Have a button for the reversers 

5 hours ago, EnSnellHest said:

What I would like to see:

-more realistic opening/closing of the cargo doors. With sounds.

-possibility to open the bulk cargo door.

Yup, these things could be a bit better than they presently are. There are some airlines which never use the bulk door or the bulk hold, but most airlines do use it; typically for late/gate bags.

For those who don't know, the bulk door is the small cargo door to the rear of the large aft cargo hold door; the bulk door is in fact the only cargo door you can open on an A320 without the aeroplane being powered up (unless you hand crank the hydraulics with a special lever stored in a panel just forward of the main rear hold door, whilst someone holds the door opening lever open, so it's very tedious to open the cargo doors on an A320 without power). The A320 and the 321 have the bulk hold door, whereas the A319 does not have the access door - you access the rear bulk hold on an A319 via the main aft cargo door, with it being separated with a cargo net.

As it stands, there are some texturing errors on the Fenix A320's forward cargo hold (see below for info about what this is). The rear hold of an A320 has four numbered cargo positions, which, from front to rear are always numbered: 31, 32, 33 and 34. On bulk A320s (i.e. ones where loose bags are loaded onto it from trailers up a conveyer belt), each one of these positions can, and usually is, separated from the others with a cargo net. Aft of these four positions is the bulk hold (commonly referred to by most rampies as 'the @rse').

On A320s equipped to carry AKH ULDs (more commonly known as cans), and/or PKZ cargo pallets, each one of those four numbered positions in the rear hold can accommodate a ULD or a pallet; these are locked in place with stop locks on the floor of the hold to prevent them shifting position in flight if there are any empty stations. Any empty cargo station on an aeroplane load plan is referred to as 'nil fit'.

All of these compartments are numbered correctly on the textures in the Fenix A320's rear hold, although the hold itself, and the door, lacks some of the detail found on the real thing, for example there are a bunch of flip up lock controls on the sill of the cargo door surround and on ULD-carrying A320s, there is a powered roller system in the floor with a control for this mounted on the right hand side of the cargo door. The front hold is textured incorrectly however.

Here is the forward cargo door of an A319 which I was loading an AKH ULD into. You can see the A319's hold can only fit two ULDs in it, the first one goes in and is rolled back using the control joystick on the open door which controls the aeroplane's floor rollers, then it is locked into position, then a second ULD can be loaded into the door position:

Below are some of those stop locks on the cargo floor I was on about (the anodised red things in the floor rails) . On this picture you can see that the canvas cover on the side of the ULD has not been fastened correctly and the bags in the ULD have not been well stacked, so one has fallen out, which could potentially have unlatched the lock on the floor, this is very serious as if it had unlocked both of them, the ULD could have rolled back along the fuselage making the plane unbalanced, which is why I took a picture of it so I could report it. You will also notice that there are in fact two stop locks on the floor in this position, which is unique to the A319's rear-most ULD station.

On an A320, there are three cargo stations in the front hold. From front to rear these are numbered 11, 12 and 13. But on the Fenix A320, the textures show four cargo positions, numbered 11, 21, 22 and 23, because of this, they are all slightly too short since they are trying to fit a texture with four stations in a hold where, in reality, there are only three of these. The incorrect numbering seen in the Fenix forward hold is more akin to that seen in an A321, where the forward hold on one of those has five stations (numbered 11, 12, 21, 22 and 23), and five in the rear (numbered 31, 32, 33, 41 and 42). In other words, an A320 can carry seven AKH ULDs or PKZ pallets, plus whatever fits in the rear bulk hold, whereas an A321 can carry ten of them, with five in the front and five in the rear, whereas an A319 can carry four, two in the front, two in the rear. It's an easy fix for Fenix to sort this out by the way - they just need to change the numbers on the textures to fit what I've said here, then crop the image to only be three stations.

For those of you who like all this realistic stuff, when you have all the stations with a ULD or pallet in each, this is called a 'full fit'. For reference, each AKH ULD container is able to hold approximately thirty suitcases, so if you average that out to about 20 kilos per bag, you can get a rough idea of the weight, but don't forget that the ULD container itself weighs 86 kg when empty. On a bulk loadout, where the bags are loaded from a trailer individually from trailers, each trailer can carry approximately 40-50 bags, so you typically see about three or four of these going out to an A320.

