FSLabs A320 or upcoming AS A320 for v4?

[Ebs 114]

29 minutes ago, diajohn said:

I sense a feeling of superiority from those who own the FSL product.  Perhaps it is justifying paying that much for a virtual aircraft.

No doubt there's some of that going on. You'll find that in any hobby though. Cars, Audio, Flight Sims. Take your pick.

I also appreciate that different 'levels' of simmer are out there, from the hardcore rivet counters to the 'mess about for 20 minutes on autopilot' and everyone in between. The problem is, the question asked in the original post of this thread is aimed towards all of those people too. The answer should be 'What kind of simmer are you?' more towards the 'casual' end or more towards the 'hardcore enthusiast' end? That way, you can give a better final answer.

Let's put it another way. I'm looking to buy a HOTAS. Which is better the Saitek X52 or the Thrustmaster Warthog? (I've owned both by the way, guess which one I'm still using?)

[Mitch24 194]

47 minutes ago, diajohn said:

I sense a feeling of superiority from those who own the FSL product.  Perhaps it is justifying paying that much for a virtual aircraft.  Sorry folks, at the end of the day, they are only model airplanes designed to work on our computers.  My bank account is much lighter from all of the products purchased for the various Microsoft versions and now from all of the P3D platforms, aircraft, scenery, weather, etc.  It does not matter a whit to me if you pay high prices for a model or not.  What matters is I enjoy flying my PMDG, Aerosoft, TDFi, or even a stock prop or my A2A or RealAir with a yoke and pedals or joystick.  If you enjoy your simming then let others do the same with their choice of platform and aircraft. 

+1000

[Alan_A 1,650]

9 minutes ago, Ebs said:

Let's put it another way. I'm looking to buy a HOTAS. Which is better the Saitek X52 or the Thrustmaster Warthog? (I've owned both by the way, guess which one I'm still using?)

Well, if you're a hardcore helicopter simmer, you're still using the Saitek, since the centering force on the Warthog is way too strong to be realistic or useful.

See what I did there? 

Just giving you a hard time, BTW - I agree with the rest of your post.

[odourboy 1,290]

22 minutes ago, Ebs said:

I also appreciate that different 'levels' of simmer are out there, from the hardcore rivet counters to the 'mess about for 20 minutes on autopilot' and everyone in between. The problem is, the question asked in the original post of this thread is aimed towards all of those people too. The answer should be 'What kind of simmer are you?' more towards the 'casual' end or more towards the 'hardcore enthusiast' end? That way, you can give a better final answer.

A good question that deserves an answer.

I am a capable simmer with a good system (see signature) and enjoy a variety of add-on types, including modern and vintage tubes, war-birds and business aircraft. Sometimes I want to kick the tires and light the fires. At other times, I want to plan and execute a cross-country commercial flight mimicking a real world flight/flight plan/weather etc.

When I moved to P3D v4, I decided I'd like to keep the clutter out of my hanger and go for best-in-class where possible. I've wasted a ton of mediocre add-ons in the past and this is something I wanted to avoid when populating v4.

Having followed all the anticipation and excitement of the FSLabs bus, I had every intention of adding it to the fleet. I didn't realize until it came out though that it was going to be priced in the stratosphere. So, despite my desire to own best-in-class, this is not at any price. I had the AS X Extended A320/321 and thought it was 'decent'. I got a lot of use out of it. With the upgrades for v4 - HD VC textures, new sound set and a few other bits and bobs, I decided I'd better re-think my plan... thus the OP.

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, diajohn said:

I sense a feeling of superiority from those who own the FSL product.  Perhaps it is justifying paying that much for a virtual aircraft.  Sorry folks, at the end of the day, they are only model airplanes designed to work on our computers.  My bank account is much lighter from all of the products purchased for the various Microsoft versions and now from all of the P3D platforms, aircraft, scenery, weather, etc.  It does not matter a whit to me if you pay high prices for a model or not.  What matters is I enjoy flying my PMDG, Aerosoft, TDFi, or even a stock prop or my A2A or RealAir with a yoke and pedals or joystick.  If you enjoy your simming then let others do the same with their choice of platform and aircraft. 

