jetBlue320
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:01 pm

Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 3:21 am

We all know about the Concorde going bye bye, But why didn't Microsoft put an Airbus on FS2002, I am sick of flying Lears, and Boeings, Give us an Airbus where we can actually use the joystick and make us believe we are actually in an Airbus, What do you think guys??? I know there are the downloadable Airbuses, but I want an Airbus from MS already on there.
 
Jason Seiple
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2000 7:42 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 4:34 am

When in Seattle....
 
jetBlue320
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:01 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 7:09 am

When in Seattle....

What does this mean?
 
lubcha132
Posts: 2642
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 10:37 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 7:24 am

microsoft is based in WA.
 
Mark2102
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 9:22 am

You could fly an Airbus. Just download it and the panel.

Mark
 
jetBlue320
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:01 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 10:35 am

Oh, Ok,... I see what Jason is trying to say. Being that they are based in Seattle, They only put Boeing Aircraft. Well That is just wrong. There are Airlines out there who do fly Airbuses  Angry
 
crank
Posts: 1524
Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 11:42 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 10:35 am

As Mark2102 said, there are good airbuses that you can get from the web
 
cramos
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 10:50 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 10:25 pm

I know what you mean. Afterall, the Concorde was a European built aircraft, so there is all reason to put an Airbus in there. I don't think it has to do with being in WA. I know what you mean with the joystick too. Of course, I still like FS2k2. By the name of JetBlue, it looks like you would really like an airbus  Smile being that they are mostly airbus.

Regards
 
EGFF
Posts: 2082
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 5:53 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 21, 2001 11:39 pm

Hey! Because Boeing is American and so is 'Microsoft' they see Airbus as there arch-rivals obviously! I think it sucks too that they have no Airbuses, they beat Boeing by far.....Bring on the A330-200  Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile
EGFF
All together or not at all
 
skyservice_330
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 6:50 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Thu Nov 22, 2001 5:59 am

Boeing and the Concorde aren't/weren't in direct competition, where Airbus and Boeing are. If Microsoft said they wanted to put an Airbus in FS, Boeing would probably destroy the contract with MS, thus saying that they can't put the 737,777,747 in the game. Probably in the contract saying that MS can't put Airbus AC in.

Just my thoughts!

From Canada,
SKYSERVICE_330

 
Pendrilsaint
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 6:46 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Thu Nov 22, 2001 7:57 am

Come on...would you rather have a 737 , 777 , and a 747 ...or an a320...the choice is clear for me
 
User avatar
apuneger
Posts: 2964
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 2:43 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Thu Nov 22, 2001 8:34 am

Hey, just download an Airbus panel, and Airbus aircraft and some airbus soundfiles. Without any doubt, they're better than the standard aircraft included in MS Flight simulator. It has always been this way...

Ivan
Ivan Coninx - Brussels Aviation Photography
 
jcxp15
Posts: 989
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 12:05 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Thu Nov 22, 2001 12:53 pm

I wonder if they'll end up putting the A380 in, since it's gonna be the largest A/C ever...

Although they just did get the 747 in the game.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Fri Nov 23, 2001 10:18 am

Golly, Boeing just wants to have their monopoly everywhere.  Big grin

The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
H. Simpson
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Fri Nov 23, 2001 12:51 pm

you want a jetblue A320?
 
skihigh2002
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2000 11:17 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Fri Nov 23, 2001 2:56 pm

And don't forget that Boeing is moving their offices out of SEA soon.

Chris
 
L-188
Posts: 29870
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Sun Nov 25, 2001 11:48 pm

I am sure that Microsoft will offer an Airbus add on package for about 60 bucks or so.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
jetBlue320
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:01 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Tue Nov 27, 2001 7:11 am

I bet if Airbus paid MS more money, that they would ditch Boeing. I really don't like how Boeing is trying to monopolize not only the market, but also trying to monopolize COMPUTER GAMES. There are people in Europe who play this game. As with what DAVID VENZ of Airbus Industrie says. "The 747 is OLDER than Airbus Industrie. It's time for a new airplane, with state of the art technology built from the wheels up, and that is what is going to happen with the A3XX (A380)."
 
ExpressJet_ERJ
Posts: 677
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 9:31 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Tue Nov 27, 2001 9:38 am

Yes that would be nice for a little change on FS. Maybe on the next FS.  Smile (The FS.com d-loads of Airbuses are better anyway) Smile/happy/getting dizzy
ETOPS...Engines Turn Or People Swim
 
THE PAUL
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Jetblue320

Tue Nov 27, 2001 10:22 am

I bet if Airbus paid MS more money, that they would ditch Boeing.

Was that a joke, or are you really serious? Airbus is a European company, not American. Boeing is American, and so is Microsoft, get the picture?

I really don't like how Boeing is trying to monopolize not only the market, but also trying to monopolize COMPUTER GAMES.

LOL, thanks for that laugh.

