Aerosoft Airbus for P3D V4 *** Not a vs FSlab post

[F737MAX 5,608]

Yawn!

Another AS vs FSL thread, just like all the hashed and re-hashed threads before it like XP vs P3D, Intel vs AMD, Airbus vs Boeing, Apple vs Android, Pepsi vs Coke - some people are going to agree with your point of view and some aren't.

Neither Aerosoft's or FSL's Airbuses are perfect. For FSL, you have to compromise peformance for detail and pay a lot for that privilege. For Aerosoft, the performance is better and it's much cheaper, but the model is limited in depth.

I would recommend holding off from buying the AS Airbus until we see what improvements are released - there's just too many small things that aren't working correctly at the moment and that creates a disappointing experience for me.

 

[odourboy 1,289]

I didn't enjoy following the progress of the AS A32x on their forum so i stopped following it some time back. Did the TrueGlass or RealLight features get incorporated and released?

Edited March 31, 2019 by odourboy

[rlashier 94]

The AS320 is a fine product, meets my needs and flying habits nicely. I am sure the FSL bird is fantastic, but my system is a few years old, and I did not want to deal with the performance trade offs. I do not regret buying the AS 320 at all. 

[RichieFly 730]

1 hour ago, odourboy said:

I didn't enjoy following the progress of the AS A32x on their forum so i stopped following it some time back. Did the TrueGlass or RealLight features get incorporated and released?

Amen. I dipped into the forums there and it was icky.

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 hour ago, odourboy said:

I didn't enjoy following the progress of the AS A32x on their forum so i stopped following it some time back. Did the TrueGlass or RealLight features get incorporated and released?

Yes, TrueGlass and RealLight are there.  I think they were in the first release as well, but don't quote me on it, I know I did some early flights with the rain effects going.

[speedyTC 195]

3 hours ago, Redwood said:

 From my perspective the biggest reason I picked Aerosoft over the FS Labs is I didnt like how I had to pay extra for the A319 version. What sense does that make? Also they dont have the A321 and if they ever do then Im sure you will be paying more for that too. Easy decision in my opinion. 

Neither the FSL A319 nor the A321 are just re-skinned versions of the A320. Both have different flight characteristics (including engine variant differences) and are accurately reproduced (as far as P3D allows, although FSL have spoken of a new flight model that runs independent of the base sim) which is why we are asked to pay (reasonably so, imho) a fraction of the original cost. Just like PMDG charged for the 77-300 variant. Nothing close to the original 777-200's cost.

A lot of coding and work goes into these "study level" products and I am happy to contribute towards the devs continuing development. Having said that, if you're not going to take advantage of the extra features and fidelity offered by the FSL product the AS version is just fine too.

Edited March 31, 2019 by speedyTC

[anden145 2,285]

It's the little things, which makes a product great and superior IMO. 

Yes, both the Aerosoft and FSLabs Airbus versions simulate the general workload of operating procedures of an Airbus. But in my opinion, there's no doubt that the FSLabs is a superior product. It's in all the little things and details. The sound environment - you'd recognize it right away, when stepping into the cockpit. Few addons, have taken my breath away:

• The first time I loaded up the PMDG 747 for FS9.
• First time I sat in the cockpit of the PMDG 737NGX (first time I flew with VC)
• Powering up the FSLabs A320 from Cold-and-Dark. The walk-around; the modelling and details.

You would know it instantly. The details of the sound environment. The attention to detail of everything from the hydraulic doors opening slower, without hydraulic pressure to dome lights flickering, when switching from GPU to APU etc... (Look at this thread - there's tons of little details). And I know - it won't change your daily operation from A to B - but it's a huge factor when it comes to immersion (in my opinion, at least) and it provides to the feeling, that it's a living breathing machine you're operating. In the FSLabs, two flights with identical setup and flight-plans, won't feel the same. 

It's hard to describe. As Morpheus says in 'The Matrix': "You'd have to see it for yourself!".

Edited March 31, 2019 by Anders Bermann

[ray hughes 165]

For me the Aerosoft A320 is a reasonable product to purchase.

I just don't fly P3Dv4 often enough to justify the expense of FSLabs 320. I am sure its good but I cannot justify the frequency of flight versus the expenditure. So the Aerosoft 320 does me just fine. It gets regular small updates and flies well enough for me to enjoy it. For the same reason I choose not to spend money again on the PMDG products because of their pricing policies and am happy with the iFly 737 and 747 instead.

This is a personal choice.. for those of you out there who want the very best of the best and have the money to spend -- good on you-- your choice and I respect that.

As an aside, I also enjoy flying the QW 787and the Leonardo MD80 and the TDFI 717.

I am looking forward to the Aerosoft 330 when it is finally released.

 

[ShawnG 1,823]

The Mercedes AMG GT and the Honda civic are both cars that you could purchase for your transportation needs.  The Mercedes is obviously better made, looks and sounds better, rides more comfortably, there is less gaps in the body work, and has a higher top speed.  However, unless you are really wealthy, or are a professional racing driver with an idea of using it on the track, the smart purchase is the civic.  It costs less, both in terms of the purchase price, and operational costs. And, in the sort of driving that everybody does in the real world, they are equivalent in speed (i.e. if you are driving across town, the AMG’s horsepower is no advantage). Yes, on a track the Merc is faster, the Merc is a better status symbol, it IS a better car, but it simply is not worth the outlay for what you get out of it, for most people.

 

Having said that, I’m glad I live in a world where both cars are made and available.  The fact that there is a “superior” car in existance is no reason to be elitist and demand that nobody produce or buy Honda Civics.  Conversely, if someone wants the very best, I’m glad that someone is out there producing it.

[anden145 2,285]

1 hour ago, ShawnG said:

The Mercedes AMG GT and the Honda civic are both cars that you could purchase for your transportation needs.  The Mercedes is obviously better made, looks and sounds better, rides more comfortably, there is less gaps in the body work, and has a higher top speed.

I'm sorry to say, but I don't really understand you analogy and comparison. You're basically comparing two different manufacturers and two different models, with two manufacturers (FSLabs and Aerosoft) producing the same type of car (A320). Please forgive the analogy here. The more precise comparison would be - for simplicity, let's remain the realm of car manufacturers - that say they produced the same car, with the same basic features; both have a steering wheel and 4 wheels. There's a price difference between them - even though they're the same make and model of car - but the more expensive one, has (and this is where the realm of reality gets tricky for this analogy - but bear with me...) a more correct engine sound, more features included and the behavior and fidelity of the systems are more in line with what the designer had in mind...? I'm sorry - but this is a really poor analogy and comparison to the facts, in my honest opinion. 

The whole analogy is flawed... You cannot compare (meaningfully) two different car manufacturers, making two different cars with two different software developers making a simulation of the same item (in this case an airplane).

1 hour ago, ShawnG said:

The fact that there is a “superior” car in existance is no reason to be elitist and demand that nobody produce or buy Honda Civics.

When had anyone ever expressed that view or demanded that one should use one version over the other?! Please don't make up facts and draw unbiased conclusions of what you think and feel - instead of what actually has transpired... 

[ckyliu 1,749]

39 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

When had anyone ever expressed that view... that one should use one version over the other?! 

Only about half the posts in this thread despite the OP saying the FSL wasn't in their budget and OP expressly saying they didn't want comparisons including the FSL. But many Avsimmers don't seem to understand the concept of a budget, they automatically point those asking for advice to the most expensive thing.

[David Roch 1,982]

I was never able to finish a flight with the AS Bus.
I respect those who enjoy this product but I don't, unfortunately.

After many uninstalls and re-installs,  and after the last update, I have definitely removed this bird from my PC.
It is beautiful, easy to fly, wonderfully designed but the AP is dramatically bugged.

Edited March 31, 2019 by David Roch

[TrentXWB 20]

To the OP.

Just think of iFly vs PMDG product. I owned AS320 but for P3Dv3 but once FSL comes out I fly excl with it. 

[SunDevil56 183]

12 hours ago, ShawnG said:

Sadly, theres no such thing as “not an fslabs post”.  

To the OP:  the aerosoft bus is a good product if you accept it for what it is trying to do, which is normal ops only.  I’ve purchased it in every iteration, and I have absolutely zero desire to buy the FSL bus.  It meets my airbus sim needs perfectly.

That pretty well sums up my impression of the AS busses.

[qqwertz 782]

@OP:

Just today, Aerosoft has added connected flight deck (CFD) capabilities to their buses as an open beta. CFD means you can start a session as a pilot, and invite someone as your first officer to perform the duties of an FO. People can also join as observers. I haven't tried it yet, but I thought I'd let you know, in case you are interested.

Peter