Beardyman

FSL A320X

Recommended Posts

Hi,

I am sitting on the fence for this bird for quite a long time, still not convinced...

Due to that i have just 3 questions to those who are familiar with FSL320.

1. Will i have performance similar to PMDG747 ? ( i have old rig but set everything so that 747 is butter smooth )

2. Should i enter flightplan manually, point by point, or is there some sort of ACARS like PMDG747 ?

3. VC - what i can judge watching YT, i am not so impressed with VC and texturing. It looks worse than PMDG747 ( sorry that i always refer to PMDG747, but that is my reference point now ). Am i right here ? ( i know that P3D4 will have texture update, but for a time being i am not going to switch to P3D4, so i am interested about P3D3.4 only ). So, is there significant difference between those two ?

 

Thanks for feedback

 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

10 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

1. Will i have performance similar to PMDG747 ?

 

Cruise speed of A320 is slightly lower than the 747. Range is much less too. :biggrin:

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

Hi,

I am sitting on the fence for this bird for quite a long time, still not convinced...

Due to that i have just 3 questions to those who are familiar with FSL320.

1. Will i have performance similar to PMDG747 ? ( i have old rig but set everything so that 747 is butter smooth )

2. Should i enter flightplan manually, point by point, or is there some sort of ACARS like PMDG747 ?

3. VC - what i can judge watching YT, i am not so impressed with VC and texturing. It looks worse than PMDG747 ( sorry that i always refer to PMDG747, but that is my reference point now ). Am i right here ? ( i know that P3D4 will have texture update, but for a time being i am not going to switch to P3D4, so i am interested about P3D3.4 only ). So, is there significant difference between those two ?

 

Thanks for feedback

 

1.) Local here similar performance waiting for the P3Dv4 version for obvious reasons.

2.) There are several ways to important a generated flightplan...

3.) Go for the P3Dv4 version 64 bit no memory issues, and the future version update(s) will be probably P3Dv4 only ;-)

P3Dv3.4 left my HD...

Share this post


Link to post

SRCE - very funny :-), but u know what performance i am talking about.

Still have no clear picture about given questions.

Share this post


Link to post

I own both FSL A320 and PMDG B747 V2. even though my system is by far not the latest available, I can't really tell if there is a significant performance difference between the two. So if your system can handle the PMDG 747 V2, most likely, it can also perform fine with the A320 Regarding flight plans, you can import them from flight-planners such as PFPX (please see further info here), finally your impressions/apprehensions of textures being of a lesser quality are not - in my opinion - justified, but this is too subjective to be debated in a post, perhaps watch more videos and look at the latest shots provided for P3D V4 on FSLabs forum. Good luck in your decision, but I would be inclined to think that you wont regret acquiring this bird when it becomes available for P3D V4.

Share this post


Link to post

THX Bernard. So far i have no plans to switch to P3D4 due to fact that i have old rig, and i read that P3D4 has higher computing power demand, apart of that i have no issues with OOM, so that is why i am not tempted by P3D4 by now.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Beardyman said:

THX Bernard. So far i have no plans to switch to P3D4 due to fact that i have old rig, and i read that P3D4 has higher computing power demand, apart of that i have no issues with OOM, so that is why i am not tempted by P3D4 by now.

- Well the FSLA320 is memory hungry you have to balance other stuff other wise you will have OOM issues ;-)

- One of those mis understandings lol, P3Dv4 will perform better on the same hardware and settings as P3Dv3.X

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

Hi,

I am sitting on the fence for this bird for quite a long time, still not convinced...

Due to that i have just 3 questions to those who are familiar with FSL320.

1. Will i have performance similar to PMDG747 ? ( i have old rig but set everything so that 747 is butter smooth )

2. Should i enter flightplan manually, point by point, or is there some sort of ACARS like PMDG747 ?

3. VC - what i can judge watching YT, i am not so impressed with VC and texturing. It looks worse than PMDG747 ( sorry that i always refer to PMDG747, but that is my reference point now ). Am i right here ? ( i know that P3D4 will have texture update, but for a time being i am not going to switch to P3D4, so i am interested about P3D3.4 only ). So, is there significant difference between those two ?

 

Thanks for feedback

 

1) I am running v3.4 FPS are about the same as the 777 3-4 fps less than the NG.

2) In PFPX All I do is "print" (its not printing it just saves a PDF) name it something like EGLLEDDF01, but that in FSL route folder it imports like importing from within the NG.

3) The VC textures are the only down side , but v4 will have a full new 4096 VC and also a new 64bit sound engine, but frankly the sounds within the VC are second to none as it is.

