AES support?

[KingCat]

When can we expect AES support for KLAX?


Jon

[virtuali]

It's linked to the destiny of the FS9 version: if we'll end up doing it, AES support will come but, if KLAX will remain FSX-only, GSX is not too far away, and will be free to use all our airports.

We had a longstanding agreement with Oliver, that we'll support AES as long we do FS9 versions of our products, since we don't have a comparable solution for FS9.

[KingCat]

Oh, that's really too bad then, since GSX will not support moving jetways.

I guess I will seriously have to consider if I'm going to buy this product. It looks wonderful, but if I have to work without moving jetways, that's a showstopper for me.  This sounds the same like having a Ferrari, but with a steeringwheel that doesn't move...


Jon

[virtuali]

Oh, that's really too bad then, since GSX will not support moving jetways.

KLAX HAS moving jetways, right now.

What GSX doesn't do, is to *add* moving jetways to 3rd party scenery that don't have them, but all our FSX sceneries always had moving jetways, without AES.

[dsflyerds]

Oh, that's really too bad then, since GSX will not support moving jetways.

KLAX HAS moving jetways, right now.

What GSX doesn't do, is to *add* moving jetways to 3rd party scenery that don't have them, but all our FSX sceneries always had moving jetways, without AES.

Its not the same thing, FSX Generic Jetway animation is not accurate nor does it work properly (Nothing to do with FSDT) Plus the support for second Jetway animation is not supported either. This may be a deal breaker if AES support is not going to happen for LAX.

[virtuali]

Its not the same thing, FSX Generic Jetway animation is not accurate nor does it work properly (Nothing to do with FSDT) Plus the support for second Jetway animation is not supported either. This may be a deal breaker if AES support is not going to happen for LAX.

One of the things we are planning for GSX (maybe not the initial release, but it's definitely planned), is to replace the FSX jetway animation system entirely. We are bit by bit replacing all the default things we don't like, KDFW and KLAX, for example, don't use any default runway lights/papis, we'll eventually get to the jetways too...

In any case, the issue raised was "I have to work without moving jetways, that's a showstopper for me.", as if the jetways were static, but that's no the case with KLAX, that has moving jetways right now.

[KingCat]

In any case, the issue raised was "I have to work without moving jetways, that's a showstopper for me.", as if the jetways were static, but that's no the case with KLAX, that has moving jetways right now.

That's not the reason why I posted this topic. I already knew that FSDT KLAX has moving jetways. But that's not the same as AES-support. In fact, even the default KLAX has moving jetways, and that's also not the same as AES-support. I'm sure I don't have to explain the differences between default moving jetways and AES-jetways.

Saying that AES-support is depending on whether or not a FS9-version is going to be developed, makes no sense to me, because I think it's pretty clear that's not going to happen. You've said it yourself that it's going to take months to adapt the FSX version to a suitable FS9-version (time better spent on new FSX products).

I just hope that this topic gets more comments from other users who also would like to see AES-support for the FSX version.


Jon

[virtuali]

That's not the reason why I posted this topic. I already knew that FSDT KLAX has moving jetways. But that's not the same as AES-support

Maybe that was your intention, but as it was written, it sounded like you thought KLAX had static jetways.

I'm sure I don't have to explain the differences between default moving jetways and AES-jetways.

Which is why we'll likely revamp the FSX default jetways system in GSX too, because we don't like it too, main reason because we don't have any control over it.

Saying that AES-support is depending on whether or not a FS9-version is going to be developed, makes no sense to me

It makes sense, because we'll provide our own FSX solution soon enough, for free (in our sceneries). It's not that we are happy having users spending additional money to add features to our product that we could offer ourselves.

We supported AES so far only because we didn't have anything comparable for FS9 and never had the slightest intention to do any research in doing it. We agreed about this with Oliver more than 2 years ago (when he first learned about GSX), and he understood our position.

because I think it's pretty clear that's not going to happen. You've said it yourself that it's going to take months to adapt the FSX version to a suitable FS9-version (time better spend on new FSX products).

I haven't said anything like that. I only said it's not decided yet, because we still haven't started looking into it. I clearly explained what the issues are, so people wouldn't mistakenly thing we don't want do to the FS9 version for reasons different than sound technical problems.

