Would be nice if you could elaborate a bit......

Thanks.

 

Guy

 

It's all over the forums, but basically...

 

Aerosoft's model has serious navigation issues. Drawing of SIDs and STARs on the ND is not accurate in most cases and aircraft will go out of route in most situations when following them. Flying to coordinates is still buggy. The descent phase is very inaccurate - It will usually set the TOD way before where it should be, it will not respect most altitude and speed restrictions and in one of my flights passed below 3000ft and almost crashed into the water. ILS capture in some situations makes the aircraft fly a 360 circle prior to capturing the ILS.

 

These are all being addressed but this is the current state. Graphically and sound-wise, the Extended is very superior to the BlackBox version. It also features more systems simulated.

 

The BBS version also has a few ND drawing issues but the aircraft follows the flight plan correctly. SIDs and STARs aren't always drawn as they are in the charts (maybe navdata issues as they claim). On climb, in many situations, it will just fly past 250KIAS into insane speeds completely ignoring the 250KIAS below 10000ft restriction (or others). In other cases it will fly the SIDs perfectly (inconsistent).

 

I trust the BBS more than Aerosoft's version right now, but i guess that with the release of SP1 or the upcoming fixes things are bound to change. Graphically BBS version is just a few steps above the 'good old Wilco' version and sound is just not on Aerosoft's level, but it is the one that flies better at the moment of this post.

It's all over the forums, but basically...

 

Aerosoft's model has serious navigation issues. Drawing of SIDs and STARs on the ND is not accurate in most cases and aircraft will go out of route in most situations when following them. Flying to coordinates is still buggy. The descent phase is very inaccurate - It will usually set the TOD way before where it should be, it will not respect most altitude and speed restrictions and in one of my flights passed below 3000ft and almost crashed into the water. ILS capture in some situations makes the aircraft fly a 360 circle prior to capturing the ILS.

 

These are all being addressed but this is the current state. Graphically and sound-wise, the Extended is very superior to the BlackBox version. It also features more systems simulated.

 

The BBS version also has a few ND drawing issues but the aircraft follows the flight plan correctly. SIDs and STARs aren't always drawn as they are in the charts (maybe navdata issues as they claim). On climb, in many situations, it will just fly past 250KIAS into insane speeds completely ignoring the 250KIAS below 10000ft restriction (or others). In other cases it will fly the SIDs perfectly (inconsistent).

 

I trust the BBS more than Aerosoft's version right now, but i guess that with the release of SP1 or the upcoming fixes things are bound to change. Graphically BBS version is just a few steps above the 'good old Wilco' version and sound is just not on Aerosoft's level, but it is the one that flies better at the moment of this post.

 

Thanks very much for taking the time to write down this good sum-up !

 

Guy

The Phoenix version was my preferred back on fs9 times... Then came the Silco, and a couple of others not even worth mentioning... The Aerosoft version does look good in the videos, but the points made by NaMcO were very useful in giving me a better overall picture of that model.

 

BTW: Is there any schedule for the release of the long promised FSLabs version?

Save your money and wait for the FSLabs A320

+1

BTW: Is there any schedule for the release of the long promised FSLabs version?

A rough guess: this year

 

In early 2012, the said that they planned for November/December 2012 but obviously that didn't work (it never did with any software company, different topic...).

 

Everything about the FSL can be found here and here, the last "bigger" update can be found here

 

Also have a look on what a tester (RW A320/A330 pilot) says about it:

 

http://forum.avsim.n...5#entry2516932

http://forum.avsim.n...25#entry2516953

It's all over the forums, but basically...

 

Aerosoft's model has serious navigation issues. Drawing of SIDs and STARs on the ND is not accurate in most cases and aircraft will go out of route in most situations when following them. Flying to coordinates is still buggy. The descent phase is very inaccurate - It will usually set the TOD way before where it should be, it will not respect most altitude and speed restrictions and in one of my flights passed below 3000ft and almost crashed into the water. ILS capture in some situations makes the aircraft fly a 360 circle prior to capturing the ILS.

