Best Airbus for P3D?

[Bobsk8 12,742]

Interesting my hotas warthog is an amazing bit of kit but when i looked into P3D null zone was 65, 0 was great but I thought it might over do it so I went for 10. So its  Interesting what your say about none to 5.

I also turned down my sensitivity. 

 

I met a Delta Airbus Pilot at a meeting about 2 weeks ago, and he said that he tried the Aerosoft Airbus on a friends PC and thought that the flight modeling was pretty close to the real thing. I have also read similar comments by real Airbus Pilots in the VA I fly for. 

Hmmm, really don't know, because it has been a long time since I used a Cougar HOTAS a friend gave me... But I always set the null zone not higher than 5 in any control axis.

 

Here's a video of a stormy approach in an A320. Watch starting around 6:00 when the AP is disconnected :-)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySvfrRbqKc8

 

Hmm, looks like he overshot the touchdown zone by quite a bit by floating past it... 

[Nyxx 6,993]

wow loved the vid, the amount of work on over threshold, Look forward to flying the A319 with  null @5. and sensitivity turned down should give move movement.

[SouthPawPaul 11]

For those comparing the Airbus to the PMDG 737, the comment above is in contrast to a streamer call Sihfty (http://www.twitch.tv/sihfty).

 

He's a real life 737 pilot for Jet2?. It's often asked in his rare streams how accurate the PMDG 737 is compared to the real thing. His answer is that systems and FMC modelling is very close however, it flies nothing like the real thing. This is however one persons opinion.

 

I think for us (sometimes) over critical armchair pilots. It's fine.

[jcomm 5,939]

Yes Paul,

 

a simple engine failure after takeoff will show how far from the real thing even a PMDG can be....

 

We will probably have the chance to get better modeling when they move to XPlane ( ? )

 

And... sorry for insisting, and even being a confess admirer of PMDG, and a super happy user of their 777, there really is NOTHING like getting your hands at the controls of the Aerowinx PSX,, specially on a nasty weather scenario.... 

[Bobsk8 12,742]

Yes Paul,

 

a simple engine failure after takeoff will show how far from the real thing even a PMDG can be....

 

We will probably have the chance to get better modeling when they move to XPlane ( ? )

 

And... sorry for insisting, and even being a confess admirer of PMDG, and a super happy user of their 777, there really is NOTHING like getting your hands at the controls of the Aerowinx PSX,, specially on a nasty weather scenario.... 

 

Even the C 172 in X plane doesn't fly like a real C-172, so what makes you think a Boeing jet would? 

[jcomm 5,939]

Even the C 172 in X plane doesn't fly like a real C-172, so what makes you think a Boeing jet would? 

 

 

Asymmetric thrust effects to feel a lot more realistic in X-Plane, anyway.... :-), on most aircraft, although they can also be made to feel that way in FSX / P3D - take the default 737 and 747 as examples...

[scotchegg 4,186]

Even the C 172 in X plane doesn't fly like a real C-172, so what makes you think a Boeing jet would? 

 

Are you suggesting default planes distributed freely with the base simulation can be used as a base to evaluate highly engineered addons like PMDG?

[Murmur 3,944]

The LevelD B767 had, at the time, a very accurate flight model. It was in my opinion superior to PMDG, and the difference showed at the extremes of the flight envelope (asymmetric thrust at low and stall speeds). The LevelD was the only one of the two to react in a plausible way. I think the person responsible for the flight model at LevelD was VERY good.

[Bobsk8 12,742]

The LevelD B767 had, at the time, a very accurate flight model. It was in my opinion superior to PMDG, and the difference showed at the extremes of the flight envelope (asymmetric thrust at low and stall speeds). The LevelD was the only one of the two to react in a plausible way. I think the person responsible for the flight model at LevelD was VERY good.

 

I got the Level D when it first came out and after over 1,000 hours flying it I had a chance to fly the Full Motion  Sim at the Delta Training center in Atlanta. That sim cost almost $30 million, and I had no problem flying it, and I attribute that to how good the Level D was. 

[jcomm 5,939]

How I miss it, the FMC even having been programmed by a Portuguese simmer :-)

[deetee 164]

Jose, as a happy AS Airbus owner believe me you do not need FS2Crew with this bird. The standard voices are fine (there's a choice) and the flows are just the right level for the "discerning" simmer without getting too anal.

 

FS2Crew is great for those that like to do it all by the book, line by line, but personally I get bored with having to read from a script each time. Admittedly I bought quite a few in the past but I don't really use them regularly.

 

Enjoy the 'bus mate; it's a fantastic, mature product, and one of the few that gets the balance *just* right. It also has a great shared cockpit feature which is apparently rather fun (never tried myself it as none of my mates are into flight simming lol).

[jcomm 5,939]

Very true Dave, and I didn't rvrn install RAAS, just as I didn't with the PMDG 777.

 

I am truly enjoying it. I had the previous version in FSX - Airbus X Extended - and always found it, among other things, a very didactic product, like I had never used before.

[jcomm 5,939]

Just a small update regarding my experience with the AEROSOFT Airbus A320 / 21 for P3Dv2.5.

 

REMARKABLE!!!!! I am so glad I bought it. Really enjoying every bit. Like the flight dynamics, the systems, the graphics, the smoothness and stability, the weather Radar is great and the terrain representation too, and that interaction with my co-pilot without having to spend more money is simply GREAT to have.

 

A very satisfied customer here :-)

[Bobsk8 12,742]

Just a small update regarding my experience with the AEROSOFT Airbus A320 / 21 for P3Dv2.5.

 

REMARKABLE!!!!! I am so glad I bought it. Really enjoying every bit. Like the flight dynamics, the systems, the graphics, the smoothness and stability, the weather Radar is great and the terrain representation too, and that interaction with my co-pilot without having to spend more money is simply GREAT to have.

 

A very satisfied customer here :-)

 

I got the Aerosoft Airbus about 6 weeks ago I believe, and the only reason I got it was that I heard the FPS were better than the PMDG products, and I had already had a PMDG when I was running FS9 and FSX. I admit that at first I wasn't to crazy about it, in fact I started a thread on this forum about how I thought it wasn't that great. Then I fixed an issue that happened during install, started learning how to fly it, and now it is the only aircraft I fly.  In fact , it has taught me much more respect for the Airbus technology now that I understand how it works. In addition, there forum is very helpful and even if you don't understand some procedures, there are people on the forum that will help you. I would recommend this aircraft to anyone.