AES or GSX

[bobbyjoh 11]

I was going to purchase AES, but GSX for me is so much more functional. The price is certainly right and the customer support cannot be beat. The issue of moving jetways is a major issue and all developers are going to have to deal with it. I am a big BluePrint fan and that is my number one issue with them also.

 

GSX development team is very responsive and continues to add new functions to this program, for my dollar its the best.

 

Bob

[RCITGuy 35]

Somebody read my mind.. I was looking at AES just the other day, and is it just me, or is the pricing really confusing?

I didnt bother with it in the end as I couldn't figure out what it was going to cost..

 

GSX seems so much more straight forward...

Heres what it does, and here is what we charge for it. Bosh... Easy choice... When I get round to it..

[krazyk 157]

Richard,

AES has continuous costs for making it work with each airport that is compatible with AES. In my opinion, a very expensive tool if you fly to a lot of different airports. Then again, if you're buying all these airports, an extra dollar or two towards making it compatible isn't really that big of an expense.

Currently, AES is the only solution towards jet way extensions at all 3rd party developed airports (well, most of the HQ ones anyways). Each airport can cost you anywhere between 2-5 credits for activation. Aerosoft offers credit packs on their website (http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd,,D10333) and they also offer bonus credits depending on how much you spent on buying a credit pack. For example, buying 10 credits might give you 3 extra credits as a bonus at no extra cost. The numbers are purely for creating an example, I can't remember the exact equation they use for that.

 

GSX falls short here. The jet way solution it offers only works at native FSDT airports and any airport that has the jet ways built according to how FSX coded it aka default jet ways (no 3rd party developed airport I know of that comes with FSX coded jet ways apart from FSDT) but it makes itself worth the one time cost as it works at every airport (default and 3rd party with only jet ways being an exception).

[duckbilled 310]

Why not both?

GSX is looked at a replacement for AES when in some crucial ways, it isn't.

 

GSX Pros :

1. Works with all airports (default, FSDT (obviously) and 3rd party developers*)

2. A major enhancement with eye candy and sound immersion over AES

3. Works with all aircraft automatically without needing to set up access areas such as pax doors, cargo doors, etc.

 

GSX Cons :

1. (In reference to the '*' I put next to 3rd party developers) Jetways will not work unless they are coded in the way default FSX jetways work. Big let down as most developers use custom coding here.

2. Push back and other vehicles might jump out of areas where there is a building, other static objects, etc at busy terminals.

3. Push back tugs might not push you and guide you to a stand according to their actual location marked by parking textures.

 

AES Pros :

1. Works at all AES enabled airports. This is a big plus in my opinion as lots of airports developed are made AES compatible.

2. Jetways, push back tugs, other enhancements will work correctly as they are coded individually for each AES enabled airport.

3. No weird movements or vehicles spawning inside a building, etc.

 

AES Cons :

1. Not all airports are AES compatible.

2. Pay for AES credits separately to enable airports.

3. Less eye candy and functionality.

4. You're required to set exact access area locations on your aircraft for AES to work and place vehicles correctly.

 

To end, I use both. At non AES airports, I make full use of GSX but at airports that support AES, I use AES for jet ways exclusively while all other handling is done by GSX.

 

Krazyk hit the nail on the head. I couldn't have said it any better. It should be a stock response to this question.

 

I will add one thing - While you do have to configure each aircraft type with AES, most of them have been done and some developers include the necessary files. If they don't include them, there are a lot of them in the AVSIM library (intelliscene files)

 

If you actually have to configure one, it is very easy with their configuration tool.

[VeryBumpy 272]

AES seems to be required with some scenery designer's airports if you want the jetways to even move (a HUGE pet peeve of mine)

 

Yep, this bugs me too. Buy payware airport, it comes with broken jetways unless you pay more to 'fix' them.

[ESzczesniak 128]

Yep, this bugs me too. Buy payware airport, it comes with broken jetways unless you pay more to 'fix' them.

