1.10 seems like a great plane. but lets not put it in PMDG 737 range. That's just not fair to Aerosoft or the developers. The 737 has service based failures as well as a well modeled failure simulation. The AXE simulates daily piloting duties only.

 

Failures are simply an optional feature and have nothing to do with the quality of the addon.

 

Failures are clearly in the quantity category.

 

 

no matter how well it flies or looks...they will keep saying...OMG it doesn't look like a PMDG...I'm going to die" In fact if tomorrow PMDG brings out a flying frog...These "kids" will TELL YOU WITH NO DOUBT, this is the best frog they have seen...Oh Yeah.

 

Humorously put...and many of them are not "kids". :lol:

NyxxUK, on 10 May 2013 - 04:17 AM, said:

 

Sorry Oliver but why don’t you just spit it out the person your talking is me!

Now Oliver read this from page 4 again.

 

 

Did they add wings, so you can see them from the VC, or is she still wingless from the VC?

No bashing, no nothing, a simple Q as I hoped they might have added it in like they did on the Q400.

 

Your reply was patronising and you added a rolleyes at the end to say how silly you thought I was for even asking.

 

 

 

 

Sorry, only the lift of the wings is simulated in VC view ... :rolleyes:

 

The following reply from me talk about the Q400, not the bus until I started a new paragraph and even started it with the word Aerosoft. No bashing the A320 at all again. The Anti Ice I was talking about was the Q400.

 

 

 

 

 

Shame as when you have ITracker I find it useful and nice to look back out the VC window.

The Q400 added wings and props from the VC in there first patch. it's very helpful to see if ice is forming and to then turn on Anti Ice, just like a pilot would do IRL.

Aerosoft could have made it an options as people without Itracker flying with there eye point fixed in a vice like grip might find it pointless. But just adding a bit of wing like you would see in a real A320 is a no go for them.

Glad to read with 1.1 it is finally working for all the fans.

 

So this reply was total wrong.

 

 

The preceding posts were about a simmer who wants to look at the edge of the wings from his VC in order to detect ice that doesn't accumulate there at all - neither visually nor in aircraft weight nor in aerodynamics.

 

Now, from a film with jack nicholson………..here….comes…….johnny..

Only johnny could get your quote Oliver so wrong but then again,…I have to pay my homage to the man here.

Not only does he talk about Aerosoft like this “This Airbus is a high quality (high fidelity), aircraft. It has nothing (I mean nothing), that might need to ask from the PMDG 737. Come on kids...Aerosoft is a POWER HOUSE in the Flight Simulation.” But then in true johhny style, contradicts himself in his very next paragraph. “want to compare an Airbus with PMDG 737 (first dumb mistake)! “

 

Johnny you’re a legend, a true legend. Thanks for making me smile so much with every post you make.

In your words...come on kids.......

I don't like your colors, David...Please go back and fix it- Be more creative and less drammy. And, I have never contradicted myself and never will again. And why don't you pick on Nuno, instead of me. (Nuno is like, what, what...me what?) :lol:

 

Man, I'm sure we all all grown-up men, and we (yes we), act like kids all over this Airbus thing. I personally have been caught up in this bad habit. We need to stop, NOW! I haven't been acting like who I really am... (I really need to stop watching Russell Peters so much !!! ) Now, if ya'll will please excuse me, I will put on my robe and go and pray-- see ya!

 

 

 

:Praying: "Holi molli mother of Nu, will you please let PM Dee Gee release the T-777, and FSL release the Airbus 330 ?"

Ahh....I wonder if Boeing and Airbus actually argue like this.....

Wow. Come on guys...what was this post originally even about??????

No one knows anymore.

The preschool took it over.

Aerosoft forum down?

I was using AS2012.

Thank you for the answer! I was using Opus when the thrust to idle and then back to normal flicker happened. This might indicate that this is not weather engine related problem.

I forgot to say that V1.10 seems to be the first version that I consider flyable. A _huge_ improvement over the last versions!

 

When FS2Crew is released, I might just retire the old Wilco A320.

