Airsimmer Airbus 320

[Avantime 81]

My pc runs FSX just great at near max settings. No complaints here.

 

Saying people need a 5ghz PC is poppycock for lack of a better term. Lol

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

It depends on what kind of payware sceneries, AI traffic and aircraft you're running, and what LOD_RADIUS you have in your fsx.cfg. I can run FSDT JFK v2 at max traffic, real world weather and fps intensive payware aircraft like the old PMDG 747 with no problems @ near max settings (light bloom off), LOD radius at 5.5 with no blurries.

 

I can easily achieve the same thing in FS9 with a far less capable machine, but nowdays nearly all new addons are for FSX only so I had to switch.

[FLEX1978 373]

Why use fs9 on a machine like that?

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2

Why not? FS9 looks and runs beautifully maxed out on a high spec machine

It doesn't appear to be available at Flight1 anymore

 

It still is

Why not putting et+basic into one package?

 

Why no communication between coder and customer?

 

Why no passion for credibility in business?

 

Why no SOP's as we find them with PMDG, Aerosoft, whatever?

 

I suggested merging the Advanced with the Basic however I do now agree with the dev's stance on this, they will release it when they are ready

 

Unless you are on the Beta team theirs no reason for the devs to be communicating, at the moment myself and a few others talk with the devs and know the status, any issues I talk with the users directly.

 

What do you mean by SOP? You follow Airbus SOP or pick an airbus operators SOP and stick with it, that is what myself and others have been doing, we provide resource links as long as they are not direct links to the FCOM, nothing stopping you getting hold of the FCOM yourself, I would assume most users looking to understand the more indepth apsects of the Basic already do.

At the same time we have a company/developer who came up with harsh NDA's during the ET development phase, then they ran out of money, and got some from madmen like me for a basic version where you even can't enter weights, no you need an extra "tablet-pc" simulated for that? It's a real joke

 

Ok, I'm not going to bother replying to most of your post since it is the usual mindless uninformed ranting I get in my inbox every now and then.

 

Just need to point out a few things, whilst I agree that they shouldnt have removed the ability to enter for example 64/34.2 in the GW/ZFWCG LSK (which takes me 3 seconds on the advanced) the system logic and affect on the FBW is fully modeled, the Basic just automatically fills in the page for you based on how you loaded the aircraft.

 

You do not require TOPCAT to load and fly this Aircraft, as long as you dont use the FS payload and correctly load the aircraft through the Tablet PC then your CG will be correct, this has a huge affect on how the aircraft behaves and hense why some have no issues and say the aircraft fly's perfectly while others say it fly's like crap.

 

TOPCAT gives you more advanced perfomance data and I reccomend for any addon addon that it supports.

Mine is grounded since I've purchased it, I can't fly it, is wobbling and don't follow direct waypoints! Flex1978 I've heard that you have a wonder air file, do you want to share it????

 

Again this is all down to your flight control setup fsuipc wind smoothing and your zfwcg, I cannot stres how important correct loading is.

 

I have had angry users contact me saying how the product is unflyable etc etc, after spending 15/20 minutes with them either via email or a teamviewer session we have both left with a smile on our faces, pretty much the only reason why I continue helping out on the forum.

 

Just so many ridiculous rumors & posts from people that in truth have no idea about what is going on with the company I'll just leave them to it from now on.

 

Putting aside any anger or frustration some simmers have with the company I have always kept things fairly simple when it comes to the product itself, many enjoy the product while others cannot fly it, we all downloaded the same files so that leaves external factors in most cases, flight controls, sim setup etc etc. If anyone does need help send me an email on the forum and I will be happy to get everything setup for you.

[Arklight1 140]

 

My pc runs FSX just great at near max settings. No complaints here.

 

 

Saying people need a 5ghz PC is poppycock for lack of a better term. Lol

 

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

 

It depends on what kind of payware sceneries, AI traffic and aircraft you're running, and what LOD_RADIUS you have in your fsx.cfg. I can run FSDT JFK v2 at max traffic, real world weather and fps intensive payware aircraft like the old PMDG 747 with no problems @ near max settings (light bloom off), LOD radius at 5.5 with no blurries.

 

I can easily achieve the same thing in FS9 with a far less capable machine, but nowdays nearly all new addons are for FSX only so I had to switch.

 

All of my settings are maxed except for AI cars/boats/etc. And I fly the PMDG out of KLAS with 100% AI and don't seem to have any issues whatsoever. All of that at 2560x1600 @ 16xSQ...so no complaints here. I usually get around 30fps. Not a lot by FPS standards but plenty for FSX.

 

5ghz is not required to run FSX at near max settings. I only use payware aircraft and only fly out of payware airports and I've had no desire to upgrade at all.

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

[Lerimer Santana 10]

Why use fs9 on a machine like that?

 

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Why not? FS9 looks and runs beautifully maxed out on a high spec machine

It doesn't appear to be available at Flight1 anymore

 

Is should look great on specks like that. But there's hardly no more support for fs9. Everything out now is fsx.