Probably true of some people for sure, but then again one could suggest that pointing this out as a failing is taking a stance of superiority over anyone who is doing that. Oh no, where will it all end?!!

[Ebs 114]

16 minutes ago, odourboy said:

I had the AS X Extended A320/321 and thought it was 'decent'. I got a lot of use out of it. With the upgrades for v4 - HD VC textures, new sound set and a few other bits and bobs, I decided I'd better re-think my plan... thus the OP.

Fair enough and thanks for the reply. Although, this sounds like you'd already made your mind up based on the price, which is a very fair thing to take into account. Be honest though, you knew that thread title would ruffle some feathers! ;) 

Up until recently I was flying the NGX and 747 a lot and I was considering buying a yoke to replace the Warthog to keep it more 'authentic'. I basically settled on the PFC or Yoko yokes. In the end though, I couldn't justify the price and decided that I'm more than happy with the Warthog. 

... I couldn't go back to the Saitek though ;) 

[odourboy 1,290]

22 minutes ago, Ebs said:

Fair enough and thanks for the reply. Although, this sounds like you'd already made your mind up based on the price, which is a very fair thing to take into account. Be honest though, you knew that thread title would ruffle some feathers! ;) 

I haven't completely made up my mind. I guess I'm looking to see if there's a compelling feature that would distinguish the FSL from the AS. ("Failures" is not that feature for me as I find it challenging enough to complete a normal flight correctly without the addition of failures). On the other hand, I value sound quality, FDE and VC modeling/texture/lighting and 'completeness' quite highly.

The worst case scenario would be, wait for the AS, buy it, then be disappointed and end up buying the FSL.

Yes, I knew this would be a controversial topic (I mean, how could it NOT be!), but it had to be tabled and I'm pleased that everyone is remaining cordial, more or less on topic and having a bit of fun!

[Nyxx 6,994]

14 minutes ago, odourboy said:

The worst case scenario would be, wait for the AS, buy it, then be disappointed and end up buying the FSL.

That could be a very expensive way to go.

I don’t know if it would be of any help, but I do my own crib sheets in a PDF file for my iPad for all my aircrafts.

I send the new versions to Ebs(Neil) they will get you though  every step needed to do a flight, but you will have to know how to fill in the MCDU, but it tells you what pages to do in what order etc.

its not just my way of doing it it’s made from watching countless hours of videos and FCOMS reading.

If you feel it might help you to see what’s envoled in a FSL flight and it will take away a huge learning curve in what and when you have to do it.

PM me your email and I will be happy to send you a copy.

Am makings some small changes tomorrow so hopefully I will have my final version done, from a “On Ground power state “

[Ebs 114]

@odourboy. I also had the Aerosoft Airbus bundle back in p3d v2. I even made a full flight video on YouTube in it. See sig ;) I tried to do it as realistically as possible but I remember having to gloss over quite a few things. As you said though, it's decent. Someone else said 'perfectly fine'. Both of these are adequate descriptions!

I read through the multi-page thread over on the Aerosoft forums and I'm getting a condescending vibe from the Aerosoft guys over there. People are asking about pop out displays and variable lighting, but the answers they're getting are not very nice imo.

I'd be much more impressed if Aerosoft had said 'look, FSL far exceeded our expectations and they nailed a lot of things that we don't have the time or resources to compete against. We realise this but we're going for a simulation lite product'. Instead, they're slapping 'Professional' on it and bragging that their APU startup time is more accurate than FSL. 

[Nyxx 6,994]

+1 Mate

If they had taken that approach I would have respected them for it.

Look at people who have asked questions they don’t like and they have there childish vote down button to make them Look bad.

Anyway I agree with everything you said my thoughts totally after reading though it.