 

Having said that, the Aerosoft version still seems a bit "jumpy". If for example, you add a new waypoint between your current position and your next waypoint (because Pro ATC decided to send me there) the plane will immediately jump to adjust to the new route. Just as if there were no resisting forces acting on the aircraft.

 

Same thing happens if you alter the altitude restriction while you are already descending. Not a big deal, but felt un natural.

 

---

 

Now to question to which I have no answer:

 

The scenario: you are below 10000ft, managed speed, managed altitude but hand flying and climbing. The fligh director was requesting a very steep climb, but I decided keep my nose up attitude lower than FD would have wanted (I was already doing +6500fpm).

 

The question: Should the auto throttle decrease thrust to respect the 250kts limit if I didn't climb as fast as flight director wanted me to climb?

 

What happened to me, was that while the trottles were in the climb detent, I accelerated to 300+ kias below 10000ft, because I didn't climb like a "mad man". Does this sound right to you? I honestly do not know.

What was your thrust mode ('detent') in that situation?

 

BTW, AS forum back online ...

What was your thrust mode ('detent') in that situation?

...while the trottles were in the climb detent...

At least that is where I thought I had set them.

In flight mode SPEED, thrust will change with pitch.

In mode CLB, thrust will be fixed.

 

Chances are, your FMGS was following a vertical path, resulting in max. CLB thrust to enable you to recapture your vertical path (from below).

You don't remember the FMA in that situation, do you?

 

And your climb rate counts for issue #2 ...

I forgot to say that V1.10 seems to be the first version that I consider flyable. A _huge_ improvement over the last versions!

When FS2Crew is released, I might just retire the old Wilco A320.

Having said that, the Aerosoft version still seems a bit "jumpy". If for example, you add a new waypoint between your current position and your next waypoint (because Pro ATC decided to send me there) the plane will immediately jump to adjust to the new route. Just as if there were no resisting forces acting on the aircraft.

Same thing happens if you alter the altitude restriction while you are already descending. Not a big deal, but felt un natural.

---

Now to question to which I have no answer:

The scenario: you are below 10000ft, managed speed, managed altitude but hand flying and climbing. The fligh director was requesting a very steep climb, but I decided keep my nose up attitude lower than FD would have wanted (I was already doing +6500fpm).

The question: Should the auto throttle decrease thrust to respect the 250kts limit if I didn't climb as fast as flight director wanted me to climb?

What happened to me, was that while the trottles were in the climb detent, I accelerated to 300+ kias below 10000ft, because I didn't climb like a "mad man". Does this sound right to you? I honestly do not know.

If you don't want to follow the flight director then switch to flight path vector & turn off the flight directors to force the auto thrust to speed.

 

Personally in your situation I would keep managed speed and the FD on, pull for open climb and accept whatever climb rate the flight directors commanded. OP climb will ( or should in the sim!) maintain target speed and give you whatever pitch attitude is required, just like flight level change on a Boeing.

Been looking around for a good Airbus payware aircraft, this might just convince me...

Sure. 95% Chance you have only a monitor, 3% Chance you have 2 monitor, and 2% you have other configurations.  

 

With due respect, the AVSIM 2013 Demographic results so far just posted would disagree with your numbers by a long shot.  65% say they use 1 monitor, 24% 2 monitors, and 10% 3 monitors. So that's 34% (probably 35%, as 1 percent isn't counted which means they probably use more than 3 monitors ) that use multiple monitors

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/407760-2013-demographics-to-date-part-2-of-3/

With due respect, the AVSIM 2013 Demographic results so far just posted would disagree with your numbers by a long shot.  65% say they use 1 monitor, 24% 2 monitors, and 10% 3 monitors. So that's 34% (probably 35%, as 1 percent isn't counted which means they probably use more than 3 monitors ) that use multiple monitors

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/407760-2013-demographics-to-date-part-2-of-3/

Sure, the numbers vary, Demographics visiting AVSIM does not mean = people using FSX. 

 

There is the boxed market as well, there is also the filter for the market segment we chosen. In short, we done our homework to know that people buying the AAX are likely to have what.

Is this about monitors or an airplane...