 

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2

[nikitos_567 1]

Quote by FLEX1978: "I suggested merging the Advanced with the Basic however I do now agree with the dev's stance on this, they will release it when they are ready. Unless you are on the Beta team theirs no reason for the devs to be communicating, at the moment myself and a few others talk with the devs and know the status, any issues I talk with the users directly"

 

I might by harsh on this, but this is exactly why I hate developers. What do you mean by they will release it, when they are ready. They have been NOT READY for long time now with no news on the work on advanced version. Do people realize that when they will be ready, nobody would even want their product since other developers will release a better one, like FS LABS?? If you know the status on advanced version, then please share it with all of us! I give you a props FLEX1978 for helping the customers, but the rest of AIRSIMMER team can suck it! 

 

Thank you

Very Interesting Post: http://airsimmergangster.blogspot.ca/

[Arklight1 140]

Rob, have the Devs considered just opening up the Advanced Beta purchase again? As I see it, there hasn't been any news for a while and there are still folks, like myself, that would opt in to the Beta program. In a way, its almost free money to the Dev team. They wouldn't be losing money by opening it up again.

 

I've been a Beta tester for various payware groups for close to 10 years now and actually enjoy helping out. The chance to help out here would be the cats meow to me. If possible, I would open up the paid beta again. It certainly can't hurt.

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

[PinkJackal 86]

As I fly only on VATSIM with live ATC it will be OK if there was a fix with DIRECT TO!! If this bug is fixed then the plane is the best airbus for FS2004! If the ATC gives you a Direct waypoint and you will insert that in your FMGC the plane will start to fly in circle!!!

[FLEX1978 373]

Quote by FLEX1978: "I suggested merging the Advanced with the Basic however I do now agree with the dev's stance on this, they will release it when they are ready. Unless you are on the Beta team theirs no reason for the devs to be communicating, at the moment myself and a few others talk with the devs and know the status, any issues I talk with the users directly"

 

I might by harsh on this, but this is exactly why I hate developers. What do you mean by they will release it, when they are ready. They have been NOT READY for long time now with no news on the work on advanced version. Do people realize that when they will be ready, nobody would even want their product since other developers will release a better one, like FS LABS?? If you know the status on advanced version, then please share it with all of us! I give you a props FLEX1978 for helping the customers, but the rest of AIRSIMMER team can suck it! 

 

Thank youVery Interesting Post: http://airsimmergangster.blogspot.ca/

Not sure why some seem to think that the bulk of people that buy FS software are the ones that post on this forum. Only a small fraction actually come to sites like these, from personal experience over the last few years the main customer base I have seen are either guys looking for a CBT whilst doing a type rating or people that have no desire to upgrade to FSX.

 

Bottom line is plenty of avenues exist outside of the standard FS simmer customer base, that is as much as I can say on the matter.

 

Regarding FSLabs, without a doubt the fidelity will be mind blowing, I plan to purchase on the day of release, Same goes for the PMDG 777. That still doesn't mean I won't still fly FS9.

 

@ Albert, use the direct to abeam points or place an overfly on the waypoint you plan to direct to (OVFY waypoint is on the MCDU keypad)

 

@Ark, only type rated guys for Beta I'm afraid, sorry but I can't comment on anything further.

[Arklight1 140]

Quote by FLEX1978: "I suggested merging the Advanced with the Basic however I do now agree with the dev's stance on this, they will release it when they are ready. Unless you are on the Beta team theirs no reason for the devs to be communicating, at the moment myself and a few others talk with the devs and know the status, any issues I talk with the users directly"

 

 

 

I might by harsh on this, but this is exactly why I hate developers. What do you mean by they will release it, when they are ready. They have been NOT READY for long time now with no news on the work on advanced version. Do people realize that when they will be ready, nobody would even want their product since other developers will release a better one, like FS LABS?? If you know the status on advanced version, then please share it with all of us! I give you a props FLEX1978 for helping the customers, but the rest of AIRSIMMER team can suck it! 

 

 

 

Thank youVery Interesting Post: http://airsimmergangster.blogspot.ca/

 

 

Not sure why some seem to think that the bulk of people that buy FS software are the ones that post on this forum. Only a small fraction actually come to sites like these, from personal experience over the last few years the main customer base I have seen are either guys looking for a CBT whilst doing a type rating or people that have no desire to upgrade to FSX.

 

 

Bottom line is plenty of avenues exist outside of the standard FS simmer customer base, that is as much as I can say on the matter.

 

 

Regarding FSLabs, without a doubt the fidelity will be mind blowing, I plan to purchase on the day of release, Same goes for the PMDG 777. That still doesn't mean I won't still fly FS9.

 

 

@ Albert, use the direct to abeam points or place an overfly on the waypoint you plan to direct to (OVFY waypoint is on the MCDU keypad)

 

 

@Ark, only type rated guys for Beta I'm afraid, sorry but I can't comment on anything further.

