10 hours ago, Zimmerbz said:

Just curious what everyone thinks is a good landing.... I've heard anything under 500fpm, anything under 250, or anything you can walk away from is good. When evaluating your landings, what do you all think is good?  I shoot for anything under 300 fpm and in the touchdown zone.  

If you can still use the aircraft the day after, the landing was good enough 😉

Seriously, though, I saw a video on youtube showing main gear vibrating badly (shimmy) during a very soft  touchdown. The aircraft in question was a 737 but it might be the same for the bus. 

I aim for an FPM of between 100 and 200 and this seems to be soft enough not to bounce, in the sim at least.

I only have about 110 hours in real world on Piper Warrior and Cessna 152 combined, so don't know if this is a good landing rate for a tube liner. Maybe a fully grown pilot could comment?

Stu

1 hour ago, Ridvan Celik said:

A couple versions ago definitely was not realistic. They have tweaked it and now seems to be spot on. You just need to re adjust how you land it. 

Did you even read my post further than the first line?

15 hours ago, F737MAX said:

😄 I like this team.

A lot of areas of improvement that will hopefully make their A320 really enjoyable again and some notable small additions that will make it shine even greater.

Yes, it's a great team.
Not just for their superb Airbus but also for their sense of humor.
You have to be quite quirky to dare that:

• The name "Airbus" is actually derived from the combinations of the words "air" and "bus".
• Dave has stolen this loading tip to tell you the BAe ATP is brilliant.
• The wings are a vital part to creating lift.
• Over 1000 people fly on airplanes every day.
• There are at least several international airports.
• Due to a bug with Fenix some loading tips can be cut short even if t
• A lot of people believe the Wright Brothers were the first to make powered flight but birds and some dinosaurs beat them to it.
• The A320 is built using 89% aeroplane and just 11% aircraft.

😄

I quite enjoyed the new deck angle on climb out… very nice! Hand flying Fifi is now as expected and very enjoyable. I had some moderate turbulence leaving SDF last night and the inertia feel was very good. The flight deck ambiance improvements were also appreciated.

The issues of needing multiple presses on the Fenix Pushback “Stop” still remains, as does the reluctance to “star” the Ground Chart but I’m sure will be solved.

A really meaningful update- BZ! Now, where’s my remote CDU? 😉

C

14 hours ago, Aamir said:

If it needs to slew the aircraft for any reason, it will. Currently we disable the brake simulation when the GSX pushback is detected. If the pushback is completed and during disconnect if the aircraft is moved for whatever reason

GSX never sets the airplane in Slew in MSFS, only in FSX or P3D, but we couldn't do that in MSFS, because whenever the airplane is set in Slew mode in MSFS, the Camera automatically switches to the "Slew Camera", which is quite annoying and would made working with the editors impossible.

Instead of Slew, we disable the simulation in every situation we need to be sure the airplane doesn't move on its own, like when editing a parking, editing the airplane profile itself, or very briefly when using the "Warp me" function to instantly move to another parking, or when lowering/raising the plane when using a Towbarless truck, which doesn't really move the airplane, but only affects its pitch.

You can detect when this happens by checking the standard "SIM DISABLED" SimVar, if it's 1, it means we temporarily disabled the simulation, because we either need to keep the airplane in place, or we need to move it, for example during a Warp.

Sometimes we also "freeze" the airplane (not necessarily always together with "disabling" its simulation ), by setting the following SimVars to 1:

IS LATITUDE LONGITUDE FREEZE ON
IS ALTITUDE FREEZE ON
IS ATTITUDE FREEZE ON

Note that, you can't be sure it's GSX that set those to 1, because they are also set by the standard "Active Pause" function.

4 minutes ago, virtuali said:

GSX never sets the airplane in Slew in MSFS, only in FSX or P3D, but we couldn't do that in MSFS, because whenever the airplane is set in Slew mode in MSFS, the Camera automatically switches to the "Slew Camera", which is quite annoying and would made working with the editors impossible.

Instead of Slew, we disable the simulation in every situation we need to be sure the airplane doesn't move on its own, like when editing a parking, editing the airplane profile itself, or very briefly when using the "Warp me" function to instantly move to another parking, or when lowering/raising the plane when using a Towbarless truck, which doesn't really move the airplane, but only affects its pitch.

You can detect when this happens by checking the standard "SIM DISABLED" SimVar, if it's 1, it means we temporarily disabled the simulation, because we either need to keep the airplane in place, or we need to move it, for example during a Warp.

Sometimes we also "freeze" the airplane (not necessarily always together with "disabling" its simulation ), by setting the following SimVars to 1:

IS LATITUDE LONGITUDE FREEZE ON
IS ALTITUDE FREEZE ON
IS ATTITUDE FREEZE ON

Note that, you can't be sure it's GSX that set those to 1, because they are also set by the standard "Active Pause" function.

 

Ok, thanks for that - I'll make the required changes and disable the brake simulation for all these cases too. I'm not too worried about the brake simulation being switched off during Active Pause, at least on first glance. I'll see if any unexpected MSFS'isms occur when we do this, though.

