For those who don't have cockpit shadows, a fix is coming next update

3 hours ago, YukonPete said:

 Its a better product then anything PMDG have released. 

It is a different product and a more modern use of available platform functionality which may translate to a different user experience.  .You are talking about products released a few years from each other which is an eternity in fligthsim terms.   It is a completely different experience flying a Boeing to an Airbus.  So your statement is unfair and largely inaccurate.

Why's 90% of the thread turned into FSlabs vs PMDG? Cant we just appreciate them both for what they are 

4 hours ago, tooting said:

Currently doing my first one in the new version...  Absolutely bloody fantastic.   And coming from old grumpy guts that's something.   It's a winner.

Using 4K,  30hz   Vsync on,  triple buffering on and x4 msaa.   

Egkk was getting 2o to 25 fps

In the air locked at 30

Happy days.  a fantastic product so far 

Good to hear Pete 

24 minutes ago, ErichB said:

 It is a completely different experience flying a Boeing to an Airbus

Indeed. And if you want the best of those two worlds, you have to fly the MD-11! Not in P3D V4 however...

10 minutes ago, Litmoose said:

Why's 90% of the thread turned into FSlabs vs PMDG? Cant we just appreciate them both for what they are 

The voice of reason!

I second that, otherwise this thread will be locked soon i suppose (like dozens of similar threads that went into flamewars and ended up being locked)

Exactly the above. Too much comparison over older products, with entirely different systems and logic. Also all these FPS claims hold no weight.  If your going to claim poor FPS (or great FPS for that matter) then quantify it by mentioning your settings, PC specs, and all addons.  Otherwise its very subjective.  Pretty sure if I have lighter settings, very few AI , and a couple of 3rd party addon enhancements, the FPS would be fantastic. But not many fly with that and why would you.  We love our detailed airports, sceneries enhanced, and as much AI as our system allows without it being a  slideshow.  

This is a very complex systems detailed aircraft so of course theres a gazillion computations going on , and naturally very hard on the computer.  Sure its very expensive, and tough to swallow for many, but for those of us who love complex simulation, we all get sucked in to enjoy the experience.  Its a phenomenal aircraft in its own right, just like some other competitor aircraft are but in their own category.  The FPS are not great when you run everything, but its certainly no killer. Balance out what your system can handle. 

Exactly the above. And I'm grateful that my simming experience coincides with the availability of such terrific add-ons like PMDG's NGX and B777, TFDi's B717, and of course the FSL A320X. Hard to imagine doing without any of these (among many others), yet, that was our reality not so long ago.

Anyone have sound stuttering issues (like a small pause as the sound loads in

For me the aircraft is beautiful, very happy with the VC texturing and functionality, sounds are awesome, only issue I have and it's a big one is performance, frame rates stutter from as high as 38 down to as low as 18 especially when panning around the VC were it tends to stutter and lag, that's with UT live at FB KMSP , I have 32ghz of ram an i7 7700 and a 1080 video card,  and most sliders around 75-80 percent. Fps as low at 9 at night with dynamic lighting, landing lights and done lights. I get solid fps , 35-40 and no stuttering with other study level sims. I hope FSL's can find a way to increase the performance or optimize it further cuz it's a beautifully well aimulated A320 and I wang to spend lots of time flying it. 

2 hours ago, MachTwo said:

Morning Pete,

The PA's should all reset on the ground automatically, providing you open any of the cabin doors and shut down the engines. You also need to have the FMGS in PRE-FLIGHT phase, which will be triggered as soon as you enter a new route on the INIT A page.

For the warning text - yes, there's an issue there. I've fixed it for the next build we're working on. Thanks.

Thanks for that.  I didn't open the door that's why.  

 

3 minutes ago, Jetspaul said:

For me the aircraft is beautiful, very happy with the VC texturing and functionality, sounds are awesome, only issue I have and it's a big one is performance, frame rates stutter from as high as 38 down to as low as 18 especially when panning around the VC were it tends to stutter and lag, that's with UT live at FB KMSP , I have 32ghz of ram an i7 7700 and a 1080 video card,  and most sliders around 75-80 percent. Fps as low at 9 at night with dynamic lighting, landing lights and done lights. I get solid fps , 35-40 and no stuttering with other study level sims. I hope FSL's can find a way to increase the performance or optimize it further cuz it's a beautifully well aimulated A320 and I wang to spend lots of time flying it. 

You do have 4x  msaa or the other one? 

I use PFPX for flight planning. Any issues exporting to the Airbus? I’ saving up for FSLabs A320. Almost there!

8 minutes ago, hawkhero said:

I use PFPX for flight planning. Any issues exporting to the Airbus? I’ saving up for FSLabs A320. Almost there!

They way I do it I save the flight plan as a PDF. It has to be name e.g EGLLEDDF01.

That way you can import it into the MCDU in the coroute. Along with other info it can read from it.

 

----------------

As for comparing it with anything else. Well most simmers have PMDG NG and people always ask for a comparison to give some idea how it might run with an aircraft they own. No harm in that.

Comparing an NG to a A320 is a totally different thing. Also comparing the FSL to any other A320 is equally silly. A perfect case of "you get what you pay for"

This is something I don't understand and hopefully someone can shed some light.  I am not technical nor am I a "gamer" so my knowledge of frames, specs, etc. are minimal.  I have both the PMDG and FSL320.  I enjoy them both.  People talk about framerates all the time and how one is lower than the other, so on and so forth.  In comparing "frames" between the 2 planes, yes PMDG might be a few more than FSL.  However, what does that even mean?  My eye cannot tell the difference between these "numbers" that people are reporting on.  Both are visually very smooth to me whether it is 10 frames or 50 flying with complex scenery and payware airports.  In fact, I would say that both planes are smooth for me, the FSL bus (though "less frame rates") is WAY smoother than PMDG when flying at night and with dynamic lighting on.  Yes, I might have a few hiccups when something is loading but shouldn't people be more concerned with a smooth flight visually than what some number tells you when you hit Shift Z?  I've see that number low and I have seen it high but it doesn't affect the smoothness of the sim.