UPDATE: AEROSOFT AIRBUS X EXTENDED ver 1.02 released

[sp85 6]

@Shamrock: Your tube is its old version already, the newest version v0.6 (released on 24 Dec, is a major improvement both in terms of the look and the system stability). I just posted my thought on BBS and their bus here http://forum.avsim.net/topic/382639-loved-the-review-on-main-page-blackbox-a320-but/#entry2556473. I am not comparing anything as I dont fly the Xtended (I prefer the idea to go system depth, not saying Xtended good or bad), but BBS v0.6 is really flyable, stable and enjoyable, of course there are still bugs, but not a CTD or deal breaker for me. I suggest you may follow them on their facebook to see what is happening . Cheers.

[duckbilled 310]

Sure, all for that, but when I have a bit limited time to do preparations (IRL you are not alone doing that), I appreciate when I can take a shortcut.

 

Same here. I have v1 so I will wait for this feature. In most cases, I have a limited amount of time to get up in the air and let the autopilot do its thing. Sitting in front of the sim for for more than 1 hour is simply not possible. I need to pick a flight and a gate, load FSX, go through pre-flight, push back, taxi out, take off, climb to cruise alt and wait for an atc handoff in less than 1 hour and if I have to create the flightplans, I'll never get an opportunity to use the add on.

 

I do tend to like lighter aircraft and I never really had a problem with v1 aside from its strange behavior on approach. My Saitek TQ worked fine from the day I installed v1.

[Johnny767 40]

Same here. I have v1 so I will wait for this feature. In most cases, I have a limited amount of time to get up in the air and let the autopilot do its thing. Sitting in front of the sim for for more than 1 hour is simply not possible. I need to pick a flight and a gate, load FSX, go through pre-flight, push back, taxi out, take off, climb to cruise alt and wait for an atc handoff in less than 1 hour and if I have to create the flightplans, I'll never get an opportunity to use the add on.

 

I do tend to like lighter aircraft and I never really had a problem with v1 aside from its strange behavior on approach. My Saitek TQ worked fine from the day I installed v1.

I maybe giving false statement but I find very hard to believe anyone would actually take the time and money for FSX, and when finally a nice Airbus comes out, to not have the time to do some of the basic things to enjoy such and advanced aircraft. And, the funny thing is, I had never heard this poor excuse with.........with...........with............let's say........737 NGX ? :lol: (ok, I did not mean to sound like Russell Peters) These are the type of excuses that most would simply ignore, or smile at. Unless you do enjoy advanced and complex simulations.

 

V0.6 is a massive improvement from previous versions. It is just going to get better and better.

 

I enjoyed PSS like the last piece of pie...But, with these , BSS, graphics...I could not even consider it, even if it were free. I think Aerosoft has spoiled us with their "out-of-this-world" graphics and systems. FSL has a great challenge to meet or beat Aerosoft's Airbus textures . However, if they manage it with an in-depth systems, they'll be the king of simulations...If they bring deep systems but not "Aerosoft-type" graphics, it will disappoint many including myself. Remember, the first thing that catches our eyes, is the beauty of the scenery or a/c.

[duckbilled 310]

I maybe giving false statement but I find very hard to believe anyone would actually take the time and money for FSX, and when finally a nice Airbus comes out, to not have the time to do some of the basic things to enjoy such and advanced aircraft.

 

Believe it. I have a family and I have better things to due than type in waypoints when there is a perfectly good way to get the FP's in to FSX in much less time. RW pilots have software to handle this task and FSX pilots have it as well. Your comments are insulting and out of touch with many in this community. I will wait for a Bus that suits my style and I know I am not alone.

[Bob Scott 7,189]

If you downloaded v1.02 of the AXE and also got the 1.02b hotfix, there's a nasty surprise waiting for you in there--an xml file is missing which will prevent roll control. 1.02c fixes that...there's also a replacement for the FBWBANK4.xml file linked in their forums if you've already installed the 1.02b hotfix.

 

With this latest version the CTD-fest appears to be over, but SID/STAR routings are pretty buggered up, along with a long list of other issues. Right now the only foolproof way of getting a SID/STAR transition into the box is to enter it waypoint-by-waypoint. Major...a**...pain. But if you're Jonesing for a 'bus to fly in FSX, you can sorta kinda get there with the AXE in its current state.

 

Regards

[JoshuaC 61]

there's also a replacement for the FBWBANK4.xml file linked in their forums if you've already installed the 1.02b hotfix.

 

No need, you can just install v1.02c on top. You no need the old replacement.

[kannwar 47]

Believe it. I have a family and I have better things to due than type in waypoints when there is a perfectly good way to get the FP's in to FSX in much less time. RW pilots have software to handle this task and FSX pilots have it as well. Your comments are insulting and out of touch with many in this community. I will wait for a Bus that suits my style and I know I am not alone.

 

Are you aware that with the Extended you only have to enter a given flight plan the first time? You can then save it in the MCDU's internal memory and reload it the next time you go to do that flight. All your waypoints will be there (except the SIDS/STARS but you can set it to remember them too) as you set them and you can get going pretty quickly. In fact with its copilot feature it has never been easier to get underway quickly and efficiently. Works really well for guys like me that don't have a real copilot to read out the checklists.

