The AF447 crash bothers me, but I think that has less to do with the Airbus' automation and more to do with a lack of proficiency and having a different philosophy in European flight training.

 

You've got pilots in Europe with 300 hours getting an A320 type rating and applying for a FO seat. And then at that point, it's all button pushing from then on. AF447's captain had 11000 hours but couldn't perform a basic stall recovery.

 

It may seem like American arrogance, but there's something to be said for the fact that you aren't touching a Boeing or Airbus in the US without at least 3500 hours. And 1500 hours of that most likely came in a piston aircraft, that's lucky to have a wing leveler, instructing, flying freight, pipelines, etc. and honing stick and rudder skills every flight for years.

 

As a pilot, there are times I wished I was in Europe because it's easier to get into jets, but I respect just how hard it is for American pilots to get there and the extra experience is valuable in the end.

 

99.9+% of the time, all that automation is going to work. What happens when it fails is the ultimate test.

 

With all that said, in P3D/XP I prefer the Boeings for the reasons already stated.

That's not the only crash air France have had. Each of their recents crashes have been because of crap CRM and not following basic procedures. It's a French mentality thing, they just do what they want as they are French. They couldn't even be bothered to look at the high sig charts for the weather when they came back from Brazil,all the other operators did and look took a way around the weather that was all over the charts, but oh not the French. It's a French thing, trust me

 

Oh and pmdg or fsl... Pmdg it's worth more buck for buck

That's not the only crash air France have had. Each of their recents crashes have been because of crap CRM and not following basic procedures. It's a French mentality thing, they just do what they want as they are French. They couldn't even be bothered to look at the high sig charts for the weather when they came back from Brazil,all the other operators did and look took a way around the weather that was all over the charts, but oh not the French. It's a French thing, trust me

 

Oh and pmdg or fsl... Pmdg it's worth more buck for buck

 

I know what your're talking about but you're so funny 

 

Dirk

Hi

Does anyone know if the FSLabs Airbus uses and external flight model similar to the Majestic Q400?

Thanks

 

Csaba

All the rich old people on here: "Buy EM ALL!! Why not!??!? It's only like $400,000"

Weird thread, back from the dead. Lots of talk about VAS - I'm getting nostalgic just reading this...

 

 

On 2/2/2017 at 5:52 AM, Chock said:

Presumably they're going to operate their simulated A320 in a manner similar to how the airlines most often tend to operate the real thing. To do otherwise would be a bit like buying a dishwasher and then doing all your washing up by hand.

I didn't see this thread the first time around, but this really made me laugh! Nice one Alan! 

On 1/29/2017 at 8:55 AM, Sebjo89 said:

Hi,

 

I need your help deciding.

 

At the moment I both have FSX Steam Edition and Xplane 10/11 (My main sim). Might buy Prepar3d soon.

 

What I wonder is the which aircraft is "best," or top of the list between PMDGs 737/777, FSL A320 X or IEXG 737. These are among the most advanced and well developed as you already know.

 

My options:

 

1. Buy A320-X for FSX Steam edition and just fly, wait for Prepar3d V4 to release and buy upgrade A320-X for P3D.

2. Buy PMDGs 737 for FSX Steam edition and just fly.

3. Buy PMDGs 777 for FSX and just fly.

4. Buy IEXG 737 Classic for X-plane 10/11 and just fly.

5. Wait for PMDG to port their aircrafts for X-plane 11.

 

 

________________

Sebastian Björk

Flight Factors A320 for XP11 should be coming out shortly and it is an ultra realistic sim of the A320 plus it will probably be 2/3 the cost of FSLabs offering for P3Dv4. I'd wait for the FF.

Locking this necroposted old thread, given that much has changed since the original discussion and that the OP's question was thoroughly discussed way back when.