Hey everybody, 

First of all I hope you all are well in COVID-19 times! 

I wanted to start thread about the A320neo in MSFS 2020 - the aircraft I am definitely looking forward to the most. With the release of the Alpha build 1.2.10 it becomes a little more detailed what the Asobo and Microsoft team are planing. With the chance log it becomes a little more clear what systems this plane could have and what could be left out. 

I wanted to open this thread to maybe discuss how detailed this plane will turn out to be. It is specially aiming at people with good knowledge about the A320 systems and possibly experience with either the aerosoft or fslabs buses. Could it be at a similar level than the aerosoft buses? Or is that aiming too high? With every development update I guess the curtain will be lifted a bit more and this thread could be fed with further infos. 
 

As a possible stating point I will quote the chance log of the A320neo published on FSelite.net (on April 14th 2020):

With this update comes the first jet for the Alpha, the Airbus A320. The team stated that they have had a close partnership with Airbus, and that this is a big step in the development process as the team works to finalize the aircraft. The team has also said “this is the first version of the plane, we hope you will help test many of the systems we’ve already included.”

• Fly by Wire system including some of the flight-envelope protection features and new airliner-specific autopilot and auto-throttle functions.
• MCDU (flight computer)
• FCU (Autopilot control panel) functions implemented.
• SID’s and STAR’s
• High altitude flight
• Long range missions
• Land with autobrake and ground spoilers
• Newly implemented ground handling features such as jetways, refueling trucks, baggage and catering, pushback and ground power carts.

Its worth noting that the A320 will be missing some systems as the team wants to test the current systems. Testers should expect to see some missing indications and visual anomalies. “Many of the autopilot and auto-throttle functions work but some are still WIP. You will be able to fly ILS and visual approaches, but full approach functionality is not included in this version. Expect updates to the MSDU functionality and audio during our next round of updates.” The team has also said that they are excited to work with the community to get the experience with the other aircraft to the best it can be.

 

Known issues A320

Displays

• Approach speed bug and values are missing from the speed tape
• Direct to waypoints display does not match reality on ND and in MCDU
• Flight director blinks regularly
• Flight director can be off on final approach
• Traffic display on ND cannot be disabled
• ILS nav beacons are not displayed in the MCDU flight plan section
• Radar altimeter callouts report altitude approximately 10 feet higher than they should
• The flight plan overlay symbols can be drawn at incorrect position
• Radio frequencies don’t update following ATC window set frequencies
• Direct to doesn’t display DIR destination on PFD
• Scale is not correct for flight path drawing between NAV and ARC modes on PFD
• PFD shows ETA in local time rather than ZULU time
• FMA auto thrust mode during take off can show wrong information
• Only Fuel and Engine synoptic displays are implemented

Flight management and guidance system

• RNAV and VOR DME procedures are displayed in MCDU but are not yet supported
• VOR indicators don’t work
• LOC mode doesn’t work
• Expedite mode is not implemented
• FMGC does not take into account selected speed in MCDU as in reality
• In MCDU departure runway cannot be selected without also selecting a SID
• TRK/FPA mode is not implemented
• MCDU “VIA airways” feature is not implemented
• Mach/IAS automatic switch at high altitude is not fully working
• MCDU performance approach phase automatic triggering happens too early during approach
• Top of climb and descent must be more precisely calculated and displayed
• Selected runway via the world map can be different from the one in the MCDU
• Altitude constraints are implemented but not yet fully functional
• Autoland is not implemented
• Both autopilots cannot be selected at the same time
• CAT 3 ILS is displayed in the FMA with only one AP enabled
• Missed approach altitude cannot be set in MCDU during approach
• Engaging managed mode for heading can cause unexpected aircraft behaviors
• The selected and managed options cannot be selected in the MCDU
• Backcourse navigation is not implemented
• LVL CLB message in FMA should blink and not be framed when passing thrust reduction altitude

Other systems

• Engine oil pressure is too high
• Engine oil quantity is too high and does not change as N1 increases
• External power is not available while the plane is on a parking spot
• Air pressure displayed while starting engines is too low
• Weather radar tilt cannot be changed
• TCAS and TARA are not implemented
• Transponder code needs to be cleared before another code can be set
• ADIRS is not implemented
• Battery voltage should decrease when turning on multiple systems while operating on Battery

Sound

• The APU bleed sound is too quiet
• Thrust levers detents can be impossible to hear when using some peripherals
• The master warning sound does not match reality

Misc

• A placard is missing on the rudder pedals
• Some tooltips are missing

Looking forward to a good discussion, 
Til

The systems it has and it supposed to simulate in the future are obviously a lot more than your average FSX/P3D/XP default aircraft, and that's very good to see. I still think there's no way this is going to be anywhere near the level of FSLabs depth, though. Aerosoft depth level seems a lot more realistic, but based on the information released so far it doesn't seem to be on that level either, at least in the view of someone who doesn't own the AS Airbus and can only rely on reports read (me). Though that doesn't mean it's not going to get there as development progresses. Visually, it looks very good to me even though the cockpit screenshot in the latest update is rather unfortunate if you want to see much.

@threegreen you are absolutely right. It can never reach an Fslabs level. I think that is absolutely impossible. I do hope that Fslabs switches to MSFS 2020 at some point. But that might take years. 

What systems are you missing that would put it on an aerosoft level? I am not an aerosoft user myself but it seems that their bus is perfect for the everyday normal routine flying from a to b. I think the MSFS 2020 could also go into that category. So far I am only missing things like ECAM memos and them obviously working on the known issues that they mentioned. 

You are also right about the cockpit screenshot. At the moment it seems like they don't want anybody to see too much. Could be a good but could also be a bad sign. 

4 minutes ago, Til19031986 said:

It can never reach an Fslabs level. I think that is absolutely impossible.

