46 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

Or you could not act so entitled?

It's more about expectation, we had a pretty nice flow of information since July last year. I don't know if it was the goal, probably, but it created a massive hype for this product and since a month ago it's radio silence, so yeah, a couple of screenshot or a few lines of info won't be the end of the world for them.

Same thing with A2A, in November we received confirmation from Scott that they will be able to develop for MSFS and that they will increase their communication to make us part of the loop, well, we got no news since then.

And you won't hear me complaining about FSL, because it's their way of doing business to keep communication on new products to a minimum, I have no problem with it.

Edited March 3, 20224 yr by bendead

1 hour ago, bendead said:

It's more about expectation, we had a pretty nice flow of information since July last year. I don't know if it was the goal, probably, but it created a massive hype for this product and since a month ago it's radio silence, so yeah, a couple of screenshot or a few lines of info won't be the end of the world for them.

Same thing with A2A, in November we received confirmation from Scott that they will be able to develop for MSFS and that they will increase their communication to make us part of the loop, well, we got no news since then.

And you won't hear me complaining about FSL, because it's their way of doing business to keep communication on new products to a minimum, I have no problem with it.

Complete conjecture on my part, but I don't imagine Aamir intended for development to take this long. One Aamir's early posts at the end of Summer said beta was "weeks away." I can only conclude that he was making these weekly hype videos because he felt he could do it up until release...

But programming has a way of dragging out timelines tenfold. I think if he knew back when he revealed the A320 what he knew now, he would have held off on announcing it until only just recently. But that's just, like, my opinion man.

5 hours ago, wiler said:

which version has VNAV ? The dev version does not... 

https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx/tree/experimental-vnav I have been using it since few weeks and works well but sometimes is buggy (expected is WIP). However, you will need to build the branch by yourself locally. I think they will integrate this branch soon into experimental branch.

15 hours ago, wiler said:

which version has VNAV ? The dev version does not... 

I use the Experimental version through their installer program.  I'm sure it doesn't have all the VNAV features of A320, but it follows altitude constraints on the decent relatively well.

10 hours ago, WestAir said:

But programming has a way of dragging out timelines tenfold. I think if he knew back when he revealed the A320 what he knew now, he would have held off on announcing it until only just recently. But that's just, like, my opinion man.

Announcing the Fenix A320 back then may also have served its purpose to ward off FSLabs from making an A320 for MSFS.  Fenix had something substantial to show last year when they announced the A320.  Perhaps FSLabs had thought about making an A320 for MSFS but with Fenix's announcement, FSLabs might be thinking of making another airliner for MSFS, thereby giving Fenix and the FBW A320, the entire market share for the A320 for MSFS.

If FSLabs has decided not to make an A320 for MSFS, FSLabs may also have decided not to make the A319 and A321 for MSFS, because of Fenix's announcement, assuming Fenix goes on to make the A319 and A321, because they can reuse their Fenix A320 code for the A319 and A321.  So Fenix's announcement may also have given them the sole market for the A319 and A321 in MSFS.

In the same way that PMDG announced they are making the 737, 777, and 747 for MSFS very early on, no other major high fidelity competitor has declared they are making the 737, 777 or 747 for MSFS (I don't count Bredok as a high fidelity competitor).  IMO, it doesn't hurt to announce if you have something substantial to show, it can scare off your competitors and give you the only market share for the airliner that you are developing for MSFS.

 

Edited March 4, 20224 yr by abrams_tank

6 hours ago, Forkboy2 said:

I use the Experimental version through their installer program.  I'm sure it doesn't have all the VNAV features of A320, but it follows altitude constraints on the decent relatively well.

Yea But still no TOD or TOC calculations, but hopefully coming sooner then later! 

21 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

https://github.com/flybywiresim/a32nx/tree/experimental-vnav I have been using it since few weeks and works well but sometimes is buggy (expected is WIP). However, you will need to build the branch by yourself locally. I think they will integrate this branch soon into experimental branch.

Do you know how to download it please? I assume I just download the flybywire-aircraft-a320-neo folder?

Latest shot from Aamir:

 

1 hour ago, espent said:

Latest shot from Aamir:

 

3d modeled fan blades at all RPM, seriously ?! 🤩

Edited March 4, 20224 yr by bendead

4 hours ago, espent said:

Latest shot from Aamir:

 

Ridiculous! Just ridiculous in the best way possible!

Amazing!, Aamir and team are heads down on beta and squashing defects/etc so completely understand if they don't have the time to release frequent updates/images/videos like above... but really looking forward to the NDA being lifted for the beta testers so we can get their insights and whatever images and videos they're able to share. And similarly for the PMDG 737 where Robert did mention possible lifting of NDA soon.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

 And similarly for the PMDG 737 where Robert did mention possible lifting of NDA soon.

😂😂😂