There are always two sides to every story Johnny and in your case the other side needs telling just as much as your very basis glowing happy clapping fan side.

 

e.g

Its funny how not ONE single Airbus A320 pilot is in any of the threads complaining how the AXE is not good enough and that he is waiting for the FSLABS A320

Like I point out

 

The ones that do come here cannot post because of NDA and also they were told it was a conflict of interest. So basically they cannot post unless it's to say how nice it looks.

 

Also I said and meant

If it works for the airport you fly to and from, then great and am happy for all the people that enjoy it, good for you.

May I rise and request a round applause to a great gentleman - Mike !!

 

"It occurred to me why so many people got sick of all the whining about systems, levers and buttons and embraced the simplicity of FLIGHT. I am having so much fun with the AXE that its okay if I can't simulate a normal-law failure of the left electrical bus while on a CAT III approach....who cares? Let me say that again...I HAD FUN and continue to do so for less than the price of a decent dinner."

There are always two sides to every story Johnny and in your case the other side needs telling just as much as your very basis glowing happy clapping fan side.

 

e.g

Like I point out

 

The ones that do come here cannot post because of NDA and also they were told it was a conflict of interest. So basically they cannot post unless it's to say how nice it looks.

 

Also I said and meant

If it works for the airport you fly to and from, then great and am happy for all the people that enjoy it, good for you.

 

Are you telling me that if a real world A320 pilot who likes to sim and purchases the AXE like all the rest of us, Cant say anything negative about it? only positive things?

 

Can you point out to me in the the Axe's EULA or Avsim's TOS where this is stated? because it is one of the most ridiculas things that I have ever read.

Yes I am laserit and just because you don't read the forum as much as me I am not going to spend hours finding the post that told us just that. (HINT. they all work for FSLabs and there coming A320)

But if you simple had read this topic though, Andrew Wilson had already told you that.

BTW the rules of these forums say you must add your real name to your sig.

-------

Again Johnny you point to a fact that the EXE was never built to do

its okay if I can't simulate a normal-law failure of the left electrical bus while on a CAT III approach.

I simple point facts out that it should do under what Aerosoft said it would do, to very different things.

But it cannot to a TOD right or even a STAR at some airport still and that was after a 6 month delay to put that right, it's still not right is it!

That and countless other things it is meant to do, not your silly example that it was never billed to do.

 

If you posted a constructive review fine but you never do it's always a picture with the blue sky and a garden full of rosed with sugar on top.

 

Anyway Like I've said many time if you like it and enjoy it that's great, good for you. It does look great and has some good futures built in. I just dislike people sugar coating something and giving a very basis view without point out any negatives what so ever.

Are you telling me that if a real world A320 pilot who likes to sim and purchases the AXE like all the rest of us, Cant say anything negative about it? only positive things?

 

Can you point out to me in the the Axe's EULA or Avsim's TOS where this is stated? because it is one of the most ridiculas things that I have ever read.

 

Actually, it's not ridiculous at all.

laserit,

 

Nothing to do with EULA's or TOS's - however there may be a conflict of interest should a professional assisting a commercial project, offer feedback towards a competitors product by pointing out inaccuracies.

 

As such, I believe most development houses and any professionals assisting them have a mutual understanding between them.

Andrew please bring us your A320 ASAP, pretty please :wink: :biggrin:

Actually, it's not ridiculous at all.

Actually, the way he put it at first, i.e. without saying why they wouldn't be allowed not to comment on the AXE, is indeed ridiculous, because that would somehow imply that this NDA comes from Airbus themselves and not that it's due to most of them being involved in the development/testing of the FSL Airbus!

WIih that clarification, I totally understand that sentence, and I remember that FSL mentioned that in another thread, most likely it was the one which announced the release of the AXE.

 

OK, back on topic: I understand both sides of you. In fact I enjoy the AXE, and I find it great, exactly because it does not require too much time to get going, and except for the (very obvious) wrong TOD I haven't yet had any problems with it. When I have a bit more time, I'd like to have a bit more realism and maybe even the thrill of abnormal procedures (but I don't care that the AXE lacks that option). But what I can't understand is certain people shouting out how great the Aerosoft Airbus is whenever they get a chance to do so, and I also don't like how people always say it's better/by far worse than the NGX, because, as said over and over again in various threads, this is a product aimed at a different group of simmers, and also a different price category(not too much difference, though).