 

These are all being addressed but this is the current state. Graphically and sound-wise, the Extended is very superior to the BlackBox version. It also features more systems simulated.

 

The BBS version also has a few ND drawing issues but the aircraft follows the flight plan correctly. SIDs and STARs aren't always drawn as they are in the charts (maybe navdata issues as they claim). On climb, in many situations, it will just fly past 250KIAS into insane speeds completely ignoring the 250KIAS below 10000ft restriction (or others). In other cases it will fly the SIDs perfectly (inconsistent).

 

I trust the BBS more than Aerosoft's version right now, but i guess that with the release of SP1 or the upcoming fixes things are bound to change. Graphically BBS version is just a few steps above the 'good old Wilco' version and sound is just not on Aerosoft's level, but it is the one that flies better at the moment of this post.

 

agree. I own the BBS (I only bought it after v0.6 released). I did test flights in my friends' Aerosoft Xtended. Same route VVTS-VVDN, Xtended could not follow flight plan (it supposed to turn but did not and lost its way, I waited a minute or two and quit when it went lost...) and it drew my SID weird, whereas BBS I can complete the flight (I can say their managed descend is really satisfactory, nothing so sudden, smoothly adjusted pitch and speed...). I must say I like the model of Aerosoft (though I found there cockpit a little bit plastic feeling) a bit more, BBS should improve further on eye candy (not saying that ugly, it is actually nice and crispy texture, only that things can be improved more). System wise Aersoft one has more ECAM pages and their flight envelop protection system is rather good, but BBS is only at v0.6 so cannot fairly or accurately compare those 2... Oh, btw, with FS Labs job on their Concord X, I will definitely have a look on their offer when they are out ...

Ok,

 

thank you all for you comments. Time to decide :-)

don't forget also that xplane10 released an amazing Airbus A320 last week :drinks: http://airbus320neo.com/

Amazing? Where?

Amazing? Where?

http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/x-planestore/Detail?no=436

I have the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended and have done few flights. The plane is eye candy inside and out but I find the plane stiff to fly rather than PMDG 737. I have done manual and AP flights. In manual flight I have to move my joystick almost to maximum to turn and the AP throttle is stiff.

I flew the Airbus one time and the wind changes a bit so I got over speed and the plane went all most straight up I got +6000fpm and then -5000fpm I used FSPassengers and the passengers satisfaction was 0% and I got very angry.

I have now experience of Black Box Simulation and I am waiting for FSLabs A320. But this is my story of the Airbus A320 from Aerosoft and I hope they will fix those small bugs because I like the plane.

 

Lots of negative things about AXE which imho are not warranted. It is very flyable, autolands well, has a really good checklist and copilot system which no-one has mentioned meaning the learning curve is much reduced. It is not the same engineering level feel as PMDG737NG but then nothing else is for any plane in the FS market but it is a great simulation and is good value. It has certainly given me a lot of pleasure.

 

Airbus is a fly by wire plane and much larger movements of the stick are normal. There are some annoyances with autopilot descent but nothing that stops you from flying anywhere and problems are being fixed fast. Manual flight is one of its strong points but then I have a fast PC and graphics card and with that combination it is smooth.

SIDS and STARS are drawn fine and the plane folows them with no probs. The issues raised of 360 degree turns were very early days and 2 sub releases ago. I think it is a pity that people rubbish good products. Read the aerosoft forum and you will get a balanced picture.

 

Peter Rowan

 

 

Lots of negative things about AXE which imho are not warranted. It is very flyable, autolands well, has a really good checklist and copilot system which no-one has mentioned meaning the learning curve is much reduced. It is not the same engineering level feel as PMDG737NG but then nothing else is for any plane in the FS market but it is a great simulation and is good value. It has certainly given me a lot of pleasure.

 

Airbus is a fly by wire plane and much larger movements of the stick are normal. There are some annoyances with autopilot descent but nothing that stops you from flying anywhere and problems are being fixed fast. Manual flight is one of its strong points but then I have a fast PC and graphics card and with that combination it is smooth.

SIDS and STARS are drawn fine and the plane folows them with no probs. The issues raised of 360 degree turns were very early days and 2 sub releases ago. I think it is a pity that people rubbish good products. Read the aerosoft forum and you will get a balanced picture.

 

Peter Rowan

 

I know, it's just I have to learn on the plane more. That incident I described happened just ones. I have done few flight and they have been almost perfect.

I have both products. The AXE is nice to look at, but personally I don't get that fuzzy feeling when flying it. In autoflight modes it feels somewhat crude. Especially noticable when changing altitude. I.e. cruise to climb or descent.

 

Any bugs with the AXE will probably be fixed by the developers. However, as of now I find myself not having trust in what the plane does is correct. Simply find it unpredictable.

 

The BBS, while not even being finished, is smoother in autoflight and also handles really nice when flown manually.

 

I think the BBS is going to be the Airbus simulator you'd want for deep systems simulation - along with the FSL one, of course.

 

Do fly Airbuses for a living?

It's all over the forums, but basically...

 

Aerosoft's model has serious navigation issues. Drawing of SIDs and STARs on the ND is not accurate in most cases and aircraft will go out of route in most situations when following them. Flying to coordinates is still buggy. The descent phase is very inaccurate - It will usually set the TOD way before where it should be, it will not respect most altitude and speed restrictions and in one of my flights passed below 3000ft and almost crashed into the water. ILS capture in some situations makes the aircraft fly a 360 circle prior to capturing the ILS.

 

These are all being addressed but this is the current state. Graphically and sound-wise, the Extended is very superior to the BlackBox version. It also features more systems simulated.

 

The BBS version also has a few ND drawing issues but the aircraft follows the flight plan correctly. SIDs and STARs aren't always drawn as they are in the charts (maybe navdata issues as they claim). On climb, in many situations, it will just fly past 250KIAS into insane speeds completely ignoring the 250KIAS below 10000ft restriction (or others). In other cases it will fly the SIDs perfectly (inconsistent).

 

I trust the BBS more than Aerosoft's version right now, but i guess that with the release of SP1 or the upcoming fixes things are bound to change. Graphically BBS version is just a few steps above the 'good old Wilco' version and sound is just not on Aerosoft's level, but it is the one that flies better at the moment of this post.

 

You are perfectly Incorrect! I have been reading your (and 2 more guys) comments about the the Airbus Extended and you don't seem to get enough at giving out false information.-- STOP! How can you convince a smart person, that the a/c is not even flyable. If YOU are having difficulties, I suggest you seek help; and not tell everyone that something is not good, only because you don't have the capability to learn.

I own the BBS and am very happy with the progress. It is the more complex bus compared to the aerosoft version..

 

It is currently on 0.6, so when version comes along I imagine it could give FSL a run for their money..

 

The aerosoft was in Beta for god knows how long and still releases with the bugs it has..

 

 

The Phoenix version was my preferred back on fs9 times... Then came the Silco, and a couple of others not even worth mentioning... The Aerosoft version does look good in the videos, but the points made by NaMcO were very useful in giving me a better overall picture of that model.

 

BTW: Is there any schedule for the release of the long promised FSLabs version?

 

BBS are some of the guys from PSS, I talk to Graham regularly, he is a sound guy, passionate about his product and not arrogant in saying his product is perfect.

 

The BBS has a lot of potential

You are perfectly Incorrect! I have been reading your (and 2 more guys) comments about the the Airbus Extended and you don't seem to get enough at giving out false information.-- STOP! How can you convince a smart person, that the a/c is not even flyable. If YOU are having difficulties, I suggest you seek help; and not tell everyone that something is not good, only because you don't have the capability to learn.

 

I am not going to laugh at you out of respect. Just think about this: Over 7000 hours logged and more than 4500 on Airbuses.

 

See you.

 

PS: Just for confirmation, the Airbus from Aerosoft is completely unreliable right now. Whoever doubts this, hasn't flown it enough. Just try to fly from Lisbon to Horta with a coordinate waypoint or fly out of Malaga using for example SVL2N SID. Those are 2 major problems and i can be here all night pointing them out to people like you who refuse to learn.