If you want a A320 then frankly I don't see why anyone would buy anything else but the best addon airline that has ever been made for any flight sim. I will not move to v4 until the FSL is available, hopefully all in the next week!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Bernard Ducret said:

Regarding flight plans, you can import them from flight-planners such as PFPX (please see further info here),

That's exactly what I said you have several options to import generated flightplans, and in that link it's summed up pretty nice ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

"One of those mis understandings lol, P3Dv4 will perform better on the same hardware and settings as P3Dv3.X"

I don't know about that, as always there are many conflicting opinions, but those with higher spec required prevail. 

Share this post


Link to post

The FSLA320 is in my opinion the best add on made for FSX/P3D. 

Performance is absolutely one of the smoothest I have experienced. The issue with P3D is simply that it came ahead of it's time.  The aircraft uses so many advanced features that it goes outside the sim to process that info and it eats up the VAS space on a 32Bit platform. That is why the excitement for a 64bit version is so high. 

 

Eye candy, the airplane is beautiful as much as the NGX or PMDG in my opinion, you don't have stretched low resolution textures like you have on the Wilco or level d and you don't have simply on and off night lighting like the competitor. 

 

So IMO, when the plane came out and they announced 99.99 tag on said ( publicly) you're mad FSlabs! However I took the plunge, never to fly ANY other Airbus the same. My hope is that they continue building the Airbus line because if they do that I can almost guarantee they will load them selves in money.  

 

Hope it helps. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

"One of those mis understandings lol, P3Dv4 will perform better on the same hardware and settings as P3Dv3.X"

I don't know about that, as always there are many conflicting opinions, but those with higher spec required prevail. 

The only differences would be memory usage (GPU and system RAM) and it will benefit from more memory on the same hardware ;-)

Obvious that with better hardware it will perform better and can utilize more settings /features that's why I'm running a high end system...

But as for the same settings hardware and / software it will perform better.

It seems you already made up your mind as for P3Dv4 ;-), anyway how the bus performance on your system can be different per system many parameters at play here.

https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/topic/7354-for-oom-vas-and-performance-issues/

https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/forum/45-read-these-first/

As for Airbus simulation on a desktop nothing comes close to this beauty :-)

 

Share this post


Link to post

Artur,

Here is a video of the updated A320 in P3D V4. It's different from low cockpit textures but this should give you a different look. But it's your decision.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Some people buy another A320 because it's easy to use features. 

 With the FSL you getting as close as you can to this.

FlightSafety-A320-Sim-0616a.JPG

So if you want to feel you're in a real A320 there is only 1 choice. Also don't kid yourself it not just about all the failures etc it's everything. The Second you turn on Ground power and the cockpit comes alive it feels just like that. You have bought alive a multi million pound aircraft to life. 

A bit like this also. Someone wants a great GA to fly, so people say buy A2A, then they reply I like the alabeo as I never let it stall, so all that stuff is wasted on me.......:ohmy::blink:

Each to there own. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

I put a moratorium on any further purchases for P3D/FSX many months ago because I was fed up with VAS and OOM issues. But this is a bird I wanted very much.Now that I've cleaned off 32 bit junk P3D/FSX from my drive and am wholly a 64 bit convert this baby will be a #1 purchase went it hits the stores.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I went with the 2D flight deck and it it is great. Never had an OOM on P3Dv3 on flights between FlyTampa Amsterdam and Copenhagen. With VC I did had a few OOM’s. Performance wise on a GTX970 was also no problem and I can’t wait to have it in the fleet again for P3Dv4.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Beardyman said:

"One of those mis understandings lol, P3Dv4 will perform better on the same hardware and settings as P3Dv3.X"

I don't know about that, as always there are many conflicting opinions, but those with higher spec required prevail. 

I have a first gen i7 (i7-920) clocked at 3,7Ghz, 6Gb RAM and an GeForce 660 Ti graphicscard. So I’m working with quite an old (8 years) rig myself. P3Dv4 runs far better on my system than v3 ever did. Even with low settings it looks also better than v3. Flying without fear of OOM is a wonderful thing.

So imho there’s no reason not to switch to v4.

Hope this helps

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

FWERFF - we have almost identical computers, so ur feedback is giving me hope ! Great to hear that such old computers can still handle latest P3D version, really great news for me.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Nyxx said:

Some people buy another A320 because it's easy to use features. 

 With the FSL you getting as close as you can to this.