If you are curious about what all that AKH and PKZ stuff refers to. These are the identifying letters to show what type of container it is and which aeroplane it will fit into, so with an A320, these use AKH ULD containers. The A. indicates it is a container which is suitable for use on an aeroplane, the K indicates the size of its floor plate footprint so that it will be able to be secured by the locks in the A320's floor, and the H refers to the contour of the ULD, so that it will fit in an A320's fuselage diameter. The larger A330 uses AKE ULDs, so now you know what those letters mean, you know that although these bigger containers have a different contour, they actually have the same size baseplate as the ULDs which go into an A320, which means that the dolly trailers used to ferry these things out to the aeroplanes are able to carry both of these types of ULD because the bottom of them is the same size for both.

All of these ULDs have a unique identifying code on them so this can be indicated on a load plan to tell the rampies which one goes in which position in either the front or rear of the aeroplane to ensure it is properly balanced. The ID number is typically something like AKH66650EI, indicating the type of ULD, a five digit number unique to that ULD, with the last two letters indicating the airline (so AKH66650EI would be an Aer Lingus ULD suitable for use in their A320s and A321s).

Last but not least if you like all this realism for your A320, the A320 can potentially tip onto its tail if loaded incorrectly. This is more of a risk with an A321, but it's not impossible for an A320 to do it. Because of this, you always unload the rear first, then you unload the front, and when you load it, you always load the front first and then the rear. So if you like supervising that on your A320, that's the proper way to do it.

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Chock

2 minutes ago, Chock said:

As it stands, there are some texturing errors on the Fenix A320's forward cargo hold (see below).

But if you hadn't pointed it out no normal mortal would have known? Or cared. 😀

7 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

But if you hadn't pointed it out no normal mortal would have known? Or cared. 😀

Well, if that was true then I doubt anyone would have bought GSX, but they did, didn't they? So obviously some people do care about it being more realistic, and I should think everyone who pays fifty quid for an add-on aeroplane would prefer it to be as correct as it could be, since as noted, it's an easy fix. But if it doesn't bother you personally, then that's great too.

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Chock

1 minute ago, Chock said:

Well, if that was true then I doubt anyone would have bought GSX, but they did, didn't they? So obviously some people do care about it being more realistic, and I should think everyone who pays fifty quid for an add-on aeroplane would prefer it to be as correct as it could be. If it doesn't bother you personally, then that's great too.

I'd say fifty quid, even if the cargo doors are not textured exactly right, is pretty good value compared to paying £100,000,000 for a real one. 😀 Which, if you must have absolute fidelity, you are going to have pay because this is just a piece of software. To my horror I realised, when looking at the galley in the Fenix, that the cupboard doors were not quite right and wouldn't open...

13 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

I'd say fifty quid, even if the cargo doors are not textured exactly right, is pretty good value compared to paying £100,000,000 for a real one. 😀 Which, if you must have absolute fidelity, you are going to have pay because this is just a piece of software. To my horror I realised, when looking at the galley in the Fenix, that the cupboard doors were not quite right and wouldn't open...

I do seem to recall some people being outraged when they realised the doors on that MSFS 737 MAX opened outwards because it was using the logic from the default A320, and we all recall the flak Captain Sim got when their Cripple Seven had PFDs with four engine tapes on them. 🤣

You could always buy an A340 - apparently you can get one of those for about 12 million quid, which is only a bit more than I paid for the FSL A320. 😄

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Chock

4 minutes ago, Chock said:

I do seem to recall some people being outraged when they realised the doors on that MSFS 737 MAX opened outwards because it was using the logic from the default A320. 🤣

There are two planes I have wasted money on in MSFS. The Bredok 737 thing and the Virtualcol Embraer 17... Wait! There are three planes I have wasted money on in MSFS. The Bredok 737 and the Virtualcol Embraer 175 and the Virtualcol Embraer 195.😀 But the Fenix was a bargain.

53 minutes ago, rob0203 said:

Have a button for the reversers 

Yours for just £219 (to be fair, you do get the sidestick controller too):

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Chock

1 hour ago, BIGSKY said:

How many hours do you have on the real Airbus?

LOOOL what a great question!

1 hour ago, Chock said:

Yup, these things could be a bit better than they presently are. There are some airlines which never use the bulk door or the bulk hold, but most airlines do use it; typically for late/gate bags.

For those who don't know, the bulk door is the small cargo door to the rear of the large aft cargo hold door; the bulk door is in fact the only cargo door you can open on an A320 without the aeroplane being powered up (unless you hand crank the hydraulics with a special lever stored in a panel just forward of the main rear hold door, whilst someone holds the door opening lever open, so it's very tedious to open the cargo doors on an A320 without power). The A320 and the 321 have the bulk hold door, whereas the A319 does not have the access door - you access the rear bulk hold on an A319 via the main aft cargo door, with it being separated with a cargo net.