 

Aww well. I just thought it might be another avenue of revenue for them. It seems to work for CS and BBS. Thanks for the response, Rob.

 

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

[MarkRey 16]

As one of those who have in fact been (eventually) able to fly the (CFM) bus even on long legs, (thanks to Rob, Rafal and others of course), I'm still not satisfied as a customer to be honest. The IAE version, sold as part of the Basic product, is broken - period - the FADEC is bugged. I am told it works in the Advanced, also that the Advanced does not require disconnecting SECs on the OH to achieve stable lateral guidance at high speed/altitudes. AS wishes to maintain separation - fine, but there is NO fathomable excuse for these fundamental flaws to remain in the Basic package after several YEARS. The very fact that they do, with no indication of any intention to fix them, still speaks volumes about the attitude of the company.

[FLEX1978 373]

Hey Mark,

 

You know I agree with pretty much everything you are saying however I have to point something out that most people don't realise.

 

Realistic EPR perfomance data in FS9 is very difficult to produce, take a look at the PMDG 744 for example, up until the freighter package was released the EPR power variants where using N1 perfomance data.

 

It was in fact the ex PMDG genius who is now running fslabs that created the correct perfomance data. The biggest mistake I think AS initially made regarding the IAE FADEC was not doing what every other developer did which is use N1 data and dress it up as EPR perfomance, I am willing to bet 90% of people would not even realise.

 

I am happy to be corrected but as far as I know none of the airbus addons for FS9 have a FADEC that uses EPR, it only looks like EPR on E/WD.

 

If you really want to fly the IAE model with CFM perfomance data it can been done quite easily, you can find a post on tech forum.

 

Regards

[MarkRey 16]

Hey Mark,

 

You know I agree with pretty much everything you are saying however I have to point something out that most people don't realise.

 

Realistic EPR perfomance data in FS9 is very difficult to produce, take a look at the PMDG 744 for example, up until the freighter package was released the EPR power variants where using N1 perfomance data.

 

It was in fact the ex PMDG genius who is now running fslabs that created the correct perfomance data. The biggest mistake I think AS initially made regarding the IAE FADEC was not doing what every other developer did which is use N1 data and dress it up as EPR perfomance, I am willing to bet 90% of people would not even realise.

 

I am happy to be corrected but as far as I know none of the airbus addons for FS9 have a FADEC that uses EPR, it only looks like EPR on E/WD.

 

If you really want to fly the IAE model with CFM perfomance data it can been done quite easily, you can find a post on tech forum.

 

Regards

Hey Rob - two things:

 

1. So if I understand, because AS tried to use EPR rather than the usual 'dressing up' fs N1 to LOOK like EPR, the result is the uncontrollable thrust bugs we experience in Basic? If that is so, then if indeed they succeeded in the Advanced - why leave us with the bugged EPR derived IAE variant in Basic? Why leave us to work around it using the CFM? Which leads to my second point

 

2. I myself have developed and posted two methods: of either repainting IAE operator liveries on CFM models, or better using the IAE external model along with the CFM variant/performance/displays. But that is not a 'fix', it is yet another user essentially rescuing AS with a workaround. And I am but one of many such examples of customers not merely 'tweaking' a finished product as normal, but just making the things reasonably flyable. This includes even the CFM, which also has core issues that can spoil enjoyment.

 

By any normal standard AS remains below the expected level of performance from a developer, no matter how innovative or promising the product. It is, by any normal standard, no 'release candidate'

[FLEX1978 373]

Hi Mark,

 

On my iPad so can't quote...

 

1. Nobody said the advanced uses EPR, am not sure where you got that from since you are not on the Beta. I am limited to what I can say due to the NDA however I can say that I personally added the IAE FADEC in a pack I made for the old non existant beta team that want to fly that variant. The fact that I had to put it back in the first place should tell you something.

 

Why did they include it in the initial release for Basic customers? I couldn't tell you, I was not around during the initial release.

 

The whole IAE FADEC logic is there, down to correct EGT limits, correct start time, overhead EPR to N1 switches etc etc. I know many people that use the sim simply to test information in the FCOM not pretend to be an airline pilot, if it wasn't for that fact I would have asked the team to remove the IAE system logic from the sim completely and just use a fake EPR reading like some other devs.

 

The rest of your post I agree with you 100% Just glad this is a hobby for me and I enjoy problem solving, otherwise I would probably lose my mind

[nikitos_567 1]

Good Thing I did not buy this plane. Just the fact that you must tweak the hell out of it and half of the plane does not work (IAE model) is already enough to wait for FS LABS. 

[MarkRey 16]

I stand corrected re Advanced then Rob, thanks. Indeed, it's a hobby, and of course everything I say is entirely within that very limited life-context. To me it's just academic, principle, and that is important.

 

At the end of the day thanks to you guys my (small amount of) money is not lost, and all else is really AS' problem - the market will determine their ultimate fate as a business.