11 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

with sweeping overhauls instead of minor tweaks.

This actually makes me think, what happened during the initial beta testing before release ? How come a new released product needs an overhaul of the whole system ? I mean i can understand small bugs went overlooked thats normal, but replacing a whole system cause the current one is not good ?  

15 minutes ago, NextGenSimmer said:

Thank you ! 

I really like the product. Its just that some issues are really annoying me. The incorrect VNAV is one of the top ones. 

I am curious, what is incorrect about the vertical navigation?  I find it to be quite good.  SIDS and STARS are followed very well for me.  Is it more of a technical thing?

2 minutes ago, 737_800 said:

What is meant by "display rewrites"?

Is there a more detail list that had been put out on 07/07 ?

If you're asking what the actual 07/07 update was, copy/paste is below... I presume "display rewrites" is related to what he says below about "optimisations to our display tech" which is performance related work probably in how the flight deck displays are updated/refreshed?
 

Aamir — 07/07/2022

Good afternoon @everyone, I’ve put together a quick update about what we’re working on to keep you all abreast of our internal status. It’s worth remembering that what I’m talking about is not by any means an exhaustive list, but it should cover some of the broader areas we’re currently working on.

For the next update:

1) VNAV vertical pathing math has been completely ripped out and replaced with a much more accurate set of algorithms - this was a hefty undertaking in the short space of time that it has been done in, but it has produced some fairly good initial results. The first run of this has entered some light testing, feedback has come through, and we are now on a “revision” cycle with this.

2) On the flight modeling side, we have rewritten the flap lift/drag area to provide better and more realistic results when decelerating the aircraft. Once again, this was a fair amount of work - and all areas of the flap lift/drag were reviewed and worked upon to improve the representation.

3) Rotation and immediate post-rotation behavior was reviewed and adjusted - this is also in a “revision” cycle, awaiting further testing.

4) Engine thrust has been reviewed and adjusted in conjunction with the analysis on post-rotation behavior to find better SRS pitch targets.

5) We’ve overhauled large swathes of the soundscape following feedback from the customer base.

6) There have been a number of visual bug fixes.

7) VR improvements (Dave got a headset and won't stop talking about it)

😎 50+ system bug fixes, crash fixes, error fixes.

We are also working on more substantial product updates such as the external engine model and optimisations to our display tech that will not arrive in the next patch owing to the amount of work required, but will be making its way to you as soon as the respective items are complete and tested properly.

Finally a small company related update - having expanded the number of professional support staff on board, we have now also started to invest in hiring additional developers to work on not only the A320, but future projects!

We’re looking forward to getting this update out to you as soon as it’s ready, and thank you for your patience.

2 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

I am curious, what is incorrect about the vertical navigation?  I find it to be quite good.  SIDS and STARS are followed very well for me.  Is it more of a technical thing?

You didn't noticed how every managed descent are on a shallow path, on the minimum speed frame ? This is confirmed by Fenix devs to be fixed with a new overhauled VNAV system. Aamir actually mentioned this one is a personal pain point for him 🙂 

5 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

I am curious, what is incorrect about the vertical navigation?  I find it to be quite good.  SIDS and STARS are followed very well for me.  Is it more of a technical thing?

AFAIK it likes to lurk around at the lower end of the econ speed bracket during descent, undershooting the target econ descent speed most of the time.

I've never understood the tribalism that occurs around some flight sim aircraft, especially when fans feel obligated to defend a model at all costs and can get rather nasty regarding valid criticism. I hear this is a thing in the wider gaming world too, but simming is the only portion of gaming I'm personally familiar with. 

But I mean... what are you defending?  It's not your work. It doesn't cost you any money if someone else doesn't like it.  Why would you care? 

Yes, the Fenix still needs some significant work to line up with real aircraft behavior. Yes, it's still pretty good in its present state.  And yes, if you're happy with it, no one else's opinion should really matter to you, right? 

17 minutes ago, RTK1972 said:

well, managed speed is with the latest MSFS202 beta no longer working for me. i have to set it manually way below managed speed to not overshoot...

It works, but you need to create a file called content.xml with the lines below in it and place it in your "C:\Users\<Your-UserName>\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\" folder (before you launch the sim).