FlightSafety-A320-Sim-0616a.JPG

So if you want to feel you're in a real A320 there is only 1 choice. Also don't kid yourself it not just about all the failures etc it's everything. The Second you turn on Ground power and the cockpit comes alive it feels just like that. You have bought alive a multi million pound aircraft to life. 

A bit like this also. Someone wants a great GA to fly, so people say buy A2A, then they reply I like the alabeo as I never let it stall, so all that stuff is wasted on me.......:ohmy::blink:

Each to there own. 

 

Amazing stuff isn't David and with 64 bit we have the ability to do a real world day or night schedule (the poor wife lol) ;-)

Can't wait for the P3Dv4 version and probably flying only the bus :cool:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Older system here, which is not particularly high end.

Core i5-3570

AMD7700

8GB RAM

On installation you will have three resolutions to decide between. Basically these are poor, better (2K), best (4K). Running 1920x1080 (2K) my system is running better than my PDMG737 did under FSX. My guess is frame rates in the 30's with no stuttering or load issues. Have not even bothered to tweak the settings other than to ensure full realism was on (it was). 

Had to go backwards and buy P3Dv3.4 to buy FS Labs 320x. Counting on their free upgrade to 4.1.

The aircraft is delightful but is not up to the standards of PDMG, or perhaps I've not found out some way to enable more realistic function of the ADIRU alignment. Probably not many people care about what is a hassle in day to day operations, but I bought the add on as a (fun) procedures trainer. It appears FS Labs simplified it a bit, which is fine. Some of the detail they did get into is astonishing, like the three modes of avionics cooling. The little doors work and aside from trivia on an oral examination someone could fly the real jet for a decade and probably not notice or care what it does as long as it works.

Well worth the money and a lot of fun.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi I would suggest you get your facts correct before posting incorrect information, might be a good idea to start by reading the manual. Realistic IRS alignment is simulated. In your opinion it may not be up to the level of PMDG (although by your example, this seems to be based on your ignorance rather than by any hard facts). 

In my opinion FSLABS A320 is the most realistic aircraft that has ever been created for flightsim on any platform.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Have high end system 7700k 4.8 and a 1080TI

will be a very early day 2-3 purchase for me! 

The soundest is almost exactly what you would hear in the cabin and the cockpit. Probably more aircraft developers should focus on the sound sets ( MJC Q400 is another winner) . Lots of them have great exterior sounds , but interior is kind of lacking. Not naming names of course.

Rumour has it that " a major addon release is expected at around the time of the 4.1 release" as per yesterday's P3d forum. Hopefully it is in our hands mid Oct!

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Proflig8tor said:

Older system here, which is not particularly high end.

Core i5-3570

AMD7700

8GB RAM

On installation you will have three resolutions to decide between. Basically these are poor, better (2K), best (4K). Running 1920x1080 (2K) my system is running better than my PDMG737 did under FSX. My guess is frame rates in the 30's with no stuttering or load issues. Have not even bothered to tweak the settings other than to ensure full realism was on (it was). 

Had to go backwards and buy P3Dv3.4 to buy FS Labs 320x. Counting on their free upgrade to 4.1.

The aircraft is delightful but is not up to the standards of PDMG, or perhaps I've not found out some way to enable more realistic function of the ADIRU alignment. Probably not many people care about what is a hassle in day to day operations, but I bought the add on as a (fun) procedures trainer. It appears FS Labs simplified it a bit, which is fine. Some of the detail they did get into is astonishing, like the three modes of avionics cooling. The little doors work and aside from trivia on an oral examination someone could fly the real jet for a decade and probably not notice or care what it does as long as it works.

Well worth the money and a lot of fun.

Please elaborate. In what way is the ADIRU Alignment not realistic in the FSLabs A320? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Proflig8tor said:

The aircraft is delightful but is not up to the standards of PDMG

The reason it is not to PMDG standards is because it greatly surpasses them. Don't get me wrong here, PMDG stuff is fab, especially their B747 and 737, but the FSL A320 has a lot more going on with it, which is why it took years for any company to have the nerve to even try to simulate an A320 properly for an ESP based flight sim.

As with the real world, the ADIRU alignment in the FSL A320 depends upon your location, it can take up to about 17 minutes for it to align in the real world, depending on where your aeroplane is parked up, and the figures for the FSL A320 are pretty close to their real world times.

But, you can stuff alignment up in a number of ways, for example, a real A320 would probably detect movement if it was particularly windy at your location, this is because the aeroplane could actually be moved a bit by a strong wind, but also because the aeroplane position systems take data from the pitot and static ports, so it could theoretically fool the system into thinking the aeroplane is moving if there was a strong wind blowing down the pitot tube, or if the aircraft was not chocked and slid along the ground on a greasy or icy apron, and as in the real world, it will stuff up on the FSL A320 if you move the aeroplane.