As it stands, there are some texturing errors on the Fenix A320's forward cargo hold (see below for info about what this is). The rear hold of an A320 has four numbered cargo positions, which, from front to rear are always numbered: 31, 32, 33 and 34. On bulk A320s (i.e. ones where loose bags are loaded onto it from trailers up a conveyer belt), each one of these positions can, and usually is, separated from the others with a cargo net. Aft of these four positions is the bulk hold (commonly referred to by most rampies as 'the @rse').

On A320s equipped to carry AKH ULDs (more commonly known as cans), and/or PKZ cargo pallets, each one of those four numbered positions in the rear hold can accommodate a ULD or a pallet; these are locked in place with stop locks on the floor of the hold to prevent them shifting position in flight if there are any empty stations. Any empty cargo station on an aeroplane load plan is referred to as 'nil fit'.

All of these compartments are numbered correctly on the textures in the Fenix A320's rear hold, although the hold itself, and the door, lacks some of the detail found on the real thing, for example there are a bunch of flip up lock controls on the sill of the cargo door surround and on ULD-carrying A320s, there is a powered roller system in the floor with a control for this mounted on the right hand side of the cargo door. The front hold is textured incorrectly however.

Here is the forward cargo door of an A319 which I was loading an AKH ULD into. You can see the A319's hold can only fit two ULDs in it, the first one goes in and is rolled back using the control joystick on the open door which controls the aeroplane's floor rollers, then it is locked into position, then a second ULD can be loaded into the door position:

Below are some of those stop locks on the cargo floor I was on about (the anodised red things in the floor rails) . On this picture you can see that the canvas cover on the side of the ULD has not been fastened correctly and the bags in the ULD have not been well stacked, so one has fallen out, which could potentially have unlatched the lock on the floor, this is very serious as if it had unlocked both of them, the ULD could have rolled back along the fuselage making the plane unbalanced, which is why I took a picture of it so I could report it. You will also notice that there are in fact two stop locks on the floor in this position, which is unique to the A319's rear-most ULD station.

On an A320, there are three cargo stations in the front hold. From front to rear these are numbered 11, 12 and 13. But on the Fenix A320, the textures show four cargo positions, numbered 11, 21, 22 and 23, because of this, they are all slightly too short since they are trying to fit a texture with four stations in a hold where, in reality, there are only three of these. The incorrect numbering seen in the Fenix forward hold is more akin to that seen in an A321, where the forward hold on one of those has five stations (numbered 11, 12, 21, 22 and 23), and five in the rear (numbered 31, 32, 33, 41 and 42). In other words, an A320 can carry seven AKH ULDs or PKZ pallets, plus whatever fits in the rear bulk hold, whereas an A321 can carry ten of them, with five in the front and five in the rear, whereas an A319 can carry four, two in the front, two in the rear. It's an easy fix for Fenix to sort this out by the way - they just need to change the numbers on the textures to fit what I've said here, then crop the image to only be three stations.

For those of you who like all this realistic stuff, when you have all the stations with a ULD or pallet in each, this is called a 'full fit'. For reference, each AKH ULD container is able to hold approximately thirty suitcases, so if you average that out to about 20 kilos per bag, you can get a rough idea of the weight, but don't forget that the ULD container itself weighs 86 kg when empty. On a bulk loadout, where the bags are loaded from a trailer individually from trailers, each trailer can carry approximately 40-50 bags, so you typically see about three or four of these going out to an A320.

If you are curious about what all that AKH and PKZ stuff refers to. These are the identifying letters to show what type of container it is and which aeroplane it will fit into, so with an A320, these use AKH ULD containers. The A. indicates it is a container which is suitable for use on an aeroplane, the K indicates the size of its floor plate footprint so that it will be able to be secured by the locks in the A320's floor, and the H refers to the contour of the ULD, so that it will fit in an A320's fuselage diameter. The larger A330 uses AKE ULDs, so now you know what those letters mean, you know that although these bigger containers have a different contour, they actually have the same size baseplate as the ULDs which go into an A320, which means that the dolly trailers used to ferry these things out to the aeroplanes are able to carry both of these types of ULD because the bottom of them is the same size for both.