3 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

I'd appreciate them not changing flare every two weeks. It was realistic a couple of versions ago, and then they started tweaking it to please everyone. That's okay, you want to make this accessible and non-frustrating for everyone, but then please stick with a setting, so people can adjust and learn it. I'm getting tired of knowing that I'll not do a smooth landing just because some little variable changed again and my muscle memory will be playing tricks on me again. Who knows, might even be a nocebo effect, but still the cause is those frequent tweaks to it.
Apart from that I'm all for constant updates.

I respectfully disagree. We are unequivocally not making changes to make the aircraft more accessible and non-frustrating. We're making changes to the aircraft to make it more realistic and true to the characteristics of the actual thing. At the end of the day, FLARE moved backwards instead of forwards in the last couple of updates due to unrelated changes in flap lift - this had a knock on effect. We could leave it be and just go: "It is what it is, deal with it.", but that's not really in the spirit of continued forward development. Things will change from time to time as we learn more about MSFS's aero engine that will allow us to exploit and find more areas we can bring our virtual airplane closer to the real beast - in this case it moved backward at first, then forwards. All said and done about wind changes and whatnot, mea culpa. But I would rather make these changes than just live with something that is a sub-par experience. 

Here is a nice overview of how Blackbox, a type rated line captain on the A320, feels about the latest changes: https://clips.twitch.tv/EnchantingPopularVelociraptorSoonerLater-Ry3uTevTWCjnHrM0

At the end of the day, I appreciate the basic sentiment of your message, however. Thankfully, we don't plan to change FLARE much past what we've done now. I think it's in a good spot now. 

7 hours ago, Maxis said:

I take it screen corruption is still a thing if you are in the SU11 beta ? Took her out of the hangar but she got wheeled back in after realizing the backup instruments were inop (garbled)

despite what I said above it just happend again at KORD. Interestingly I let the Fenix sit there for maybe 2-3 minutes since I had to do some (home office) work simultaneously and - magic - the display error cured itself, see the 2 pics... now don't ask me why but if this happens - and you bring some patience - the just let it sit for few minutes and see whether that helps...

2 hours ago, Aamir said:

I respectfully disagree. We are unequivocally not making changes to make the aircraft more accessible and non-frustrating. We're making changes to the aircraft to make it more realistic and true to the characteristics of the actual thing. At the end of the day, FLARE moved backwards instead of forwards in the last couple of updates due to unrelated changes in flap lift - this had a knock on effect. We could leave it be and just go: "It is what it is, deal with it.", but that's not really in the spirit of continued forward development. Things will change from time to time as we learn more about MSFS's aero engine that will allow us to exploit and find more areas we can bring our virtual airplane closer to the real beast - in this case it moved backward at first, then forwards. All said and done about wind changes and whatnot, mea culpa. But I would rather make these changes than just live with something that is a sub-par experience.

So I understood correctly that you actually wanted to fix another thing and this had a knock on effect on the flare, so you had to re-fix that again? Of course that's another story then, I was thinking it was a deliberate change.
Anyway I think there's no ultimate tweak for the flare, just because people have vastly different hardware and sensitivity settings. The most realistic tweak for people with a dampened joystick could be the most frustrating tweak for some persons that use a yoke and so on. Quite a rabbit hole.

Well, two landings in I would like to say it feels way easier to NOT slam the thing into the ground.. 😉

 

16 minutes ago, Swe_Richard said:

Well, two landings in I would like to say it feels way easier to NOT slam the thing into the ground.. 😉

 

Could you test an x-wind autoland please?

Maybe picking something easy to setup in MFS with a published ILS approach and gusts as per BadBadWeather 🙂

A video would be the cherry on top of the cake 😉

5 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Did you even read my post further than the first line?

I  read your post. The issue is that the original version was fairly easy to land, but then an SU hit, and some issues affecting the landing, made it suddenly problematic. People got used to the messed up landing characteristic, and a few even said that they thought it was fine, bur many including actual A 320 pilots said it was not right. It seems that this last hotfix, and rectified the problems, and now it seems to be much better regarding it's landing performance. 

4 hours ago, DAD said:

despite what I said above it just happend again at KORD. Interestingly I let the Fenix sit there for maybe 2-3 minutes since I had to do some (home office) work simultaneously and - magic - the display error cured itself, see the 2 pics... now don't ask me why but if this happens - and you bring some patience - the just let it sit for few minutes and see whether that helps...

Ill try it when i get home but it didnt even look as good as yours did .. It was a garbled mess. But ill will try waiting it out and see. Meanwhile the PMDG is seeing daily utilization. Hopefully this gets resolved completely soon.

Hijacking this thread for a question to those with the Thrustmaster Joystick: How do you program the AP disconnect to disconnect on the first click and silence the aural alert on the second click?

Right now my second click only re-activates AP1, so to silence the AP Disconnect Aural Alert I need to click the master caution button near the MCP, and that's super distracting during final approach.

For those in the SU11 beta - please don't expect a fix in the immediate short term for the displays - we expressly do not support beta builds of MSFS because they pretty variable. We will, of course, investigate the display issue internally, but we will not be rushing a new build out to support it until we know more. 

Yes, concentrate on the remote MCDU 😉 😜