[Johnny767 40]

Believe it. I have a family and I have better things to due than type in waypoints when there is a perfectly good way to get the FP's in to FSX in much less time. RW pilots have software to handle this task and FSX pilots have it as well. Your comments are insulting and out of touch with many in this community. I will wait for a Bus that suits my style and I know I am not alone.

I did not know my comment would insult you...Forgive me. But, I understand you do not want to program the MCDU. No problem...I understand. I guess Aerosoft sinned by saying this a/c would not be in the highest-end of simulations, and I am guessing they will consider having this option updated as in the previous "semi-light" version.

[JoshuaC 61]

I guess Aerosoft sinned by saying this a/c would not be in the highest-end of simulations, and I am guessing they will consider having this option updated as in the previous "semi-light" version.

 

Regarding the high end spectrum of the simulation, Indeed it was considered before, but it was immediately thrown out of the window after less than a few days of discussions.

 

To put it simply, HIGH END product ≠ Sales or enough profit.

[JS212 4]

I normally don't comment on threads, but I felt an exception was needed here.

Firstly, I commend Aerosoft for their work. It is a brilliant addon that provides quality and simplicity in the same package. Nothing is ever perfect upon the initial release, so it is pointless to expect perfection at this point. Nevertheless, the addon works and flies beautifully. Kudos Aerosoft!

 

Not necessarily related to this thread, but relavent:

I have seen too many threads that end up with 'debates' (and that is the polite way of stating it) that turn into 'one is better than the other'. Competition is a good thing and it drives businesses to constantly improve upon their products, which benefits the quality and complexity of the addons that end up in the hands of Flight Simmers. I appreciate that some people may not want the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended, but that is no reason to condem or ridicule fellow Flight Simmers that have purchased the product. Keep in mind that this is a diverse community with well intentioned people who are here for a common purpose. It sometimes feels that people have forgotten that fundamental commonality.

[slait 169]

I have seen too many threads that end up with 'debates' (and that is the polite way of stating it) that turn into 'one is better than the other'. Competition is a good thing and it drives businesses to constantly improve upon their products, which benefits the quality and complexity of the addons that end up in the hands of Flight Simmers. I appreciate that some people may not want the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended, but that is no reason to condem or ridicule fellow Flight Simmers that have purchased the product. Keep in mind that this is a diverse community with well intentioned people who are here for a common purpose. It sometimes feels that people have forgotten that fundamental commonality.

 

Well stated indeed.

[BillCusick 75]

I normally don't comment on threads, but I felt an exception was needed here.

Firstly, I commend Aerosoft for their work. It is a brilliant addon that provides quality and simplicity in the same package. Nothing is ever perfect upon the initial release, so it is pointless to expect perfection at this point. Nevertheless, the addon works and flies beautifully. Kudos Aerosoft!

 

Not necessarily related to this thread, but relavent:

I have seen too many threads that end up with 'debates' (and that is the polite way of stating it) that turn into 'one is better than the other'. Competition is a good thing and it drives businesses to constantly improve upon their products, which benefits the quality and complexity of the addons that end up in the hands of Flight Simmers. I appreciate that some people may not want the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended, but that is no reason to condem or ridicule fellow Flight Simmers that have purchased the product. Keep in mind that this is a diverse community with well intentioned people who are here for a common purpose. It sometimes feels that people have forgotten that fundamental commonality.

 

I agree. Well said.

 

I have been using FS since 1986 - and I'm still in awe of what can be achieved by these talented programmers. I find it rather amusing to see posts re this or that aircraft being a 'Light' version or not. IMO this is not. This aircraft is amongst the best.

 

I'm having no problems with it - just a steep learning curve ....

 

It is well worth the cash - and I would recommend it to all.

 

I am also very impressed at the frame rates I'm getting with such a complicated aircraft. Well done Aerosoft. :Applause:

 

Joshua - in my book this IS a 'high end' aircraft. I'm not really into 'Setting failures' and such. I have enough failed landings and flights without adding more problems :lol:

 

Regards

Bill

[alpha117 73]

update 1.02C has now been released :rolleyes:

[oldbear 33]

I did not know my comment would insult you...Forgive me. But, I understand you do not want to program the MCDU. No problem...I understand. I guess Aerosoft sinned by saying this a/c would not be in the highest-end of simulations, and I am guessing they will consider having this option updated as in the previous "semi-light" version.

 

You weren't being 'insulting' at all. Just voicing your surprise at another person's similarly valid opinion.

 

It's no big deal to me that I have to spend a few moments keying in a plan. But if it is to others, so be it...

 

Personally, I can't understand why anyone who's been waiting so long for a decent airbus doesn't just go ahead and snap this one up. It's like turning up at an oasis in the desert and refusing a drink because they haven't got sparkling water, only still.

 

But that's just my humble opinion. No offence meant. Each to his own.. etc

[altstiff 71]

I think the original Aerosoft Airbus had the ability to import flight plans. I could be mistaken....