FSLabs and Fenix Sim Airbus A320's.

[Nyxx 6,993]

38 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

But it should still be well within Fenix's control to improve/override even ground handling (which many reviewers have said are pretty good) and especially anything above ground like flare logic... don't think that's an Asobo constraint.  Why exactly do you find wrong with Fenix's flare logic?

for a start along these lines...

In flight mode the stick commands a load-factor. Which means it will be impossible to flare the aircraft, because as you pull on the stick, you'll be commanding a positive g-load.

Because of this the Airbus has a flare mode which activates at 50' RA. At 50' the pitch angle is stored (memorized). At 30' the aircraft commands a 2° nose down (it takes 8 seconds). The pilot would gently counter this by pulling back, resulting in a nice flare and no increase in the auto-thrust.

If the pilot did not float for way too long (they should not), the plane will touchdown before the 8 seconds pass, further eliminating the need to push forward on the stick to keep the nose gear planted.

The logic reverts to ground mode when two conditions are met: on ground for 5 seconds and pitch angle <2.5°.

If the 5 seconds pass and the nose is still +2.5°, the logic will remain in the flare mode and the THS will not reset to 0°. The pitch will revert to the one set at 50'. As the plane continues to slow down this may result in a nasty nose landing gear slam or a tail strike depending on the stored pitch angle and any gusts.

In short its a clever bottom thats imo makes the boeing NG a far better airframe to land. The Bus is a totaly diffrent feel and should feel very diffrent to an NG to land.

But once you "get it" its fine, the FSL had it perfect. Who thought a aircraft pitching itself down on landing was a good idea 🤪so your "flare" is more like counteracting the aircraft pitching down 🤪

Edited May 21, 2022 by Nyxx

[Scottoest 1,561]

Not really gonna weigh in on this question other than to say:

1) The Fenix actually exists in MSFS, so trying to rank the two seems inherently fruitless because the sandbox each plane runs in is very different - the comparison is very asynchronous.  If you're using MSFS, it's not like you have a choice between the two either.

2) The Fenix is about two days old.  Let's give them a chance roll out some waves of patches and updates, the same as FSL has for years.

Actual 320 pilots have glowed about how great they think the Fenix look and feels to fly, and that ultimately matters to me more than a blurry line where it is declared "better" than FSL's product.

[Nyxx 6,993]

6 minutes ago, Scottoest said:

Not really gonna weigh in on this question other than to say:

1) The Fenix actually exists in MSFS, so trying to rank the two seems inherently fruitless because the sandbox each plane runs in is very different - the comparison is very asynchronous.  If you're using MSFS, it's not like you have a choice between the two either.

2) The Fenix is about two days old.  Let's give them a chance roll out some waves of patches and updates, the same as FSL has for years.

Actual 320 pilots have glowed about how great they think the Fenix look and feels to fly, and that ultimately matters to me more than a blurry line where it is declared "better" than FSL's product.

The Fenix is fine. 🙂 👍

 

[320Driver 63]

36 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Why exactly do you find wrong with Fenix's flare logic?

it doesn't seem to be implemented at all. I don't notice the flare mode at all. As @Nyxx has written further above, it actiivates at 50´ and at 30' the aircraft should command a 2° nose down including a transition normal law to direct law. You would then apply back pressure like landing a conventional aircraft.  

My Fenix A320 flares itself without touching anything, any back pressure leads to a looong float.

FSL has that correctly implemented.

 

Edited May 21, 2022 by 320Driver

[lwt1971 7,417]

6 minutes ago, 320Driver said:

it doesn't seem to be implemented at all. I don't notice the flare mode at all. As @Nyxx has written further above, at 30' the aircraft should command a 2° nose down including a transition normal law to direct law. You would then apply back pressure like landing a conventional aircraft.  

My Fenix A320 flares itself without touching anything, any back pressure leads to a looong float.

FSL has that correctly implemented.

 

Maybe it's due to MSFS's at-times excessive ground effect, would be interesting to see how FSLab's aircrafts exhibit flare behaviour in MSFS. Don't believe I saw any of the IRL airbus/320 pilots reviewing the Fenix mention this.. given all their glowing praise for its flight model and handling/aerodynamics one would've thought they'd have noticed if flare mode is not implemented at all?.

Perhaps @Aamir can chime in? 

Edited May 21, 2022 by lwt1971

[Nyxx 6,993]

5 minutes ago, 320Driver said:

it doesn't seem to be implemented at all. I don't notice the flare mode at all. As @Nyxx has written further above, at 30' the aircraft should command a 2° nose down including a transition normal law to direct law. You would then apply back pressure like landing a conventional aircraft.  

My Fenix A320 flares itself without touching anything, any back pressure leads to a looong float.

FSL has that correctly implemented.

 

What we dont know is it a MSFS problem as I feel Prosim would have it.

[Bernard Ducret 790]

9 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I am seeing more and more comments, consistent with yours that the Fenix A320 is better than the FSLabs A320!

