Like this it'll be hard to draw more people to X-Plane. I want to try it, but... i just can't.

I'll pass. I have both the 757 V1 and the 767, and both are good addons - the 767 is very good, actually - but they're not good enough, in my opinion, to justify spending $45 for this update.

I don't know about the A320, but I just think $60 bucks initial and then $44 bucks upgrade(after discount) =$104.00 penalty for early backers. I thought the upgrade was $20 dollars (reasonable) and I was reading it wrong as it was $20 off full price. Bummer. Seems to be a hot topic at the .org also.

 

With you on that one. They seem to have completely misjudged the total price for previous owners. Add the extended package which has another update fee and you're at an even higher price point.

 

I'll be passing on this. If they had charged previous owners 20-25 bucks, everyone would happily upgrade and I'm sure they'd a) have made people happy instead of angry and b) made more money in the process too.

Mine hasn't left the ground yet, but I have to say they did a fantastic job, beautiful inside and out.

They even put the stairs on the left side of the plane (eureka!!).

 

Looking forward to this one becoming my regular ride.  :smile:

I agree, another $45 to fly effectively the same plane. The combined price of the two is more than the FlightSim Labs A320 yet its no where near that standard.

 

In what areas do you think the A320 is superior? Just curious.

Mine hasn't left the ground yet, but I have to say they did a fantastic job, beautiful inside and out.

They even put the stairs on the left side of the plane (eureka!!).

 

Looking forward to this one becoming my regular ride.  :smile:

 

Hi

 

They reference BSS sounds--can you say much about the new sound-set?  BSS work on the CRJ and A-320 is fantastic--and worth a bunch to me.  How does this bird sound?

 

V1 owner.

 

Thanks

Bill

Don't know yet, I havn't got home yet to try it out.

With you on that one. They seem to have completely misjudged the total price for previous owners. Add the extended package which has another update fee and you're at an even higher price point.

 

I'll be passing on this. If they had charged previous owners 20-25 bucks, everyone would happily upgrade and I'm sure they'd a) have made people happy instead of angry and B) made more money in the process too.

Exactly that. They got to greedy. I paid for V1 AND the extended package. That should be enough to justify a small fee. I cant even believe they charge 10$ for regional livery packs. Kinda pathetic.

I agree, that $45 seems like a lot of money for the v2 update.  Also purchased the extended version of v1 and some livery packs so I am going to have to think long and hard about a v2 purchase.

The cockpit looks a ton better, proportions more correct etc.

 

 

The exterior model is quite poor I think. I mean, what is going on with the monstrous gap between the flaps?

 

 

The winglets are a bit odd, as are the engines. It just doesn't look right.  When starting the engines, at maximum motoring the fan blades don't budge. Only when you add the fuel do they slowly turn into a blur, they don't spool up really, even when there is N1 movement on the EICAS. Tut tut tut!

 

 

The sounds are still quite bad, my pet peeve! There is ZERO wind sound and when you go into reverse the sound just fades to nothing outside. The texture pack that I paid for is of EXTREMELY low quality, but I kind of expected that anyway. I really hope they bring out some updates fast, but I won't hold my breath.

 In saying all that, I have not touched the FMC or autopilot, hopefully when I dig deep I will be happily surprised. TO THE NEXT TEST FLIGHT WE GOOOOOO!!!

wow, except cockpit, it looks bad.  decade older cs757 is competitive with this

In what areas do you think the A320 is superior? Just curious.

 

It is extremly detailed. For example the fuel fluid simulation. Here's an explanation by the developers:

 

 

I've mentioned before that we've designed a fluid dynamics simulation to model aircraft fuel, bleed air and hydraulics - it is actually adapted from a similar model we use to simulate electric current throughout the aircraft. This system allows us to simulate, for example, an accurate model of fuel pressure and temperature propagation through the aircraft.

What we're also doing is simulating our fuel tanks in 3 dimensions. Most aircraft products for MSFS only simulate a fuel tank using the default coordinate system that FSX provides. Our fuel tanks on the A320-X are more than just a point in space, we actually calculate where the fuel is inside the tank - how it reacts to pitch, roll and acceleration.

Why have we done this? Well - the A320 fuel system comprises of around 30 fuel sensors (all of which are modeled), and their resistance is measured by the Fuel Level Sensing Control Units. From this resistance the FLSCUs can deduce if the sensor is wet or dry and through a series of logic gates, controls various valves in the fuel system. Such valves include the wing tank transfer valves that latch open to allow the transfer of fuel from the outer wing tanks, to the inner wing tanks where the main fuel pumps feed the engines. The logic gates in the FLSCUs command the transfer valves to open if any one of the inner wing tank low level sensors becomes dry.

Now here's where it gets interesting and where our 3D fuel tanks come into play: two of the fuel low level sensors are situated on the rear spar of the wing inside the inner wing tank. If the aircraft pitches down, for example at top of descent and the fuel level in the inner wing tank is within a few hundred kilos of the low level, there is a good chance that the sensors on the rear spar will become dry and the FLSCUs will command the wing transfer valves to latch open early.

This isn't documented in the FCOM or AMM; but it occurs quite often on the real aircraft.

 

The excerpt is from the avsim review (http://www.avsim.com/index.php/_/reviews/aircraft/review-airbus-a320x-by-flightsimlabs-for-fsx-r3825), but a real-world Airbus pilot whom I know confirms that this is not just THE definitive Airbus simulation, the most detailed ever created, but probably the most detailed desktop aircraft simulation ever (exactly because of such details like the fluid stuff explained above, which the average FSX user probably won't even notice.) I can't judge by myself, though, 'cause I don't use FSX/P3D anymore.

It is extremly detailed. For example the fuel fluid simulation. Here's an explanation by the developers:

 

 

The excerpt is from the avsim review (http://www.avsim.com/index.php/_/reviews/aircraft/review-airbus-a320x-by-flightsimlabs-for-fsx-r3825), but a real-world Airbus pilot whom I know confirms that this is not just THE definitive Airbus simulation, the most detailed ever created, but probably the most detailed desktop aircraft simulation ever (exactly because of such details like the fluid stuff explained above, which the average FSX user probably won't even notice.) I can't judge by myself, though, 'cause I don't use FSX/P3D anymore.

 

Actually, there's another - Aerowinx PSX for the B747-400 family :-)

V-1 still flies fine on XP-10.  Think I'll save that $45 and apply it toward something completely different for my XP-11.  Funny how people can't figure out that if you sell 20 at $25, you make more than one at $45.

 

John

For me it is the first time that i will pass something as i can't justify the price tag. 

 

it's 45$ update which is very steep and if i had a weak moment i might have even bought it.

 

but then i found out you need to buy the livery packs again (for which you get 50% off gracciously)

AND we need to buy the extended edition again  (for which we get 20% off )

 

 

this pricing policy is taking the p___  and i am sure this must be a social experiment on what you can get away with.

 

Of course FF is using the car anology to justify everything, but at the end of the day this thing is way more expensive than a pmdg t7 for p3d. And that has to mean something.