FlyByWire Simulations | A32NX | Hydraulic Gear Extension

[Car147 2,290]

8 hours ago, Ridvan Celik said:

Personally, I look forward to having the NEO in the hanger and the CEO in the hanger.... different flights for different routes and airlines. Don't really care what's freeware or payware, as long as they're good. FBW is doing an amazing job, not many freeware we have seen to this standard throughout past flight sims... I remember a great great freeware Orion I got from a PC pilot magazine CD back in FS9!.

Even though FBW is freeware, it sure is setting the bar for what payware should be... if its less than FBW quality, dont think about charging for it.... I can think of one company with the first letter starting with Captain and the second letter starting with Sim... sorry sorry I mean C and S. Yes I just had to.  

As do i, I usually look at RW flights i want to try and then use the corresponding aircraft, so if it's the CEO version, i would use that. And again if it's the NEO i will use the NEO, and fully expect it to continue in it's development until such time as it's as good as any in the sim.

 

[Fiorentoni 4,411]

2 hours ago, Car147 said:

As do i, I usually look at RW flights i want to try and then use the corresponding aircraft, so if it's the CEO version, i would use that. And again if it's the NEO i will use the NEO, and fully expect it to continue in it's development until such time as it's as good as any in the sim.

 

This is exactly what I will do. I can't have enough variants and versions.

[phbordini 0]

As someone who has been using MSFS for GA purpose, how feature complete is FBW compared to “gold standard” payware airbuses at the moment?

[omarsmak30 4,068]

1 hour ago, phbordini said:

As someone who has been using MSFS for GA purpose, how feature complete is FBW compared to “gold standard” payware airbuses at the moment?

There is nothing complete in this world 🙂 

[RaptyrOne 1,457]

2 hours ago, phbordini said:

As someone who has been using MSFS for GA purpose, how feature complete is FBW compared to “gold standard” payware airbuses at the moment?

There is no other modern airliner currently available to everyone for MSFS that comes close. FBW A32NX is the gold standard in MSFS right now.

Coming from a GA, it will be a feature overload. :-)

[Fiorentoni 4,411]

4 hours ago, phbordini said:

As someone who has been using MSFS for GA purpose, how feature complete is FBW compared to “gold standard” payware airbuses at the moment?

Well depends on what you consider "features". As for the daily use you might only miss VNAV so far (which however is already available on the xperimental version, though far from perfect yet). Oh and split FMCs are missing, too. No panel state saving, no failures, ... well I guess that's all that is really missing in daily affairs.

[omarsmak30 4,068]

1 hour ago, RaptyrOne said:

There is no other modern airliner currently available to everyone for MSFS that comes close. FBW A32NX is the gold standard in MSFS right now.

Yep agreed! And that is the nice thing about MSFS, it unleashed all the talents that one could imagine, with strong community orientation, which makes sim no longer "exclusive" to some set of add-one developers. With the likes of FBW and WT and the other community projects, they are pushing the standards of payware. 

On another note, @Watsi the features on the experimental are becoming better and better everyday, namely the VNAV, this weekend I was flying with latest experimental and the VNAV had almost no issues at all, impressive work indeed! I am wondering now, I feel like the VNAV is becoming ready to be merged into the development version, are you guys considering doing this soon or you still want to iron out few more issues? 

[omarsmak30 4,068]

3 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

which however is already available on the xperimental version, though far from perfect yet). Oh and split FMCs are missing, too. No panel state saving, no failures, ... well I guess that's all that is really missing in daily affairs.

Not sure what you mean by "far from perfect", the VNAV on experimental right now, is becoming extremely good. 

No panel states, then which panel states am I seeing right now in the experimental version? 🤔

No failures? Are you sure? There is good range of failure support and more are coming. 

Of course I am referring to the experimental version, no idea about the development version.

[Fiorentoni 4,411]

2 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

Not sure what you mean by "far from perfect", the VNAV on experimental right now, is becoming extremely good. 

No panel states, then which panel states am I seeing right now in the experimental version? 🤔

No failures? Are you sure? There is good range of failure support and more are coming. 

Of course I am referring to the experimental version, no idea about the development version.

a) Far from perfect means that it bugs out once I manually enter or delete restrictions (mainly speed), that cost index or change of descent speed (in kts) does not work yet, that it has big problems with early below restrictions on STARs, and re-engaging managed speed later after disengaging also does not work well. I wouldn't call it extremely good, no need to be hyperbole. LNAV is extremely good, yes, but VNAV, no, not yet. (I am not complaining by the way, I was just answering the question)

b) What you see are pre-defined panel states; I am talking about custom panel states (like PMDG, the Maddog's turnaround mode or - to a lesser extent - the FSL Airbus), which make it possible to return to an aircraft in the exact state (switches, buttons, engine oil etc.) you left it.

c) There are basic failures, but they are rather there to test the systems than simulate realistic events and solutions. Also I meant rather random failures and/or service based failures, like PMDG, Maddog etc. Sure more are coming, but the question was not about the future.