With due respect, this is not what I implied or inferred, I could not, simply because I don't own the Fenix A320, so how could I write such a thing?

[MySound 403]

Just bought the Fenix and I am on my first flight.

After reading here this should have been mind blowing. But really? Compared to the FBW I could have saved the 60€. I mean it's very nice. But I dont care if I can move the jumpseat or the window. For my personal purpose it diesnt offer much more than the FBW.

Edited May 21, 2022 by MySound

[320Driver 63]

16 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Don't believe I saw any of the IRL airbus/320 pilots reviewing the Fenix mention this.. given all their glowing praise for its flight model and handling/aerodynamics one would've thought they'd have noticed if flare mode is not implemented at all?.

Well, I watched some streams and several landings I have seen would have certainly raised fleet captain eyebrows. 🙂

[320Driver 63]

32 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

What we dont know is it a MSFS problem as I feel Prosim would have it.

Don't overestimate Prosim though, just because it has an expensive price tag. What I have seen one year ago was embarrassing at best. Their A320 didn't feel like an A320 at all, it was a weird Boeing/Airbus ("Boebus") mixture and add to that several basics completely wrong, e.g. engine out behaviour. They had a monopoly in that market for years and could sell everything. Also their certifications mean nothing, as the subject we are talking about here doesn't get evaluated at all.

I have seen a Prosim A320 easily climb to FL500 in MSFS, if that might say something ...

Edited May 21, 2022 by 320Driver

[SAS443 1,723]

1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

so your "flare" is more like counteracting the aircraft pitching down 🤪

Just like how a conventional airplane would behave. But there you are counteracting an increasing offset from trimmed airspeed (read *nose gets more heavy") + engine pitch coupling.

I also experiended the same as @320Driver, my first landing was quite a floater, it felt totally different than the FSL Airbus (where you got punished for retarding too early).  

 

[tweekz 2,165]

9 hours ago, 320Driver said:

Ermmm, I am seeing not authentic display fonts, pitch attitudes of 19deg during initial climb, fuel flows around 800 during cruise, a questionable landing behaviour (AC almost flares itself). Sure this might eventually be fixed with custom flight/engine models in the future. But how on earth can people rate Fenix better at that point ?

Abnormals seem to be more comprehensive in the Fenix, but who has evaluated them all yet ?

Also don't forget the many innovations FSL came up with, e.g. winter operations with first serious icing simulation. I have yet to see this kind of innovations in the Fenix.

Don't get me wrong, the Fenix is a very nice product at that price tag. Just these kind of "Better than..." statements are useless at that point.

A320 pilots across the board, even coming from XP are extremely happy, calling it the new benchmark for flight simulation. It'll do for me, even if it is barely acceptable for you. 😉

Edited May 21, 2022 by tweekz

[lwt1971 7,417]

24 minutes ago, 320Driver said:

Well, I watched some streams and several landings I have seen would have certainly raised fleet captain eyebrows. 🙂

Hmm just read initial bits of this thread... well I guess given your opinions about MSFS / P3D / FSL here https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/619324-fslabs-and-fenix-sim-airbus-a320s/?do=findComment&comment=4778890 ,

compared to a great majority of actual A320/airbus captains/FO who're also veteran simmers who say this https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/619324-fslabs-and-fenix-sim-airbus-a320s/?do=findComment&comment=4778988 here, 

... you can guess which I'm going to give much more weight to :) ... obviously you're entitled to your own opinions as are we all, and these IRL pilots ... let's just leave it at that.

Edited May 21, 2022 by lwt1971

[tweekz 2,165]

33 minutes ago, MySound said:

Just bought the Fenix and I am on my first flight.

After reading here this should have been mind blowing. But really? Compared to the FBW I could have saved the 60€. I mean it's very nice. But I dont care if I can move the jumpseat or the window. For my personal purpose it diesnt offer much more than the FBW.

While the FBW is an awesome project, it is in no way comparable to the Fenix. I constantly had problems intercepting ILS and with power management, doing weird stuff. Yesterday in the Fenix, it was a real treat - the plane flew itself perfectly to what I programmed.

[Nyxx 6,993]

15 minutes ago, tweekz said:

While the FBW is an awesome project, it is in no way comparable to the Fenix. I constantly had problems intercepting ILS and with power management, doing weird stuff. Yesterday in the Fenix, it was a real treat - the plane flew itself perfectly to what I programmed.

I remember topic's when people said the Aerosoft Bus was great and wish they had not bought the FSL. Its pointless even pointing out what you know...just smile to yourself I find best. Each to there own as they say. 🙂

The FBW is imo far better then the Aerosoft one was, unless a coffee with a big smily face in it make it the must have. I am sure it is for some. The FBW is great and for free, is stunning. 

If people find the FBW bus suits there needs and have no wish for more then without question they should not buy the Fenix.

Some people want no more than a Ford, some want a BMW, some want a RR. If the only thing that matter is getting you from A to B then the Ford is perfect.😉 

Edited May 21, 2022 by Nyxx