Alignment can also be affected by running any tests on any system on the aeroplane which interacts with the ADIRU, this is the case with some systems you might not think would affect alignment, including the flight controls, the FMS, the weather radar, TCAS and the EGPWS, plus a few circuit breakers can affect it too and some other systems which you wouldn't realistically be messing with whilst parked up, i.e. the landing gear and the autopilot among other things. In the real world the ADIRU alignment can also be affected by the shifting position of the aeroplane as passengers and cargo are loaded believe it or not, although this is not something which would happen with the FSL A320, or at least I don't think so, because loading is not a dynamic process in FSX or P3D, so it would be fairly impossible to simulate that dynamically changing weight unless you wanted to keep going into the sim's loadout screen and add one passenger at a time in order to simulate some really fat bloke in the doorway arguing with the cabin crew and waving his arms about and stamping his feet, or a new load of peanuts in the catering trolley being hauled onto the thing lol. If any developer manages to pull that one off, I think they should call it AccuFatty, or perhaps TrueCake.

Can't say I've tried it, but I should imagine if the engines and APU were all running under a lot of load, they might possibly affect matters too as the aeroplane burned off weight in the form of fuel, but since you are unlikely to be aligning the systems with the engines running at full tilt, I guess that's a moot point.

You can test some of this for yourself, as you know, you have to have the DATA switch on PPOS to enter the coordinates for alignment, but once it gets going, you can cheerfully move the switch to the HDG setting and it will display how long alignment is going to take, try this in the FSL A320 at different locations around the world and it will show different times. Near the equator, the alignment will be quicker because the ring laser gyros, of which there are three on the real aeroplane, will detect the greater movement of the Earth at the equator, so it has more suitable movement to work with and can suss things out quicker, at this locale it will take about 5 minutes or so to align, at the poles there is less rotational movement but more roll which is harder for it to suss out, which is why it takes longer. What the ring laser gyros are actually sensing is the amount of roll the aeroplane is experiencing as the world spins around and the speed, then comparing all that to the heading of the aeroplane. Point this out to one of those word not allowed flat Earthers if you want them to have a meltdown lol.

Since the system knows that the Earth is rotating at exactly 1,040.4 mph at the equator, and that the Earth has a diameter of 7926 miles at the equator and a polar diameter of 7899.86 miles, from different locations it can figure out where you are on the Earth by comparing what you put in (which helps it to narrow things down) with what it thinks should be going on, and what movement of the Earth it is sensing.

If something is not working right and you move the DATA switch to the STS position, it will report any fault codes, usually something such as the aforementioned stuff which can affect alignment, and if it does show a fault code, alignment will commence again only once you have fixed whatever it was you did which caused the fault code in the first place. 

The real ADIRU is also somewhat dependent upon being powered down correctly, because when you commence alignment, the system cross references the position you put into it, with its last known position, which it writes to solid state memory when the aircraft stops moving, which is why it is important to shut the real aeroplane down properly so the aircraft can have time to do that, not something which should matter much on a simulated aeroplane really. If however it stuffs up and tells you it doesn't trust your input and requests you to enter your position, you have to enter it again on the ADIRU and on all the CDUs as well, which is a bit like slapping it and telling it repeatedly that you are right, but that is what you have to do on the real aeroplane, although for minor discrepancies to be corrected between flights, so long as the aeroplane is stationary, you can simply move the mode select switch to OFF and then back to NAV within five seconds, then all you have to do is key in the present position and after a brief think about it, this will update the velocity and heading settings so long as they are not too different from where the aeroplane thinks it is, and you'll be properly aligned again (this is usually what is done when the aeroplane is at the gate waiting for passengers if it has already been through a full alignment process at the start of its day of operations, since although the system is pretty good and figuring out where it is and updating itself as you fly about, it isn't perfect and so the settings can drift out).

Incidentally, this is pretty much the same system which military submarines use in order to know where they are when navigating underwater, so they can stay submerged for long periods and sneak about without colliding with any known underwater obstructions, which is one of the things P3D features since it has some accurate ocean floor mapping in there as well as the visible terrain above water, so if you use P3D, if you turn that off in the options, it will improve frame rates a tiny bit.

As far as I'm aware, pretty much all of this is ADIRU malarkey is simulated on the FSL A320, apart from the aforementioned bits which are not practical, although of course not everyone is bothered about that, which is why you can choose to have it align faster as an option in your simulator.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now