Hi guys,

would like to have your opinions.
I'm about to buy an Airbus 320 family for P3D. So question is Aerosoft or FSLabs.
Aerosoft full package is half the price of FSL. Is FSLabs worth an 80,- EUR difference?

I heard already the "system depth" is not as good on the Aerosoft, but what does it mean?
I do not need a fuel, oil or bleed system to be modelled to the very last detail.
But can it (the FMC basically) comply with all navigation procedures that you usually need for a commercial flight?

 

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by jetfish

I know this is not going to be a very popular response around here but here's my experience.  I own the new AeroSoft Pro (31x and 32x packages), I do not own the FSL packages.  AeroSoft promised a simulation based on actual everyday operation of these airplanes.  They promised a new connected flight deck, they said that their offering was tested by type rated pilots, and that the bugs were minute items that most would not even notice. I wasn't interested in emergency procedures or failures so I decided to go with AeroSoft.  The decision was mine and I'm not happy with my decision. If I had to do over I would get FSL airbuses. I'll leave it there. 

Just replicating a commercial flight according to procedures or system depth is not what it`s all about. For me it is  the feeling and the immersion that counts. How close does the Addon come to what a real pilot sees and hears and "feels" during this day to day operations. What does he see on the displays, what small details can you notice, what kind of sound nuances do you hear, how does the Autopilot deal with the plane an so on. 

In that regard, you cannot replace the FSL with anything else. Even if the price difference would be 500 Euro, I`d still go for it. It`s the best that has ever been made for flight simulation.

Mike

I have both and almost never fly the FSL. On my system, it is way too heavy on resources, which completely ruins the immersion that other users emphasize so much. The Aerosoft let's you perform all normal operation procedures and has about 50% better frame rates on my PC. Yes, systems are better modelled in the FSL, but most of that only affects abnormal procedures, which I never perform.

Peter

Hi,

You might check this thread: Is it worth buy FSLabs A320?

You will find many infos and opinions.

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by Simicro

I have both. I bought the Aerosoft one because it "simulate" the 321.

I only have fly the Aerosoft the first day. I can't use it once I tried the Fslabs 320 and 319. 

I don't mind now the 321. I'm so happy with the Fslabs!

1 hour ago, jetfish said:

that you usually need for a commercial flight

Sounds like you should get the Aerosoft one.

1 hour ago, jetfish said:

Hi guys,

would like to have your opinions.
I'm about to buy an Airbus 320 family for P3D. So question is Aerosoft or FSLabs.
Aerosoft full package is half the price of FSL. Is FSLabs worth an 80,- EUR difference?

I heard already the "system depth" is not as good on the Aerosoft, but what does it mean?
I do not need a fuel, oil or bleed system to be modelled to the very last detail.
But can it (the FMC basically) comply with all navigation procedures that you usually need for a commercial flight?

 

What are your computer specs and other add-ons u plan to use?

21 minutes ago, mpw8679 said:

What are your computer specs and other add-ons u plan to use?

Win 10 on i7-8700K , 8GB GeForce GTX 1080, DDR4-2666 16GB (2x 8192MB),  1000GB Samsung 960 Evo M.2

I'm using P3DV4.3 with GSX L2, Chaseplane, UTL and Active Sky

Add on aircrafts I'm using actually most are: Majestic Q400, Aerosoft CRJ 700/900 and TFDi B717. In parallell I always use Navigraph and have the webbrowser open and so far all is running smooth on my system.

52 minutes ago, Ekim said:

I have both. I bought the Aerosoft one because it "simulate" the 321.

I only have fly the Aerosoft the first day. I can't use it once I tried the Fslabs 320 and 319. 

I don't mind now the 321. I'm so happy with the Fslabs!

I had the same thoughts about the A321, because it is used by so many airlines
So thanks for your view on this

23 minutes ago, jetfish said:

Win 10 on i7-8700K , 8GB GeForce GTX 1080, DDR4-2666 16GB (2x 8192MB),  1000GB Samsung 960 Evo M.2

I'm using P3DV4.3 with GSX L2, Chaseplane, UTL and Active Sky

Add on aircrafts I'm using actually most are: Majestic Q400, Aerosoft CRJ 700/900 and TFDi B717. In parallell I always use Navigraph and have the webbrowser open and so far all is running smooth on my system.

I would go with the FSlabs.  Like others have said its not just the systems depth the FSlabs offers but the immersion factor it brings with it.  Just the sound package alone makes it worth the extra cost.

My vote would be for FSlabs.  It is awesome.  If your system can handle it, go for it. 

2 hours ago, mikealpha said:

In that regard, you cannot replace the FSL with anything else. Even if the price difference would be 500 Euro, I`d still go for it. It`s the best that has ever been made for flight simulation.

Absolutely agree!

Ask yourself, do you want a plane that was rushed off the line because the company fell behind in development to port over scenery (Aerosoft) or would you like a plane that was meticulously checked and released. Aerosoft is a good company but their A320 family has seen a ton of problems in v4. It seems like people are always complaining about some type of system problem. FSLabs has its fair share of bugs but nothing huge that affects air worthiness 

Ask yourself, how much time per day / week do you spend in front of the simulator? Will you be able to enjoy the additional detail FSL has put into their Airbus?

If you say:

Quote

I do not need a fuel, oil or bleed system to be modelled to the very last detail.

Then you mostly answered your post's topic question already. I suggest saving the money and getting a couple of nice scenery upgrades instead.

Cheers
Frank