Besides, wouldn't be comparing an Airbus (the AXE) to a Boeing (the NGX) be comparing apples not only to pears, but to carrots? I mean, those planes were designed with different philosophies, so any differences should not be too much a surprise, and thus the comparisons can be misleading.

 

Regards,

Flo

Besides, wouldn't be comparing an Airbus (the AXE) to a Boeing (the NGX) be comparing apples not only to pears, but to carrots? I mean, those planes were designed with different philosophies, so any differences should not be too much a surprise, and thus the comparisons can be misleading.

 

Regards,

Flo

 

I don't think they/we are comparing them system to system... It's more like an "overall quality thingy".

And to be able to see that one just needs to read some manuals for start for example...

I understand

laserit,

 

Nothing to do with EULA's or TOS's - however there may be a conflict of interest should a professional assisting a commercial project, offer feedback towards a competitors product by pointing out inaccuracies.

 

As such, I believe most development houses and any professionals assisting them have a mutual understanding between them.

 

That is totally understandable. But Is an A320 pilot who is a consumer (not a beta tester or someone involved in a commercial addon project.) able to express his opinion on a flightsim product under the same rules as the rest of us?

May I rise and request a round applause to a great gentleman - Mike !!

 

"It occurred to me why so many people got sick of all the whining about systems, levers and buttons and embraced the simplicity of FLIGHT. I am having so much fun with the AXE that its okay if I can't simulate a normal-law failure of the left electrical bus while on a CAT III approach....who cares? Let me say that again...I HAD FUN and continue to do so for less than the price of a decent dinner."

 

Nobody here is trying to tell you that you are not in fact "having fun." Having fun is subjective. The debate is always how realistic XYZ addon aircraft is.

 

The problem in topics like the Aerosoft 'Bus, Captain Sim, and others, is when people come in and start writing how realistic and complete XYZ aircraft is and anyone who is having problems just needs to learn how to fly it properly and read the manuals. That's when people come in and correct this type of person, and the comments "turn into a hit."

The problem in topics like the Aerosoft 'Bus, Captain Sim, and others, is when people come in and start writing how realistic and complete XYZ aircraft is and anyone who is having problems just needs to learn how to fly it properly and read the manuals. That's when people come in and correct this type of person, and the comments "turn into a hit."

 

There you go.

 

I understand

 

 

That is totally understandable. But Is an A320 pilot who is a consumer (not a beta tester or someone involved in a commercial addon project.) able to express his opinion on a flightsim product under the same rules as the rest of us?

I think anybody can make his own mind about systems by reading an FCOM.

For a lot of stuff, especially basic systems behavior, you don't need a real pilot opinion you just have to read. But of course you'll have to read them.

Airbus FCOM can be found at smartcockpit.

 

Of course developers doing in-depth sims will need MUCH MORE than that.

It's more like an "overall quality thingy".

But what do you compare, then? If not the systems (which it seems we agree that comparing wouldn't be fair in the case AXE vs NGX), there's not too much left. I mean the modelling is great on both (I don't have the NGX, but it's a PMDG, and all the screenshots of the NGX show how fantastic it looks), though the Airbus has a more"sterile" look due to its simplistic design.

The FDE? I doubt that, because except for some RW pilots there won't be too many people who know what flying the real thing feels, unless the such a large bird behaves like an ultralight.

 

And to be able to see that one just needs to read some manuals for start for example...

I think you have to read the manual for both of them, unless you have flown the thing before (in this case you have read the manual at some point before). I was able to use the AXE without that, because I had the previous AS Airbus (which was by far worse than the AXE), and I also had experience with the Wilco Bus, but I wasn't able before I loaded an addon Airbus into FSX for the first time. Same applies for the first serious Boeing simulations I had (iFly 737 and PMDG MD-11), because learning to handle an FMC is complicated, and it will always involve some reading!

The problem in topics like the Aerosoft 'Bus, Captain Sim, and others, is when people come in and start writing how realistic and complete XYZ aircraft is and anyone who is having problems just needs to learn how to fly it properly and read the manuals. That's when people come in and correct this type of person, and the comments "turn into a hit."

+1000...sometimes reading the false facts, misleadings & the hidden sales agenda is just ridiculous.