All of these ULDs have a unique identifying code on them so this can be indicated on a load plan to tell the rampies which one goes in which position in either the front or rear of the aeroplane to ensure it is properly balanced. The ID number is typically something like AKH66650EI, indicating the type of ULD, a five digit number unique to that ULD, with the last two letters indicating the airline (so AKH66650EI would be an Aer Lingus ULD suitable for use in their A320s and A321s).

Last but not least if you like all this realism for your A320, the A320 can potentially tip onto its tail if loaded incorrectly. This is more of a risk with an A321, but it's not impossible for an A320 to do it. Because of this, you always unload the rear first, then you unload the front, and when you load it, you always load the front first and then the rear. So if you like supervising that on your A320, that's the proper way to do it.

This is awesome stuff to read for someone who used to work as a baggage handler.

Two specific things I remember loading to the rear bulk as well as the late bags. Live animals  (usually bigs dogs in their cages) and human organs (they came packed in the very heavy and slightly radioactive containers).

Edited June 3, 20224 yr by Kopteeni

21 minutes ago, Kopteeni said:

This is awesome stuff to read for someone who used to work as a baggage handler.

Two specific things I remember loading to the rear bulk as well as the late bags. Live animals  (usually bigs dogs in their cages) and human organs (they came packed in the very heavy and slightly radioactive containers).

Hmmm.. so they never modelled dogs and human organs either....

continuance in maintenance is great for a2a and GA aircraft, where you are simulating aircraft ownership, but it would be highly unrealistic in an airliner, because airline pilots don't fly the same plane a lot.  they get off, another crew preps the next flight, and takes off a bit later, and the one you fly after a siesta in a hotel is a completely different bird.  that's what makes the random realistic thing more apt.  what might be entertaining is a slightly different default panel state,  where on early morning flights it's C&D, later it's on a turnaround state, but there is a small chance that certain things might be slightly off,  which would make you pay attention to your preflight more.  cause, you know, maybe maintenance was messing with some things in the cockpit, or the last pilot missed something, etc...  real stuff.

49 minutes ago, Chock said:

Yours for just £219 (to be fair, you do get the sidestick controller too):

Yes, looks great but have a boeing cockpit setup, also flying the Airbus with a yoke.

Like to fly a lot of airplanes!

6 hours ago, ShawnG said:

continuance in maintenance is great for a2a and GA aircraft, where you are simulating aircraft ownership, but it would be highly unrealistic in an airliner, because airline pilots don't fly the same plane a lot.  they get off, another crew preps the next flight, and takes off a bit later, and the one you fly after a siesta in a hotel is a completely different bird.  that's what makes the random realistic thing more apt.  what might be entertaining is a slightly different default panel state,  where on early morning flights it's C&D, later it's on a turnaround state, but there is a small chance that certain things might be slightly off,  which would make you pay attention to your preflight more.  cause, you know, maybe maintenance was messing with some things in the cockpit, or the last pilot missed something, etc...  real stuff.

What you say it is true.. but again.. are we pilots training or players. I own a plane. it is my plane (or my plane purchased) and that is the one I am going to fly it. I understand that are people that make training, but a good number we play.. and in that case there are things different, and I would like to have such features of maintenance for the plane, and I would like to have to option ti activate or deactivate so everybody would be happy about it. 

I also understand the simulation/gameplay in the option to jump into a plane that other "pilot" used before you... so you may find not the same stage of the cockpit everytime.There is a plane that does that. I think it is the Sting S4(?) that simulates it is a aeroclub plane. That option to include would be interesting also.

The doors and all that stuff is good... it is simulation and comes from people that are pilots or near to the real world. I want to have that simulation also, but I need a reason to fly the Fenix or any other plane frequently. A reason to have joy. Not to train anything. I need gameplay, and that comes from Maintenance, passengers behaviours with programs as SLC, FSPassengers or FSCaptain. 

9 hours ago, anden145 said:

I agree. I don't know what is meant by "fix the flight dynamics", but as far as I can see - and from what I've seen in the videos of it - it simulates fly-by-wire correctly and behaves as expected within it's flight envelope... of am I missing something?

You know what, perhaps my comment was a bit harsh and uncalled for. So I apologize.  Im flying the fenix right now in cruise and so far she seems to be dead on in terms of pitch, power, and climb performance.  Lets see how se does during descent and landing.  My last flight definitely felt like it was a bit too easy to slow down compared to what I was used to from the fslabs, but that doesnt mean the fs labs was 100% correct necessarily either.