Fenix A320 - Engine-out weirdiness...

[jcomm]

Well, I took the plunge and bought it 🙂

After the install night, a couple days ago, I watched a few videos ( the FSElite Tutorials are really good for Install & Conf ) and last night went for a short hop from Faro ( LPFR ) to Lisboa ( LPPT ).

I used the EFB on an external device - Surface 3 Pro - and loaded the aircraft in the state where it's being feed by the CART and PAC.

All went well, it's very well done and I really love the functionality of the EFB, and the way I have to type some data into the MCDU instead of magically clicking a LSK and miraculously but irrealistically having it done for me.... 

Graphics and smoothness wise it's a very good addon too. While I did experience a CTD the first time I loaded it and after changging severeal times to external view ( END ) these turn around it was uneventful, from Faro to Lisboa with many END / END view transitions...

This turn around ( thx as per the FSElite tutorial suggestions ) I installed a 4k livery instead of the default offer for 8k.

I disbled cabin graphics and lighting - I have no use for that sort of details...

Nice feel of flight although It felt it a bit strange on takeoff - continuous pitch rate input required to maintain the correct initial climb attitude after rotating, which I believe should not be the case, specially if I compare it to the Toliss A319 or even the FSL A319 / 20, and my own CAE FFS experience around 2002...

Liked the VNAV / LNAV behaviour and how it tried to follow the route and the associated constraints, although it failled speeds here & there...

Landed safely & nicelly at LPPT 02, and decided to try a go-arround by setting TOGA, retracting flaps to 1+S and then.... aove 400', failling the left engine...

Well, engine shutdown ( by switching off the Left Engine Master Switch - LEMC ) worked very strange in all sorts of ways, from the indications on the upper and lower ECAMs to the aerodynamics of an asymmetric thrust scenario:

.) the shutdown engine continued to show the very same TOGA N1, as if the engine was working perfectly, although the lower ECAM already displayed the correct items for suh a situation;

.) there was practically no indication of sideslip due to the failled engine on port side, the skid cue was correctly displayed in blue while configured with flaps, slats and gear BUT it was pretty much centered.

.) aerodynamically the model sometimes did exhibit rolling and yawing moments, but these weren't correctly displayed in the EFIS...

It appears to me that this aircraft, just like the FBW A320, are "victims" of the rather poor FBW modelling that comes with MFS. In using the default MFS FM they are probably setting that flag in the flight_dynamics.cfg to "FBW= Yes" and thus end up behaving as bad as the default A320 under abnormal situations like thse due to asymmetric thrust.

Hope they can find a way arround this.

Overall, I like it, but not as much as I do the Toliss A319 - that is still my reference in terms of "feel of airbus flight", less when exposed to the weird XP11 turbulence and wind variability, which will probably be fixed with XP12...  

Would like to see Fenix ported to X-Plane !

[omarsmak30]

7 minutes ago, jcomm said:

It appears to me that this aircraft, just like the FBW A320, are victims of the rather poor FBW modelling that comes with MFS. In using the default MFS FM they are probably setting that flag in the flight_dynamics.cfg to "FBW= Yes" and thus end up behaving as bad as the default A320 under abnormal situations like thse due to asymmetric thrust.

FBW nor Fenix are using the default FBW provided by MSFS. Is all custom

[jarmstro]

17 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Would like to see Fenix ported to X-Plane !

Why? What would be the point?

[jcomm]

14 minutes ago, omarsmak30 said:

FBW nor Fenix are using the default FBW provided by MSFS. Is all custom

Hmmm, then there's something wrong with it too, even more in the Fenix when it comes to asymmetric flight ( manual or managed ).

[jcomm]

7 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Why? What would be the point?

Being able to use the ProSIM featues in X-Plane, for those who have ProSIM-based cockpits...

 

[omarsmak30]

7 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Hmmm, then there's something wrong with it too, even more in the Fenix when it comes to asymmetric flight ( manual or managed ).

Not that I noticed (I am not a real life pilot by all mean), perhaps is settings issue? No idea, perhaps experts here can provide more info 

[psychedelic_tortilla]

Concerning the non-existent N1 drop, that is not something I have observed. N1 on the failed engine dropped pretty much immediately. Maybe you've selected the compressor stall failure option? The one I've tried was ENG FAIL/DMG.

[jarmstro]

8 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Being able to use the ProSIM featues in X-Plane, for those who have ProSIM-based cockpits...

 

Well I doubt there are enough of those to make it viable. Anyway they can just buy MSFS if they want to use the Fenix. The two together total £110 which is about the price I paid for the Toliss plus engine options if I remember correctly.

[jcomm]

Just now, psychedelic_tortilla said:

Concerning the non-existent N1 drop, that is not something I have observed. N1 on the failed engine dropped pretty much immediately. Maybe you've selected the compressor stall failure option? The one I've tried was ENG FAIL/DMG.

Nope, I simply switched off the Left Engine Master switch...

[jarmstro]

5 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Nope, I simply switched off the Left Engine Master switch...

Report it to Fenix on their Discord. Their customer feedback responsiveness has been excellent. It won't get fixed here. 

[psychedelic_tortilla]

3 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Nope, I simply switched off the Left Engine Master switch...

Hmmm, that's really not how you'd evaluate the OEO case in an A320. If you switch off the ENG Master, only fuel flow is cut off. The N1 is going to stay high for quite a while, simply due to windmilling by the airflow into the engine and the inertia still provided by the spinning turbine. That is also the reason why you don't get much yaw forces, the engine is still producing a lot of thrust for quite a while (since most of the thrust is generated by bypass air, not airflow from the hot section).

An actual ENG FAIL has a whole different dynamic, since the underlying cause is most likely not fuel starvation, but mechanical failure, which leads to much more rapid N1 drops and thus yawing action. To evaluate that, try the failure option in the MCDU.

[jcomm]

Just now, psychedelic_tortilla said:

Hmmm, that's really not how you'd evaluate the OEO case in an A320. If you switch off the ENG Master, only fuel flow is cut off. The N1 is going to stay

Yes, but not at TOGA N1 🙂

[DEHowie]

Its been discussed the Fenix has a pile of realism issues ranging from small to huge.Single engine wise the pitch attitudes Fenix use are nothing near the 12 degrees used by the real aircraft. Im quite staggered that other real world pilots have remained completely silent about large obvious errors ANy Airbus pilot would immediately recognize.

if they are not commenting they either fail to understand some of the most basic performance based attitudes every Airbus pilot MUST know or they are remaining silent for another more obvious reason..

[craigeaglefire]

5 minutes ago, DEHowie said:

or they are remaining silent for another more obvious reason..

must be a sinister conspiracy;)

[psychedelic_tortilla]

Yes, the infamous "Fenix OEO pitch attitude" conspiracy. "Pitch-up-gate", we conspirators call it.