曝光臺 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

use the +/- keys to zoom in and out as
necessary. I found this to work quite
well, but I still feel that leaving out
the 2D panel was a mistake. There are
still times when a well done 2D panel
would be useful to have around.
Next, I tested my controller to
verify that all axes were responding
properly. Even with the instructions
provided, I had to make several
attempts at configuration to get my
controller to function the way I wanted
it to. Once more, I remind users that a
considerable amount of tweaking may
be necessary to get the product set up
to your liking.
As I readied the ship for flight
I encountered a problem with the
documentation. The publisher/
developers failed to include
performance charts for the aircraft.
This is an especially large oversight
since the Airbus Flight Management
System is not capable of calculating
V-speeds. Thus, without these charts it
is impossible to properly program the
computer. It seems ironic to me that the
most convenient source I found for this
missing information was the website of a
direct competitor for this product.
The autopilot, FMS, and other systems
were all very well implemented and were
comparable in detail to the respective
systems in the PSS Airbus product which I
reviewed last month. However, A320 PIC
offers a somewhat different interpretation
of the autothrottle system. Rather than
using the “+/-” keys to simulate the heavy
detents on the Power levers that activate
different autothrottle modes, they are
incorporated into the throttle axis on
your controller. The detents themselves
are signified by audible clicks (they are
audible on the real world aircraft as well).
More importantly, the areas in between
the detents continue to be dynamically
responsive, even when the autothrottle is
on (I am told that this is also realistic).
Perhaps the most interesting feature of
A320 PIC is that it attempts to implement
the Airbus flare mode system as a part
THE TEXTURES ARE A BIT SIMPLISTIC IN PLACES
THE OVERHEAD THE EXTERIOR DETAILING IS NOT BAD.
GEAR UP! THE OPTIONAL FO
THAT CLASSIC A320 PROFILE
REVIEW
33
of its normal flight control law. What this
means is that during a manual landing,
at 50 feet RA, the fly-by-wire system
will pitch the nose of the aircraft down
in order to force the pilot to pull up and
flare the aircraft. This sounds bizarre, and
indeed if the pilot is not expecting this he
may overcorrect, or even feel prompted
to attempt a last second go-around. In
the “options” menu this feature may be
deactivated if desired.
Overall, I found that A320 PIC did a
remarkably effective job of illustrating
the feel of the Airbus fly-by-wire system.
This is especially evident in the pitch axis
where the joystick no longer commands
pitch angle but rather the rate of change
in pitch. That is to say, if you pull back on
the stick until the nose rises 10 degrees,
and then return the stick to center, the nose
will not remain pitched up at 10 degrees
without the pilot having to manually apply
stabilizer trim. Other MSFS-based Airbus
sims I have tried did not accomplish this
effect convincingly. Unfortunately, I fear
the system’s awkward implementation
(see the configuration section above) will
prevent many from discovering how well it
actually works.
Performance:
During most phases of flight, performance
was adequate, if not stellar. Certainly it is
better than what many users reported when
the product was originally released. For a
benchmark, in most phases of flight I found
frame rates to be comparable on my machine
to PMDG’s 737NG. A320 PIC benefits from
the fact that CPU speeds have significantly
improved since the time of its original
release, but on the other hand it is also
visually dated. Again, if we compare it to
PMDG’s 737-800/900, the latter product has
a much sharper, more graphically intensive
virtual flight deck. Thus, one would generally
expect to get better frame rates from A320
PIC. Alas, this is not quite the case.
Visuals
Visually, A320 PIC is clearly showing
its age. The virtual cockpit is crude in
appearance by comparison to newer
products. The virtual passenger cabin feature
is also not as sharp as it could be, if this
even matters to you? I feel it would have
been better to leave it out to save memory
and CPU power for more important tasks.
The plane’s exterior is not bad but is notably
　
中國航空網(wǎng) m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：航空資料23(55)