A32NX VS default A320 Neo

[MrFuzzy 2,118]

I have the impression that the FBW plane has been further optimized in terms of framerate and now it's close to the default A320, at least with glass cockpit refresh rate on Low. I am using it more often now.

I noticed, however, two remarkable differences:

- Climb rate above 30,000 ft is much higher. The default A320 Neo really struggles while the A32NX climbs up to 38-39,000 ft without breaking a sweat. Same payload of course. 

- Overspeed marker at high altitude is 30-40 knots lower than the default A320 Neo. Maybe it considers also the direction of the wind and the TAS?

The big question is: which one is closer to the real thing, in particular for the first parameter (engine power)? 🙂

 

[Watsi 2,571]

We change these things in accordance with infos and testrides of real A320N pilots and real A320N performance data. You can be sure, if we do such changes, they're checked.

[Bobsk8 12,585]

They also have a very active Discord channel where you can ask questions about the FBW.