It's not impossible, I just don't think AS are going all that way.

4 minutes ago, Til19031986 said:

What systems are you missing that would put it on an aerosoft level?

I'd like to see more of the MCDU. Basic features seem to be implemented, but I'm wondering to what level of depth they're going to go. Same with the flight envelope protections.

2 minutes ago, threegreen said:

I'd like to see more of the MCDU. Basic features seem to be implemented, but I'm wondering to what level of depth they're going to go. Same with the flight envelope protections.

True the MCDU will be key. I am looking forward to seeing more and more previews I hope they will give us more infos on that. 

I just think that for a first release this alpha build does look promising. It will be interesting to see how they keep on working with that.

23 minutes ago, threegreen said:

I'd like to see more of the MCDU. Basic features seem to be implemented, but I'm wondering to what level of depth they're going to go. Same with the flight envelope protections.

I imagine the IFR video might cover that.

Hi Til

I love to speculate as much as anybody here but I just have not enough info.

For instance, what kind of partnership has Asobo with Airbus, to which extent they work in depth with Airbus engineers ? What is MS goal, a shiny bauble to sell FS20 to the kids, a solid model for hardcore simmers, a procedure training tool for the pro market ? 

What I see in their list of still missing/faulty items is a pretty good simcraft. Only a simmer like @FDEdev could  comment if not the alpha implementation at least what Asobo has made public,  but since he has been inducted in the alpha elite, he has made himself scarce (hint, hint😄).

7 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

What is MS goal, a shiny bauble to sell FS20 to the kids, a solid model for hardcore simmers? 

I think it’s both of these. Considering how complex the flight model seems based on the development videos, but it’s also going to be flyable on an Xbox controller.

I imagine it’s going to have realism options to make it super simple and super complicated to fly, just like FSX/P3D do right now.

Right now I could boot up P3D/FSX and land and take off using an XB1 controller fairly easily, if using a default plane or one based off the base flight model that is. I probably couldn’t do it with one of the expensive addon planes.

Edited April 18, 20206 yr by Tuskin38

10 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

I imagine the IFR video might cover that.

I think you might be right about that.

9 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Hi Til

I love to speculate as much as anybody here but I just have not enough info.

For instance, what kind of partnership has Asobo with Airbus, to which extent they work in depth with Airbus engineers ? What is MS goal, a shiny bauble to sell FS20 to the kids, a solid model for hardcore simmers, a procedure training tool for the pro market ? 

What I see in their list of still missing/faulty items is a pretty good simcraft. Only a simmer like @FDEdev could  comment if not the alpha implementation at least what Asobo has made public,  but since he has been inducted in the alpha elite, he has made himself scarce (hint, hint😄).

I recon that the partnership with Airbus is more in the area that they get access to an aircraft to measure out things and to be able to use the name. I somehow doubt that Airbus engineers have time to sit down with sim devs. But who knows at the moment - as you correctly put it - it is pure speculation.

I hope they are aiming at an aerosoft level (which is still hoping for much). Anything more seems like it would be too much work.

Its going to be weird because PMDG & Fslabs will be competing against MSFS

MSFS have good developers in large quantity but they lack knowledge and experience in coding airliners

But PMDG & FSlab aircraft will give them all the ressource they lack, what would prevent MSFS developers getting their ressources from 3pd aircraft ?

In some  way 3PD will be in a position where they will indirectly help their competitors (MSFS) who will make them go away once they acquire their ressources and experience

Edited April 18, 20206 yr by cepact

42 minutes ago, threegreen said:

I'd like to see more of the MCDU. Basic features seem to be implemented, but I'm wondering to what level of depth they're going to go. Same with the flight envelope protections.

I guess this is wishful thinking, but I'd love it, if they offer a possibility for the community to extend the functionality, like on the Zibo in XP. With all that will already be implemented, this could get huge.

I would hope that its NOT a "study level" aircraft. There are several simmers including myself that just dont care, dont have the time, the interest in learning complex systems to fly the bloody thing. Because I have no interest in becoming an Airbus pilot. If its half way between the stock fsx 737, and pmdg 737 I'll be extremely happy. I won't need anything more. Save that depth for people that want it and will pay for it. 

I don't expect a study level aircraft, nor would I expect it from MS as this is a game being developed for consoles and PC's.  I would rather MS devote their time to getting the feel of the controls and conditions accurate, so those who want to pay add-on companies for professional-grade aircraft models can build just about anything as realistic as they can afford to program.  Microsoft should focus on their core audience which are the casuals who just hop in defaults and occasionally skin the aircraft with liveries, build a nice AI world traffic and ATC system that's easy to work with, and leave the professional tools open to other developers to give enthusiasts choices and build an ecosystem around it.  As long as the out-of-the-box plane has a basic working GPS and the most common controls to fire up the engines, I'm cool with it.  Their resources should be devoted to adding more depth to the overall game, not making every gizmo and doodad in the cockpit do something for an audience that mostly won't care.

31 minutes ago, Casualcas said:

I would hope that its NOT a "study level" aircraft. There are several simmers including myself that just dont care, dont have the time, the interest in learning complex systems to fly the bloody thing. Because I have no interest in becoming an Airbus pilot. If its half way between the stock fsx 737, and pmdg 737 I'll be extremely happy. I won't need anything more. Save that depth for people that want it and will pay for it. 

Add me here, too. I'm in the very same boat. Plus I hope they will provide a good tutorial adapted to their implementation for the release version.

Kind regards, Michael

We just don't know because of 2 things:

- Their standard seems to be light years ahead everything currently existing on this planet.

- They previously stated they will leave room for 3rd parties to do addons because "they are better than us". I tend not to believe them anymore regarding this...

 

Edited April 18, 20206 yr by Noooch