Aerosoft Airbus Extended A319 or A320

Hello,

 

My son has been using FSX:SE v 10.0.62615.0. He is interested in buying the Aerosoft Airbus.

 

1.) Which Airbus do you recommend, the A319-A318 bundle or the A320-A321 bundle (he heard the MCDU of the A320-A321 was not as updated as the A319-A318. Is this true?)

 

2.) Where should he buy/download the Airbus (which online store/site)?

 

Thank you so much for your help.

 

Sincerely,

 

An FSX fan

1. Both, if you could. The 320/321 if you have one choice. I have their bundle and fly the shorter bus when I want to fly in and out of local airports, which are smaller airfields with 6-7k ft runways. Currently, I fly the A320, as it seems to fit my hobby best.

FMC works the same for me in the 318 and 321.

 

2. Doesn't really matter. Mine came directly from Aerosoft.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hello

i have the 320-321 aerosoft.

very good one with raas. good fmc

very accurate

ganuv

Thank you SO much! My son is ecstatic that you responded so fast and can't wait to buy one (or both) for his upcoming birthday. Thank you, again, for your great help!

Thanks so much for your fast and helpful reply!

1.) Which Airbus do you recommend, the A319-A318 bundle or the A320-A321 bundle (he heard the MCDU of the A320-A321 was not as updated as the A319-A318. Is this true?)

 

Either one will be fine - it depends entirely on which size aircraft he's interested in. The MCDU is the same between the two products, so there isn't any real difference there. Personally, the A320/321 set would fit my needs more than the 318/319... but that's just me.

 

2.) Where should he buy/download the Airbus (which online store/site)?

 

Although it shouldn't matter, I prefer to purchase direct from the publisher of an addon whenever possible.

 

Enjoy!

-Greg

Hi,

 

Purchase direct from Aerosoft - it makes getting major updates simpler since you just log in and redownload. Be sure to go to the support forums and get the current 1.31 hotfix.

 

DJ

Thank you for letting us know about the 1.31 hotfix!

Thank you so much, Greg! This is really helpful....

hi

i have an aerosoft airbus a320-321 and im enjoying it but airbus a318-319-320-321 are very same but i heared the fslabs a320 is better than it

maybe you can update with airosoft new automatic updater that works good.

called on pc menu ,AEROSOFT UPDATER.

Which Airbus you get for FSX depends to some extent on what you are interested in doing with it. There is little doubt that the Flight Sim Labs version is the most 'realistic' in terms of it simulating the systems of the real aeroplane in massive detail, however, unless you were training to be an airline pilot or had a special interest in being able to simulate abnormal circumstances, much of what it simulates are things which would never normally be used on a day to day basis. Regular day to day operations without any emergencies are what the Aerosoft Airbuses concentrate on simulating.

 

A real Airbus A320 (and all the other variants based upon it such as the A318, A319 and A321) has five distinctly different flight control modes, these being: Normal Law, Alternate Law, Abnormal Attitude Law, Direct Law and Mechanical Backup, and as the names of these suggest, providing everything is working okay, airline pilots would usually be flying the aeroplane using Normal Law, only experiencing the other flight control system laws when doing check rides every six months in a simulator so that should anything ever go wrong for real, they'll know what to do. So if you only want to simulate normal flights on an Airbus, having those other modes able to be simulated is something you'd not really use, and since the FSL A320 is considerably more expensive than other choices for your simulator, if you don't want to use those abnormal flight control modes, then you'd be paying for something you'd never really use.

 

Now in fairness to FSL, it does simulate a lot of other things in greater detail than its competitors, which does make it act more precisely like the real thing than its competitors, for example, it fully simulates the real aeroplane's electrical systems, its fuel systems and all three of its hydraulic systems in complete detail. This means its gauges tend to display incredibly accurate readings which are exactly like the real aeroplanes panel indications would be. By this, I mean you'll see exactly accurate voltage drops on readouts when various systems come online, the forward and rear hold doors wouldn't open if the yellow hydraulic system fails (since that's the one which powers the motors which crank the cargo doors), putting the air con packs on when climbing will reduce performance by the same amount as it does on the real thing etc, etc. All of that kind of stuff being simulated is handy if you're a real A320 pilot who wants to use your simulated A320 in FSX for a bit of additional study for a check ride or exam, but for most people, the differences between that and slightly less obsessively modeled FSX A320s would be lost on them and would serve very little purpose. So if that kind of obsessive realism is not what you are looking for, then the Aerosoft Airbus is ideal, as it is considerably cheaper than the FSL Airbus and for the most part it pretty much simulates the real thing completely accurately as far as normal day to day airline operations are concerned.

 

The only other thing which might sway your decision, would be whether to go for an A318 and 319, or an A320 and 321. Generally speaking, for normal operations, they all pretty much do the same thing, in fact, on the real things, they all share exact same standard operating procedures manual in the cockpit with only a few notes about some of the differences between models, such as the need to watch out for over-rotating the A321 on take off (it being the longest of the bunch) if as a pilot you've been used to flying the shorter variants, or the different turning circles of the various models when taxying, and the ability of the A318 to make steeper approaches.

 

This is why all of these Airbuses share a common type rating for pilots, but having said that and as noted, the A318 does have something which the A319, A320 and A321 do not have, and that is an additional Steep Approach Function. This comprises a modification to the flight control laws which allow it to make approaches into airports at glideslope descent angles of up to 5.5 degrees. Airbus variants other than the A318 descend at 3 degrees, but the A318, with its modified flight profile software, can operate into and out of airports such as London City Airport, which has a runway less than 5,000 feet in length and some tall obstructions surrounding it, making such a 5.5 degree approach necessary.

 

Despite its small size, the A318 is actually the largest European Aviation Safety Agency-certified airliner permitted to carry out steep approaches. The small size of the A318 confers another advantage too; it can have a much longer range than its bigger Airbus sisters when configured in all-business class (as it is when operating with British Airways, where it has just 32 passenger seats). This means it can make a transatlantic flight to and from London City Airport to NY's JFK, stopping off at Shannon when Westbound to refuel because of its need to take off from London City's short runway, but flying direct from NYC to London City when Eastbound. So, the A318 will let you do some realistic yet unusual flights, but the A320 and A321 will let you do a great many more realistic flights although none with that exciting steep approach business. Which might be a deciding factor for you.

I've accumulated them all, freeware, over time. I have 318, 319, 320, 321, 330, 340, 350 and 380's!

My favorites are the 318, 319 and 320's! They are all very nice aircraft. Hope you enjoy them, whichever selection you decide on!

 

Rick :cool:

Since I'm running FSX-SE, I saw the A319/A320 bundle at Steam, discounted (30 or 40% off; I don't remember). I purchased, just in case. When I finally decided to install FSX-SE in my current rig, the Airbuses were already there waiting for me.