hmmm, yes, his videos are a must. But he doesn't make any comments regarding the speeds...

I confess I didn't try the holds ... but at the .org forum it's mentioned as "todo" ?

Edited April 1, 20188 yr by jcomm

José, I was talking about the FF 320. Vr is always 126 or 127 kts, no matter how much fuel/payload I add. The Toliss does a more reasonable job.

22 minutes ago, Ralf Maylin said:

José, I was talking about the FF 320. Vr is always 126 or 127 kts, no matter how much fuel/payload I add. The Toliss does a more reasonable job.

That's is not the case with mine. When I have set the load Fuel / Pax / Cargo I send it to the MCDU from the EFB and I get a different Vr each time if I change the weights.Maybe you are missing a step or loading it incorrectly?

19 minutes ago, Glenn_C said:

That's is not the case with mine. When I have set the load Fuel / Pax / Cargo I send it to the MCDU from the EFB and I get a different Vr each time if I change the weights.Maybe you are missing a step or loading it incorrectly?

I believe Ralf, just as me, thinks that what is strange is that the Vr V2 seldom exceed the 120+ range, even for a wide variation in GW.

V1 in the FF is not even calculated, while the Toliss makes a calculation based on rw and weather parameters, as well as, of course, the aircraft loading and configuration.

 

V1 is not calculated anyway in the real bus. Blackbox explained that a few times in his streams. This is due to the fact the V1 can be influenced by factors such as contaminated runway / wet / icy and other factors. Pilots manually enter that  on prevailing conditions or it's calculated by flight ops. But yea strange about the weights as if I do a 50 ton ZFW take off and a 61 ton ZFW take off I get totally different V speeds for example  125 & 138 for example. V1 is then always the same or a few knots lower than VR as a general rule.

1 hour ago, Glenn_C said:

That's is not the case with mine. When I have set the load Fuel / Pax / Cargo I send it to the MCDU from the EFB and I get a different Vr each time if I change the weights.Maybe you are missing a step or loading it incorrectly?

I fuel it up using „set“ and „get“ after calling the fuel truck. From memory, I‘m away from the computer now, I add cargo and pax by editing the perf page of the EFB and press „set“.

29 minutes ago, Ralf Maylin said:

I fuel it up using „set“ and „get“ after calling the fuel truck. From memory, I‘m away from the computer now, I add cargo and pax by editing the perf page of the EFB and press „set“.

Same here, and over a really wide range of ZFWs , speeds stay pretty much in the 120+s...

I just made a flight with 2/3 passengers, 2300 kg load of cargo and 8300 kg fuel. I got Vr134 with 55 for flex.

Edited April 1, 20188 yr by janbergwall01

Are you clearing the V speeds first when changing the weight? Maybe that is the reason. You need to clear the V-Speeds fir it to recalculate.

ZFW 45 tons

ZFW 45 tons (vr 125)

ZFW 61 tons

ZFW 61 tons (vr 143)

Glenn, you may have a point there !

Will check.

Edited April 1, 20188 yr by jcomm

Well,

BlackBox711 clearly liking the FF A320!  And we gaining with it :-)

 

 

My advice... after having played a good while with the 3 airbuses :-)

If you have invested seriously in P3D, and have a rig to run it, and your primary concern is being able to fly a good Airbus Simulation, stay there and wait for even more goodies to happen in X-Plane's land, like stable and fully featured weather engine being it the apparently excellent xEnviro or the upcoming HiFi alternative...

Since you already spent the money, you're served, and you aren't going to get any better in terms of a sophisticated Airbus simulation - FSLabs is a unique product for that platform,

If you're moving to XP11, then you have two alternatives, although many say Toliss A319 isn't really on the same league as the FF A320 Ultimate. They're different that's for sure, starting with the modelled aircraft itself, but both have their pros and cons, and all summed up, I play both and enjoy both with equal satisfaction. And since by default in XP11 you get a lot of stuff that is ahead of P3D, like scenery detail at most airports, quality of terrain, even some aspects of weather modelling, XP11 once configured for the rig you have to run it, specially if you're willing to use high res mesh and complex scenery is Outstanding!

So, I really have to say I enjoyed all of the 3 Airbuses and only settled for XP11 because I don't / can't maintain two similar platforms - it's a problem with my mindset...  Having bought the typical 1 month license I usually buy to test new versions of P3D I was very positively impressed by the performance with version 4.2 and the latest release of the FSlabs - by far the smoother experience I ever had in MSFS and derived platforms, even smoother under some circumstances than XP. And I am running it all in that old i5 2500, GTX 960 4GB, 240 GB SSD... Win 10 Pro 64 bit of course...

We can't and shouldn't compare both offers, they're equally Remarkable and offer their users great experiences. Don't move if it's because of the Airbus IMHO...

 

Well I've got all 3, and while Toliss FBW seems much better, the ease of loading flights and prep-time in FFA320 is much less, as is the FSLabs A320.

My favorite though is the FFA320 at the moment. 

I hope that the Toliss gets more features added such as cockpit lighting reostats which the FFA320 has.

Although FSL is a stutter, I don't think I can blame FSL for that. Really, I think it's the sim itself.

P3D v4 is FSX just better, however, it isn't a completely new game like XP. 

Meaning, the old FS2002, FS9, and FSX garbage is still in P3D, unless if LM wants to completely dump that and make a new game entirely.

Edited October 28, 20187 yr by Aaron Kim

Does anyone knows when FF A320 will support weather radar? Also, has any improvements been made in the sounds? I find the FSL sounds to be a really good representation of a flight deck "feeling" (I am not rated on the 320 but rated in other types, often commuting on a bus and have a good reference from real life)...