Poll: Fenix customer wishes IAE or Remote CDU?

[guenseli 1,580]

Please do not take it too serious 😉

But I'm really interested where the focus from a customers point of view probably is. A remote CDU is for me, personally, very important. I can't care less if the Bus is driven by a IAE or PW or whatever, at least it should be behave like the real one.

As far as I can interpret some comments from Aamir, the Fenix dev, there are no technical reasons to not have a remote EFB (as we all thought, because of Prosim etc.). It is simply the customers choices which want IAE more.

That shouldn't meant to force the Fenix devs anywhere. I just want a personal picture how important remote CDUs are for other people.

Many thanks for taking part.

[RALF9636 1,950]

While I personally don't use a remote CDU currently, I totally understand that this is an absolutely crucial feature for people with a corresponding hardware setup.

I am also not really interested in what engines push the A320 as long as it is adequately modelled. I couldn't care less for IAE engines as well. The difference between flying an A320 with CFM engines and an A320 with IAE engines is neglectable for my simming experience.

I'd rather have a Fenix A321.

 

So out of the two options from the poll: Definitely a remote CDU would make more sense for me.

 

[WestAir 2,522]

There are some liveries I want that use IAE, and also the IAE sounds a bit cooler than the CFM to me. So it takes my vote.

[Amon1973 1,421]

I love the sound of the IAE engines, and I enjoy with flying them, but I mostly want the IAE engines on the Fenix because I help to manufacture the Fan Disc and some of the turbines on the V2500.

[rick celik 1,243]

IAE for me!

[cavaricooper 2,614]

Whilst I am looking forward to the IAEs, I would have to support the remote CDU function FIRST.  Of paramount interest to me.

[NovemberUniform 156]

With the IAE engine also comes the advanced engine model. (Hopefully) meaning closer to real engine performance and fuel burn. It is my vote. 

[chapstick 2,757]

The CFM modeling is unfinished and it's not just fuel burn that's wrong, the entire start sequence is off. And IAE's would be a way more interesting and expansive feature. Remote CDU should be way lower on the list behind fixing FMGC bugs, EFB rewrite, etc. Basically, the way they're prioritizing things right now is right. 

Edited November 27, 2022 by Chapstick

[guenseli 1,580]

4 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

Basically, the way they're prioritizing things right now is right.

seems so, yes, when I look at the result above 👍

[Bobsk8 12,668]

Should have been a choice for neither. 

[polosim 841]

For me, remote CDU has a higher priority.

[micstatic 4,319]

I want remote CDU if it somehow leads to me being able to use my hardware FCU with the fenix.  I'd like IAE just to have something different and be able to simulate other airlines.  Though I'll admit i've always thought the IAE was terribly ugly compared to the CFM.  But I respect its performance at the same time.  

[regis9 4,011]

Definitely IAE for me.  Different sound (arguably cooler sound!), and different taxiing/flying dynamics.

Personally I haven’t used any kind of remote CDU in a very long time, haven’t seen the need over having a view hotkey set to look at the CDU.

Edit: I agree with @micstatic above, if I could somehow use my Skalarki CDU with a remote CDU then count me in, though I doubt that will be the case unfortunately.

Edited November 27, 2022 by regis9

[micstatic 4,319]

yeah the missing skalarki functionality is the most disappointing aspect of fenix for me personally.  

[F737MAX 5,579]

For people whose chips haven't been word not allowed on, this is an interesting set of results @guenseli

 

35 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

Basically, the way they're prioritizing things right now is right. 

For a lot of people, a remote CDU is the most anticipated missing item. For most others, an IAE engine variant is.

These are big, obvious additions that would appeal far more than *just* amending the rate at which numbers on the engine indication and fuel flow gauges change. (I'm well aware it's not just that, but it could be seen that way by people frustrated by the long wait for their preferred feature).

Even if something is important to us, doesn't make it critical to the overall project. None of these awaited improvements has to be the next item to appear in the changelog. It would be great if it were the other engine variant, although it would make more sense to have IAE engines release with them using the new v2 engine modelling to save the dev team re-doing work.