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<content>
<Package name="fnx-aircraft-320" Active="true"/>
</content>

1 minute ago, Stearmandriver said:

I've never understood the tribalism that occurs around some flight sim aircraft, especially when fans feel obligated to defend a model at all costs and can get rather nasty regarding valid criticism. I hear this is a thing in the wider gaming world too, but simming is the only portion of gaming I'm personally familiar with. 

 

Its not so bad on MSFS forums, I even quite enjoy that forum TBH. Its an Avsim thing... the more "advanced" members of us know it 🙂 

4 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

I've never understood the tribalism that occurs around some flight sim aircraft, especially when fans feel obligated to defend a model at all costs and can get rather nasty regarding valid criticism. I hear this is a thing in the wider gaming world too, but simming is the only portion of gaming I'm personally familiar with. 

But I mean... what are you defending?  It's not your work. It doesn't cost you any money if someone else doesn't like it.  Why would you care? 

Yes, the Fenix still needs some significant work to line up with real aircraft behavior. Yes, it's still pretty good in its present state.  And yes, if you're happy with it, no one else's opinion should really matter to you, right? 

It's not valid criticism when it isn't true.  Just because the developer may not be going fast enough for someone, doesn't mean they've taken your money and ran.

Why not just let them work and get it right?  They can't reply to every single question over and over again every second of the day.

There is nothing wrong with their communication.  

7 minutes ago, roi1862 said:

Its not so bad on MSFS forums, I even quite enjoy that forum TBH. Its an Avsim thing... the more "advanced" members of us know it 🙂 

That’s very true. 
This stupid bashing is an Avsim thing. 
 

Mimimi PMDG bad 

mimimi Fenix bad

mimimi Discord bad

mimimi ……..

 

And i am sitting here enjoying the Fenix and the PMDG in the best sim we ever had. 

16 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

But I mean... what are you defending?  It's not your work. It doesn't cost you any money if someone else doesn't like it.  Why would you care?

I could flip that on it's head and asked why the OP would think that a bunch of people who are happy with their airplanes would care that they aren't. Why would WE care?

As a general statement NOT related to the OP of this particular topic. I find some of the childish, entitled, angry, loud, petulant complaints that I read on here to be utterly revolting. I'm not sure when it became so common for some to think that such behavior was either acceptable or productive, but it is not. Civilized discussion and proper reporting of valid issues are acceptable and are more likely to get the response the person is expecting. 

This whole thread is not about whether or not Fenix will be providing an update. They clearly are working on an extensive list. The aircraft flies acceptably in it's current state. So the gist is he is telling Fenix to "work faster". I'm shocked that Amir hasn't personally told him to pound sand on Discord. I certainly would have.

Edited August 17, 20223 yr by MDFlier

1 minute ago, MySound said:

That’s very true. 
This stupid bashing is an Avsim thing. 
 

Mimimi PMDG bad 

mimimi Fenix bad

mimimi Discord bad

mimimi ……..

 

And i am sitting here enjoying the Fenix and the PMDG in the best sim we ever had. 

We are all happy that you are happy 🙂

3 minutes ago, MDFlier said:

 

This whole thread is not about whether or not Fenix will be providing an update. They clearly are working on an extensive list. The aircraft flies acceptably in it's current state. So the gist is he is telling Fenix to "work faster". I'm shocked that Amir hasn't personally told him to pound sand on Discord. I certainly would have.

As a customer he is entitled to voice his opinion. Even if you don't like it or agree with it. 

"Pound sand" what does that even means ? Ohh ok I googled it, basically its "get lost". Why would Aamir will speak like that to one of his customers ?  

7 minutes ago, roi1862 said:

As a customer he is entitled to voice his opinion. Even if you don't like it or agree with it. 

"Pound sand" what does that even means ? Ohh ok I googled it, basically its "get lost". Why would Aamir will speak like that to one of his customers ?  

I have no problem with any valid opinion. Read what I said. Delivery is everything.

I guess I have made an assumption that the OP was/is the same person who asks Amir that same question in the same manner every day on Discord. If they aren't, then Amir shouldn't tell him to pound sand. But he SHOULD tell that other person to do so.

Edited August 17, 20223 yr by MDFlier

😅😅😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