[flapsup]

In any case, the issue raised was "I have to work without moving jetways, that's a showstopper for me.", as if the jetways were static, but that's no the case with KLAX, that has moving jetways right now.

That's not the reason why I posted this topic. I already knew that FSDT KLAX has moving jetways. But that's not the same as AES-support. In fact, even the default KLAX has moving jetways, and that's also not the same as AES-support. I'm sure I don't have to explain the differences between default moving jetways and AES-jetways.

Saying that AES-support is depending on whether or not a FS9-version is going to be developed, makes no sense to me, because I think it's pretty clear that's not going to happen. You've said it yourself that it's going to take months to adapt the FSX version to a suitable FS9-version (time better spent on new FSX products).

I just hope that this topic gets more comments from other users who also would like to see AES-support for the FSX version.


Jon

Another rude prospective customer

[B777ER]

Until GSX is fully implemented with correct jetway animation which will be some time in the future, could we not get AES for LAX? It should be up to the user if they want to spend money for the AES credits. Can we please get AES for this airport? You said yourself the jetway animation will not be in the initial release. The jetway movement now in your scenery sucks compared to AES.

[cmpbllsjc]

Another rude prospective customer

Unfortunatley anything goes on the net and people tend to say things they generally probably wouldn't if they were talking to Umberto face to face.

In all seriousness, I knew people liked moving jetways, but I had never seen a complaint about the actual animation of them. Personally I dont really even care since I am usually busy preparing to fly rather than fixating on the animation sequence of the jetways and to me it would be a waste of developer time and resources to pour more time and energy into improving it. I wonder if real airline pilots even really watch them extend or retract, or if they can even see them from the cockpit? I doubt it.

Maybe a groung crew, jetway, and AI sim would be a good idea for Aerosoft to develope in the future since I see a lot of posts where people are more concerned about these features than actually simulating flight.

[flapsup]

Until GSX is fully implemented with correct jetway animation which will be some time in the future, could we not get AES for LAX? It should be up to the user if they want to spend money for the AES credits. Can we please get AES for this airport? You said yourself the jetway animation will not be in the initial release. The jetway movement now in your scenery sucks compared to AES.

That would be an ideal compromise, quite agree with you. I am sure Oliver could have his arm twisted ever so slightly.

[flapsup]

Another rude prospective customer

Unfortunatley anything goes on the net and people tend to say things they generally probably wouldn't if they were talking to Umberto face to face.

In all seriousness, I knew people liked moving jetways, but I had never seen a complaint about the actual animation of them. Personally I dont really even care since I am usually busy preparing to fly rather than fixating on the animation sequence of the jetways and to me it would be a waste of developer time and resources to pour more time and energy into improving it. I wonder if real airline pilots even really watch them extend or retract, or if they can even see them from the cockpit? I doubt it.

Maybe a groung crew, jetway, and AI sim would be a good idea for Aerosoft to develope in the future since I see a lot of posts where people are more concerned about these features than actually simulating flight.

I suppose to some, airport purchases are based on wether it has AES support or not. Some maybe prefer the immersion factor having AES when simulating real life airline operations. And then there are those who park at the threshold, and gun it. I think once GSX is released, this issue will probably never rear it's ugly head.  

[KingCat]

Until GSX is fully implemented with correct jetway animation which will be some time in the future, could we not get AES for LAX? It should be up to the user if they want to spend money for the AES credits. Can we please get AES for this airport? You said yourself the jetway animation will not be in the initial release. The jetway movement now in your scenery sucks compared to AES.

+1

But I doubt AES-support is going to happen. Simply because AES is a competitor for GSX in FSX.


Jon

[substance]

Dear all,

Once upon a time I bought cloud9 KLAX hoping it get AESed some day. Unfortunately this never happened. In fact I never flew into cloud9 KLAX. An abandoned installation.
And now, years later and after a late move to FSX, the same thing again with KLAX?

What a disappointment!

Until now,  I purchased every single airport from FSDT and I admire your work. You are the best.
But without AES it is a showstopper for me too. And an improved GSX cannot be expected soon.

Therefore, I would kindly encourage you, Umberto and the FSDreamteam, to re-consider the AES issue.
This would be highly appreciated.


Have a nice day

Goetz