 

Particularly true of Aerosoft sceneries...who also happens to be the distributor of AES. This apparent motive has been even more saddening to me than a simple "we chose not to model them).

[Jean-Jacques 120]

" . . . Although I've rarely called upon the 'follow me' vehicle, they do seem to be confused about where to go and how to get there. On the plus side, GSX is updated quite frequently . . ."

 

Based on my experience, for example with FlightSim Commander for displaying airport layouts, the quality of the information displayed, and in this case the capability of GSX's 'Follow-Me' vehicle to follow adequate routes as opposed to occasionally using grass areas, I think highly depends on the quality of the AFCAD.

 

I use GSX.

 

JJ

[bukeyolacan 24]

I heard AES has some performance problems. Is it true? I was thinking about using it.

[CraigyW 30]

I quite like AES. It came out when nothing else was available and made the airport come alive in a lot of respects. I have never used GSX and have tended to only buy sceneries which have AES enabled, which includes a number of freeware sceneries. The beauty of AES is that it is already preprogrammed for pushback positions etc, so no playing about to configure it. And as one poster mentioned, it is only a couple of extra dollars on top of the scenery purchase price.

 

The other point to make is that AES is developed by one person on a part time basis. I understand that FSDT developers work fulltime and therefore can be more responsive. I will probably get GSX for a couple of airfields which are not AES compatible but will continie to support AES .

 

Craig

[bukeyolacan 24]

Does AES and GSX work together? I mean is there any conflict? Thanks

[krazyk 157]

The beauty of AES is that it is already preprogrammed for pushback positions etc, so no playing about to configure it.

 

Craig, I might have misunderstood you here so forgive me if I'm relaying information that was obvious but GSX has the same options as AES in terms of push back. It is programmed to pick up the data from the AFCAD just like AES is programmed to. It has the same two options of pushing back left or right so there isn't really any need to specify how far back to push and how many degrees to turn to line up on the taxiway.

The only effort you might have to make the first time with GSX is to specify if the gate you're at has a jetway or not.

 

Does AES and GSX work together? I mean is there any conflict? Thanks

 

AES and GSX can be configured to work together, yes. I use both of them. The only conflict you might have are the 2 marshalls that will show up from both AES and GSX.

[Guest]

Why not both?

GSX is looked at a replacement for AES when in some crucial ways, it isn't.

 

GSX Pros :

1. Works with all airports (default, FSDT (obviously) and 3rd party developers*)

2. A major enhancement with eye candy and sound immersion over AES

3. Works with all aircraft automatically without needing to set up access areas such as pax doors, cargo doors, etc.

 

GSX Cons :

1. (In reference to the '*' I put next to 3rd party developers) Jetways will not work unless they are coded in the way default FSX jetways work. Big let down as most developers use custom coding here.

2. Push back and other vehicles might jump out of areas where there is a building, other static objects, etc at busy terminals.

3. Push back tugs might not push you and guide you to a stand according to their actual location marked by parking textures.

 

AES Pros :

1. Works at all AES enabled airports. This is a big plus in my opinion as lots of airports developed are made AES compatible.

2. Jetways, push back tugs, other enhancements will work correctly as they are coded individually for each AES enabled airport.

3. No weird movements or vehicles spawning inside a building, etc.

 

AES Cons :

1. Not all airports are AES compatible.

2. Pay for AES credits separately to enable airports.

3. Less eye candy and functionality.

4. You're required to set exact access area locations on your aircraft for AES to work and place vehicles correctly.

 

To end, I use both. At non AES airports, I make full use of GSX but at airports that support AES, I use AES for jet ways exclusively while all other handling is done by GSX.

 

Can you explane me (can also in PM) how you've set up your AES and GSX so you can sue it both?

[CDR_Shark 0]

Krazyk,

 

Can you post for all to read on using both AES & GSX?

 

Thanks

[A320FAN 370]

I advise you GSX. It works with all airports in the world.

[pete_auau 1,162]

Gsx my vote for the simple reason as given in the above post works on all fsx airports for the one of cost