As with what DAVID VENZ of Airbus Industrie says. "The 747 is OLDER than Airbus Industrie. It's time for a new airplane, with state of the art technology built from the wheels up, and that is what is going to happen with the A3XX (A380)."

That statement is laughed at by many. The 747 may be an old design, but a lot of the 747s flying today are not old planes. State of the are technology from the wheels up? Uhhh, duh, look at the 747-400 and the 777.


You seem to be dreaming here.

Anyway, the default MS aircraft are usually crap compared to the ones you can get from the web, so why do you care so much?

Rgds.......

The Paul
 
hkgspotter1
Posts: 5750
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:43 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Tue Nov 27, 2001 2:33 pm

The best plane I have on FS is a MNG Pax A300.
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Tue Nov 27, 2001 3:46 pm

Errr quit your whining and download it from FS.com, their better looking, feature real airlines, and in some cases fly better.

People are saying its the American thing that it's all Boeing, lets not kid our selfs Boeing just has more aircraft out in the field its like me complaining that Cessnas, they only do that because they pay them, it should be all Pipers. Wrong Cessnas are more prevalent and will probally always will be, personally I prefer Pipers, but most people will get their flight training in a Cessna, its the same thing with the Boeings.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
Skystar
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 28, 2001 7:18 pm

It's a pity, because the Airbuses have more advanced systems to simulate, in particular the flight envelope protection system and auto trim - which noone has been able to effectively replicate in FSIM. I don't want to start an Airbus/Boeing war, but the automatic systems would be interesting - especially for people first getting used to FS flying.

But, generally speaking the MSFS flight models for the airliners are quite pathetic. Absolute crap for the engines - the spool speeds are back to front (should be very slow initially, then fast once inertia is overcome) and the thrust output at low N1s is far too low - taxi in a real jet is conducted at near idle - ie 23 odd N1.

Cheers,

Justin
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Nov 28, 2001 11:29 pm

JetBlue, there are airlines in Europe using only or mainly Boeing aircraft and no Airbusses at all...
I wish I were flying
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Fri Nov 30, 2001 4:47 am

There are diffrent levels of design, there intial specs (use basic drag, thrust, lift charectics), then you go in detail and start designing each individual parts.

744 uses the basic design of the 747 but its was redesigned. Thats from the engineering classes that I am taking.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
ajaaron
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2000 9:31 am

Pathertic Thrust/Drag Model Huh?

Fri Nov 30, 2001 9:06 am

I don't know about anyone else, but I know a fully laden 747 does not take off and accelerate to 500kts in one minute and reach 10,0000ft

MS really have got it wrong!
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Fri Nov 30, 2001 1:26 pm

Did you alter the cfg because I was told the default isn't fully loaded.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
baec777
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 5:01 am

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:27 pm

I have downloaded couple airbuses like 320s, 330s, 340s.. it cool... like Cathay Pacific was cool & Virgin Atlantic on a A343, and Sabena on a A330, BA on a A320.. not bad... my strobes was nut when u see me smiles.... it flashes to tell me im ready to rock and roll !!!  Nuts

Baec777  Nuts
 
Skystar
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2000 3:58 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Wed Dec 05, 2001 8:08 pm

Remember that rated TO thrust is actually developed at just over 90N1 in the MS2002 models. Full throttle gives you far more thrust.

You can use AirEd to see why - see Thrust factor vs N1 & mach no. At full throttle you get about 133% of rated thrust, or 75,000lbs of thrust ea.

I don't find these MSFS models very accurate generally speaking - few models out there are quite accurate - partially because of FS limitations and a tendency to only target certain areas of flight modelling and following stereotypes (such as all airliners are very slow to respond to roll - rubbish - Project Freeware once had probably the most lazy 737 I have ever flown - I've flown the real sim, it ain't that lazy). Then again, you look at the MSFS aircraft manual, and a bit of it really does read like rubbish  Smile

So ideally to get the most accurate thrust in FS, you should use the TOGA button. As a guide, 100% rated thrust in the 734 is developed at 93.5N1 - you can actually adjust TOGA N1 settings in the aircraft.cfg file.

Remember (as tempting as it is), aircraft rarely ever use full thrust. Try and fly the 747 a bit more realistically, and it should behave a bit better.

Cheers,

Justin
 
MIAspotter
Posts: 2848
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 1:57 pm

RE: Why No Airbus On FS2002

Thu Dec 06, 2001 11:47 am

Dude like everyone her stated there are thousands of Airbuses to download on the net that are faaaaar better than the default M$ crap.

the default aircrafts are so pathetic it justs makes me cry to see them, well the concorde,cessnas and the new 734 are a bit better but the 773 looks so crappy

id rather download a freeware Airbus from the net than wait for M$ to do a awfull looking one its just not justice for airbus

Thank God for Freeware planes

Cheers

MIAspotter

P.S. i cant wait for POSKY to release their A330 it looks so beautiful! EGFF are u with me !  Laugh out loud
Nos vamos de Vueling?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests