MachTwo

It should work fine. I've been using Winwing and Mobiflight with the FCU/MCDU for a while now. I know our customers have also.

Hi Bill, This won't work. As we indicated in our reply to you on our forum - those assignments are coming.

No - the majority of the systems would need to be reworked.

I think what I said was that we haven't finalised the details yet - but I did confirm that there will be an upgrade path. Sorry if that part wasn't spoken clearly. Glad to hear you're enjoying it Peter! :smile:

Hi Michel, Almost - we've already invested a lot of time and resources into the A320 for P3D. The title will be subjected to a beta/rc program similar to the one we conducted for the FSX title and then released. Our intention is to begin this process shortly after the general release of the A320 for FSX. Obviously any issues that are discovered and fixed now as part of the FSX release, that are applicable to the P3D version, will be applied. For that reason, we're anticipating a shorter testing period. Pete, Many thanks - any questions, please feel free to drop us a note on our forum.

No one is beta testing anything, Pete. We have said many times, that the EA process is to catch any potential and unforeseen issues with the installation and configuration process. The technology that the A320-X is built upon is extremely complex and integrated - and with the vast number of configuration possibilities for FSX/FSX-SE and P3D, this thing needs rolling out carefully. We will not be asking anyone to report any system logic anomalies with the aircraft - we have several teams in place for that already and any such findings by our customers will be investigated thoroughly by them. Obviously, after such a prolonged development cycle, we are keen to make the product available as quickly and smoothly as we can.

Not true - our title includes two A320 aircraft, the A320-214 (CFM engine variant) and the A320-232 (IAE engine variant). Each aircraft has its own engine model, performance model, different systems, sound set, visual model and cockpit. We implemented different ground handling for each type - they fly differently and a lot of the system logic is different (FADEC, FWC, FMGC). You really are getting two different aircraft.

Paul, This title isn't really intended for the casual simmer - it was built for those who enjoy studying aircraft systems in depth and learning how flight crews not only operate a scheduled commercial flight, but also how to deal with non-normal scenarios, such as an electrical failure, hydraulic leak or a bird strike on takeoff. Whilst the title doesn't interest you - a great number of people are interested in a study-level sim, and that is the reason why we have spent six years developing this simulation.

As stated on post 29 on this thread, it is our intention to release for P3D after the release for FSX. I appreciate that this is frustrating for customers on P3D - but given the complexity of the product, we need to take this one step at a time. We have, of course, been working with P3D for a number of years now and have invested a huge amount of resource into our infrastructure to take full advantage of the platform. What we cannot do, is release something on this scale to four different platforms simultaneously. It would be different if they were locked down systems such as iOS or PS4 - instead we have to support a very dynamic environment. As such, we need to conduct this in a way that minimises any potential, unforeseen issues that might arise and release for FSX(SP2/XP)/FSX-SE first - and then P3D.

Hi Jose, We've been completing our testing and ensuring that the installers are working properly. Given the complexity of both the simulation and the technologies it's built upon - this is a very time consuming process. I'll give you some idea of the complexity; there are over 1200 combinations of route path types that the Trajectory Computation Module in the Flight Management and Guidance Computer has to compute in five dimensions - and if an with one of these types is found to have an issue and corrected, the majority all have to be tested again. We have coded over 100,000 electrical components that form the electrical and data networks upon which all of the aircraft systems are built (and as I'm sure you can imagine, it's a tedious process to trace/fix any issues there). We've coded over 2500 logic sheets and text codes that are used when various warnings are triggered through the FWC - these too have needed testing and refining. As you can see - it's a huge task, and is why it's taking some time to get the aircraft ready for release. That said, the latest Release Candidate that our teams are flying now is looking very promising indeed. One things for sure - I didn't have as much grey hair back then as I do now :smile:

That is our intention.

Only the two cloud effect files in P3D/ShadersHLSL need restoring (via RSP), and their respective 'cloud' cached files in the \users\<username>\AppData\Local\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3D v3\Shaders need removing. Not sure if the rest of the shader tweaks remain from 3.2, but this certainly gets rid of the black clouds.

We're working on this issue Rick. We should have a solution for you soon.

Hi Rick, If you're upgrading for FSX - we offer a $4.99 redownload purchase program, should you wish to continue using the Concorde-X there (includes FSX-SE) - it covers our costs on the ISP only - we don't see any of this income, so the v1.3 FSX update is virtually free for work that has taken years to develop (the autopilot / autothrust logic alone, which was developed for the A320-X and retrofitted in the Concorde-X is one such example).

I'm intrigued, Carlo... As someone who has worked in this industry for twenty years, with market analysis data from previous titles to hand upon which our price points are calculated - I would very much like to know what a finance professor believes constitutes a 'weird pricing point'? Presumably, you feel that because a small number of people complain about the price in a small corner of the Internet (which, I might add, represents a very small portion of general sales) - developers should be adjusting their figures to make everyone happy? Please don't take my post as being facetious - I am generally interested in your reply.