in this pic of the ND (Posted by fellow beta tester, Patrick, in the Aerosoft preview forums).

 

She is really coming along nicely.

 

 

the very popular and awaited A330.

Oooh, Dave, you are making the lips wet in anticipation! Yes, yes, yes.

I think Rob is simply caught in the quandary of having a level of systems knowledge that gives him a different perspective on Aerosoft's AXE than most of the rest of us (which is what Q400_Flyer is kind of saying).

 

I know if I go to a high school performance of a Brahms Symphony, earnest as it may be I will cringe and wish I were listening to the Vienna Philharmonic performing the same piece instead.... no offense to any of the parents of the hard-working young students doing their best.

 

Rough analogy, but we all come to things with sometimes fundamentally very different perspectives.  One man's missing carburetor is another's fuel injection system, or something like that, er.....

I take it they are working on a more complex version?

 

Normal SOP areas remain as the focus of development (I mean, in flight normal sop, you dont turn off HYD or ELAC or FAC). Things like Radios are already worked on (check AS preview forums), other attention to detail like decel symbol supposed to be white in hdg/spd selected mode or even the widely loved "hockey sticks" are under consideration...

Normal SOP areas remain as the focus of development (I mean, in flight normal sop, you dont turn off HYD or ELAC or FAC). Things like Radios are already worked on (check AS preview forums), other attention to detail like decel symbol supposed to be white in hdg/spd selected mode or even the widely loved "hockey sticks" are under consideration...

Thats good to hear Joshua, Cheers.

The Aerosoft Airbus might not be on PMDG-level with regards to sytem depth and functionality, but the immersion, god it's so phenomenal. Both visually and audially (<-- is that even word?) it feels exactly like being in a real A320. Only when you start messing with the systems/FMS a bit, you realize it's not entirely realistic.

But I hope this product will keep evolving though, we'll see. 

...or even the widely loved "hockey sticks" are under consideration...

 

:yahoo: :clapping:

The Aerosoft Airbus might not be on PMDG-level with regards to sytem depth and functionality, but the immersion, god it's so phenomenal. Both visually and audially (<-- is that even word?) it feels exactly like being in a real A320. Only when you start messing with the systems/FMS a bit, you realize it's not entirely realistic.

 

I concur, well said.

 

Dirk.

The Aerosoft Airbus might not be on PMDG-level with regards to sytem depth and functionality, but the immersion, god it's so phenomenal. Both visually and audially (<-- is that even word?) it feels exactly like being in a real A320. Only when you start messing with the systems/FMS a bit, you realize it's not entirely realistic.

 

But I hope this product will keep evolving though, we'll see. 

So, yeah, it's really hard to describe what I would be hoping for if I bought this aircraft.  As I said before, I've been an NGX user since day one.  I have flown that 99.8% of the time since it's been out(with the Q400 being the other .2%).  I know the NGX can do and simulate many things that I really don't care to worry about.  I don't care about failures.  I just like the day to day operations of "being an airline pilot".  Flying from A to B.

 

The nice thing about the NGX is that I know that the level of detail for this is going to be as spot on as you can get in FSX.  Using PFPX/Topcat, real routes and simulating normal operations to the highest level of detail possible, I know with the NGX the numbers are going to be dead on/real.  All those normal ops are going to be as real as can be.

 

From what I'm gathering from some of the latest comments here, it sounds like the AAX will do that too.  Is that right?  Will I get very accurate normal operations of flying an A320?  Will the numbers PFPX/Topcat give me be right on for the AAX?  Can I simulate normal ops to the level of detail that I can with the NGX?  I'm not sure I'm explaining this well enough.  I know the NGX blows everything away w/ the exception maybe of the Q400 right now(at least for a couple more days anyway ) as far as system depth/detail.  I don't expect nor need the AAX to go to that depth.  But, for day to day ops, I want it to be as close to PMDG quality/details as possible.

 

I was just watching a Froogle video on Youtube this morning about his impressions of the aircraft and on descent he got calls to extend the flaps from the F/O what he said was way to early/way too high of speeds.  I don't know if that indeed is a bug in the bus or if it was right and Froogle was wrong.  But, those kind of things obviously don't happen in the NGX.  So, are there still those weird bugs or nuances with the AAX that will take away from those "spot on" normal ops?

 

I wonder too why FS2Crew has to come out with their stuff for AAX when the AAX has its own crew integrated in the product?  How off is the product to real world crew interaction that it warrants FS2Crew to do their stuff for the AAX?

 

Also, what about setup of throttles?  More specifically, does anyone have the Saitek throttle quadrant that can comment how easy/hard that is to get working?  Can you get reverse thrust working as well as the various detents associated to the Airbus?  I have done some reading on this and it looks possible but I haven't seen a definitive answer or guide to make sure it doesn't take 2 weeks to finally get it working.  I have also seen where setting up the throttles/yokes has effected other aircraft.  Any issues there?  I assume this was a case of changing FSUIPC/FSX assignments for the AAX but not making them aircraft specific or forgetting to put them back the way they were for the other aircraft.  Are there any ill effects on other installed aircraft?  Can I switch from the AAX to NGX without too much problems there?

 

Sorry for the questions and, I'm sure maybe even asking the same thing over and over again in some cases.  At some point, I'm just going to have to buy this and try it I guess.  That will be the only way to know.    But, I really appreciate everyone's time answering them.  Thanks again!!!