[Chock 17,769]

47 minutes ago, odourboy said:

I haven't completely made up my mind. I guess I'm looking to see if there's a compelling feature that would distinguish the FSL from the AS. ("Failures" is not that feature for me as I find it challenging enough to complete a normal flight correctly without the addition of failures). On the other hand, I value sound quality, FDE and VC modeling/texture/lighting and 'completeness' quite highly.

The worst case scenario would be, wait for the AS, buy it, then be disappointed and end up buying the FSL.

Yes, I knew this would be a controversial topic (I mean, how could it NOT be!), but it had to be tabled and I'm pleased that everyone is remaining cordial, more or less on topic and having a bit of fun!

Well, what will probably help more is to check out some comparisons of features, which can be tedious of course, so here's a couple of videos which do that. Some of the features which the videographer is critical off might not be things which concern you (and to be honest, probably wouldn't concern very many flight simmers either), for example, if you are flying the thing properly, you'd never hear the stall warning - unless simulating Air France, in which case it will be a regular occurrence lol - so it wouldn't really matter if that kind of thing was inaccurate.

And things like windows opening and blinds working and seats moving are nice, but really, who cares? That's like caring if the cigarette lighter is simulated on a car in Gran Turismo for a playstation lol. I clicked on the seat in the QW 787 when I saw the tooltip appear in the VC when I was first checking it out, and thought, yeah, it's kind of fun that they've simulated it motoring backwards and forwards, but I will literally never do that again, because it's pointless and just uses up VAS for no sensible reason. I'd prefer that VAs to be good to go for the EFB, which actually is something useful which you would use.

Even with more regular sim stuff it is debatable what really matters, although the igniters on an A320's engines are dual, because they sometime break so it's a bit like having the twin plugs and twin fan belts etc on a Rolls Royce or other posh car as a reliability back up,  how many simmers really care that you can do a manual start which uses both igniters on both engines as you would on the real one when one of them is listed as busted on the MEL when they just want to simulate a normal flight? 

I am nerdy enough about the A320 to have wanted one which did have all that stuff, but really, it was only because I'd worked on the real thing and wanted to mess about with it, most flight simmers aren't gonna care about that stuff, after all, it is interesting (to me) that the FSL does simulate a lot of stuff realistically, but if for example we take the abnormal law flight and systems modeling, which is really well done on it, even I'm not going to be using that so I can crash my A320 realistically on anything other than a one time occasion out of curiosity.

Keep in mind this is the P3D V3 versions, so both the FSL and the Aerosoft ones are tarted up a bit in their V4 incarnations, but as a general guide to the ethos behind the two, it's not a bad comparison of features...

 

[odourboy 1,290]

Yep - I like those video comparisons. Features aside, they gave a good sense of the incredible ambience of the flight deck of the FSLabs bus over the AS (which is what everyone loves about!)

[qqwertz 797]

Most inspiring, especially the first video. During landing, the frame rate difference between the two models appears to be significant. I'll wait a bit longer and enjoy the Q400.

Peter

[Alan_A 1,650]

Fantastic side-by-side - hadn't been aware of it.  Thanks for sharing.

The FSL is more impressive in every respect except frame rates, where it's not impressive at all - assuming, of course, that the videos are showing performance accurately.  

TV Flight, the videographer, says in comments on the first one that they were made on his "old computer," which is why he's getting ~15 FPS in the FSL.  Wonder if there's a comparison out there on a higher-performance rig.

More to think about.

 

 

[Nyxx 6,994]

8 hours ago, Alan_A said:

Wonder if there's a comparison out there on a higher-performance rig.

More to think about.

Here is a test I did, detail below Alan. As Long as you have a nice running PC and a good clean install of 4.1 you will find it runs the same as PMDG 747.

I have a 4790K@4.5 1070, 8GB RAM 1080x1920

On 10/17/2017 at 9:44 PM, Nyxx said:

OK here is a like for like test.

The hardest hitting FPS gate I know within P3D = Aerosofts EGLL Gate 539, facing all the airport and London. No AI, NO weather.

Setting I use.

PMDG NG = Can see in screenshot 36 FPS

FSL A320 = 32 FPS