[omarsmak30 4,068]

14 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I wouldn't call it extremely good, no need to be hyperbole.

Well to be honest, for my humble usage, I find it pretty pretty good though 😊. Let's get back the time 2 years back and remember how the default A320 was, we were just wishing the autopilot will just perform the basic functionality in good manner let alone vnav lol.

 

[Fiorentoni 4,411]

7 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Well to be honest, for my humble usage, I find it pretty pretty good though 😊. Let's get back the time 2 years back and remember how the default A320 was, we were just wishing the autopilot will just perform the basic functionality in good manner let alone vnav lol.

 

Absolutely, all in all the A32NX is great.

[Watsi 2,574]

9 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Yep agreed! And that is the nice thing about MSFS, it unleashed all the talents that one could imagine, with strong community orientation, which makes sim no longer "exclusive" to some set of add-one developers. With the likes of FBW and WT and the other community projects, they are pushing the standards of payware. 

On another note, @Watsi the features on the experimental are becoming better and better everyday, namely the VNAV, this weekend I was flying with latest experimental and the VNAV had almost no issues at all, impressive work indeed! I am wondering now, I feel like the VNAV is becoming ready to be merged into the development version, are you guys considering doing this soon or you still want to iron out few more issues? 

Due to the community-driven nature of our projects, we do not enforce delivery timelines on our volunteer developers. We value high-quality, polished releases over frequent and quickly-released ones, which means some features might take time to land in a publicly-available build. Rest assured that our developers and contributors are working hard on making every FlyByWire project as bug-free and feature-complete as possible, but that we are simply not able to provide release dates or estimates for a certain feature/fix.

[Crocket 47]

On 4/23/2022 at 8:01 PM, guenseli said:

@Watsi

just a little offtopic question regarding the PTU.
I have enabled it in the EFB, but it is triggered when you start the second engine, right?

Is this just a workaround from your side (you as devs)? At what point in reality starts the self test of the PTU?
I do not think it is right in that moment when you switch the engine starter ...?

 

thx

Hi!

To be clear there is no self test function in PTU. This is an hydraulic only component, and only control you have on it is the solenoid valves that can open or close to let the PTU feeded with fluid or not.

When you launch the second engine, the only thing happening is that this is one condition (having both engine masters at the same position on or off) that will allow PTU valves to open. At that moment, you have full pressure on one side, and no pressure on other side, so when valve opens, PTU will generate a huge net torque. As we simulate the whole internal physics of the PTU, this is just resulting in the PTU rotating at fast speed, thus making a high pitch noise.

That high pitch noise has nothing to do with a "self test" feature.  For example, if you happen to kill green edp while PTU is set to off. Wait for the green pressure to get back to 0, if you set PTU ON again it will also make that characteristic noise.

If you have ptu active and set a green or yellow circuit leak, you can expect PTU going at crazy RPM too :D

 

[lwt1971 7,464]

54 minutes ago, Crocket said:

When you launch the second engine, the only thing happening is that this is one condition (having both engine masters at the same position on or off) that will allow PTU valves to open. At that moment, you have full pressure on one side, and no pressure on other side, so when valve opens, PTU will generate a huge net torque. As we simulate the whole internal physics of the PTU, this is just resulting in the PTU rotating at fast speed, thus making a high pitch noise.

That high pitch noise has nothing to do with a "self test" feature.  For example, if you happen to kill green edp while PTU is set to off. Wait for the green pressure to get back to 0, if you set PTU ON again it will also make that characteristic noise.

If you have ptu active and set a green or yellow circuit leak, you can expect PTU going at crazy RPM too 😄

 

Absolutely love this level of physics simulation of individual componentry! Can only imagine how this aircraft is going to progress in next few months, let alone years, given the pace you guys are going.  FBW in no uncertain terms is setting the bar for 3PD payware aircraft to even think about entering the MSFS ecosystem when those 3PDs claim to be high fidelity.

Edited April 25, 2022 by lwt1971

[Crocket 47]

3 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Absolutely love this level of physics simulation of individual componentry! Can only imagine how this aircraft is going to progress in next few months, let alone years, given the pace you guys are going.  FBW in no uncertain terms is setting the bar for 3PD payware aircraft to even think about entering the MSFS ecosystem when they claim to be high fidelity.

Feel free to play around with yellow epump active on ground and moving flight controls or flaps (on latest experimental). Boris made a super job on sounds and this is really sounding super cool.

With gears it's really fun to do the same test as the video here shows off but with new sounds: you can hear electric pump pushing hard and PTU struggling to get that word not allowed gear moving.

 Electric pumps are of course also fully simulated and are rotating through a current controller regulating their speed in real time 😄

Last but not least PTU has now random statistics so that they never have the same characteristics.  In 10 to 20% of cases, you could get a worn out one that could spin continuously when running electric pump instead of doing barks. This is because due to lack of efficiency and internal leaks, it makes it easier to find an equilibrium between yellow and green side torques... This stuff is getting quite complicated as we start to encounter plane engineering issues instead of computer code issues 😛