Fenix is the one I have the most fun with, but it’s a narrow margin over the others.  
 

Apart from being generally really well done, I’ve always really enjoyed the Airbus flying philosophy. 

Edited June 23, 20223 yr by regis9

100% 737 because....it’s the only one I’ve got😃. It’s also the first serious tube liner I’ve flown so I’ve got my hands full at the moment but it’s a lot of fun and it also works really well with my Neolithic pc🙃

 

All great aircraft in their own way, but for FUN? I'd have to go with the Maddog. It's an idiosyncratic mix of old and new with lots of quirks and surprises to keep a pilot on his toes. Every flight is a bit of an adventure. That's fun!

If you have a nice yoke (Thrustmaster Boeing, etc), the 737 is a blast fly.  If you only use a joystick then the 320 might be a better purchase.  Both are great and I go back and forth between them both.  I had the MD80 in P3D and it took a lot of study to learn.  If I did not fly it for a while I would forgot how to fly it.  As the MD-80's are disappearing IRL, I did not bother getting it for MSFS but it was a very complete and impressive simulation in P3D...

Edited June 23, 20223 yr by Flic1

Didnt purchase the MD for reasons stated in another thread.

Flying the 737 and really enjoying it. Considering the similarity of the Fenix and the FBW NEO i have not been spending as much time with them as the workflows are similar and there's not much new to learn if doing a typical flight on my end. Whereby there is more to do and learn with the 737 so that AC gets most of my time these days. I guess when i master the typical flows then ill start looking at failures with both.

Considering being a bit of a purist I'm looking forward to the 800 and on the Fenix side the IAE engines and winglets to round out the short haul fleet with the liveries i want to use.

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

They are on Discord constantly, working on some bugs and taking input for features users would like to be added. Don't know of any other developer that is so active talking with users. 

I meant more in terms of announcements and patches. Like, I can't save options in the EFB. Why is that basic functionality still broken? Then there are the much bigger items like the fact that the engine model is totally off and will need to be entirely replaced. I just worry that this is a new dev team that has bitten off more than they can chew. 

Honestly, I think the FBW A32NX takes some beating, yes the others mentioned are amazing (I have them and fly a couple of them everyday). The FBW isn't that far off study level, comes with an amazing EFB and not only do you get this cake! You can eat it as well, because it's fun and free.

https://flybywiresim.com/

P.S. It's also the only one with a dedicated co-pilot if you splash out for FS2Crew

Edited June 23, 20223 yr by SierraHotel

26 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

I meant more in terms of announcements and patches. Like, I can't save options in the EFB. Why is that basic functionality still broken? Then there are the much bigger items like the fact that the engine model is totally off and will need to be entirely replaced. I just worry that this is a new dev team that has bitten off more than they can chew. 

What they have bitten off is far better than anything else on MSFS....

7 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Yup agree with Bob... if you're not particular about specific airliner types and ops, then the Fenix A320 is the best out there for MSFS currently. It is also the one that has taken the most advantage of the MSFS platform from visuals inside and out, to spatial soundscapes, to flight dynamics, systems, etc. But if you're very particular about flying the "more manual way" in Boeings rather than "fly by wire", then the PMDG 737 is for you (IMO it only lacks in interior visuals vs the Fenix, LNAV not as good, and also has no EFB currently but that's all being fixed for free soon).  If you like old school flying then it's the MD80

They are all good, but I wouldn't describe the MD-80 as old school - moving map, fmc, auto throttle etc. 

If you actually want some more manual fun, rather than push some buttons and watch it fly itself,  then go for the Just Flight BAe 146. No auto throttle, no moving map and a 'sync' function - engage sync so flight surfaces disconnect from autopilot, pitch up/down to change rate of climb or speed then disengage sync.  It flies beautifully but you do have to plan and think more to be accurate.

Edited June 23, 20223 yr by MrBitstFlyer

4 hours ago, Torsen said:

These two are actual pilot planes needing more "flying" skills than "managing"

Completely agree with you. You often can't just press a button on the 146 to change something, you have to have a good think about it first.  The sync function is really nice.  For example, if you are descending at 700ft per minute, but you want to descend at 1000ft per minute, you engage sync.  Sync disconnects the flight surfaces from the autopilot (which is still engaged).  You then manually fly the aircraft by pitching down until you are descending at 1000ft per minute.  You press sync again to re-connect the flying surfaces to the autopilot which will maintain the 1000ft per minute descent.

I own all four of the 'study level' airliners and love them all, but when I want to fly, rather than manage, its the 146!

2 hours ago, Chapstick said:

I meant more in terms of announcements and patches. Like, I can't save options in the EFB. Why is that basic functionality still broken? Then there are the much bigger items like the fact that the engine model is totally off and will need to be entirely replaced. I just worry that this is a new dev team that has bitten off more than they can chew. 

I can save options in the EFB just fine. You probably think they are saved in general, but they are saved per-livery. So you'll have to set them for every livery. So it's not broken, just differently working. That's why you should contact the developer to clarify before coming to a forum and (falsely) claiming that "basic functionality" is "still broken".
Also the engine model is not "totally off", unless by "totally" you mean 6% less fuel burn on cruise altitude and too much thrust in the first climb phase.

Actually I think it's in an astonishingly good shape for the deepest and most detailed product on MSFS and - on top of that - by an entirely new developer.

6 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Also the engine model is not "totally off", unless by "totally" you mean 6% less fuel burn on cruise altitude and too much thrust in the first climb phase.

And way too much drag on descent...and way off on the pitch/power curve...

or else why would they even bother to completely re-model the engine. 

Did you ever attempt to land it with a x-wind > 10?

Heh, don't get me started... 🙂

 

Edited June 23, 20223 yr by ha5mvo

32 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I can save options in the EFB just fine. You probably think they are saved in general, but they are saved per-livery. So you'll have to set them for every livery. 

I understand how it's supposed to work, and that's not how it's working on my end. 

28 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

And way too much drag on descent...and way off on the pitch/power curve...

or else why would they even bother to completely re-model the engine. 

Did you ever attempt to land it with a x-wind > 10?

Heh, don't get me started... 🙂

 

Yeah, it's more than just fuel burn. 

Thankfully, the Fenix devs themselves are way more receptive to feedback than their fans...

56 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

 

Thankfully, the Fenix devs themselves are way more receptive to feedback than their fans...

haha that is a very true statement

3 hours ago, ha5mvo said:

Heh, don't get me started..

Please don't get started