2 hours ago, Aamir said:

"Feel" is always going to be quite interesting and subjective, I find. If it's one thing I've learned during the course of development, it's that pilot consultants will more or less often have completely different feedback from one to another. What is "perfect" for one, is "no, this doesn't feel right" to another. A lot of the times that comes down to control configurations, calibration, etc, but also interestingly, perception. We've built something that satisfies the majority of them in different areas, but I've certainly run into the case of completely opposite feedback more than once during the basic development of the aircraft. 

I also think it's slightly disrespectful to the media guys and pilot streamers to insinuate that they're saying the flight model feels great just because it brings them views. I'd offer an opinion to the contrary, I used to be in that industry after all, and controversy brings far more money and clicks overall. 

All said and done, I'm always happy for qualitative feedback from type-rated pilots, so if you have some points that you'd like me to look at in specific with regard to feel, drop me a DM with the details and I can have a look and see what can be done!

Agree with Aamir here,

Some years ago I led a team with a Red Arrows simulation with the Hawk. We had the entire current Red Arrows team try it out and they were mega impressed at Alpha stage (it was a sim for the RAF to use internally).They were really gushing.

I pointed out their team leader that actually there was a lot still left to do including flight dynamics tweaks and we weren't happy yet. His reply was that they had no idea those things could be done to that standard on a home computer. They were totally in love with the sim as not one of them had any understanding of just how realistic things could be and set their expectations of a high bar lower.  Once we told them what we could do, their perceptions changed considerably and we went from gushing to real technical feedback.

Happy New Year everyone,

Jane

I have them both. I fly them both. I love them both. Apart from the lack of WXR and MCDU popups (MSFS limitations, AFAIK) and well, there are not so many differences between each. Well, the FSL VC is too feature-happy for my liking, and that results in me using the 2D panel instead. Not so with Fenix.

1 minute ago, Luis Hernandez said:

I have them both. I fly them both. I love them both. Apart from the lack of WXR and MCDU popups (MSFS limitations, AFAIK) and well, there are not so many differences between each. Well, the FSL VC is too feature-happy for my liking, and that results in me using the 2D panel instead. Not so with Fenix.

I agree with you. If you have P3D only fly the FSL, if you have the new sim fly Fenix. If you have both, feel free to fly both 🙂

Are both perfect, of course not. They are though, both incredible pieces of software and we have to realise that both are developed in a completely different environment within each sim, which imposes limitations and quirks courtesy of the coding of the host sim.

I spent over 15 years as Deputy Editor of PC Pilot magazine and reviewed every airliner release during that time (including the very first release by PMDG way back when). I also spent a large part of my career getting paid to do flightsims for major publishers. My honest opinion is that right now we are in a new golden age of airliners in simulation. We are flying on the desktop with an unprecedented amount of realism.

The standard right now from many developers including Aamir and his team is just incredible. It is great giving feedback to developers to help them grow (nearly all quality developers love you to feedback to them!). Just remember though the incredible standard we are at now from all of these guys. When we can nitpick over minor variations in N1 to the keyboard repeat rate on a CDU, we know we are in a really great place!

It is a great time to fly regardless of your choice of sim and aircraft.

Jane

52 minutes ago, 320Driver said:

Absolutely right, controls are an important factor. I more than once came across flight model comments just to find out there is a plastic Saitek stick in use. I am using an OEM Sidestick for that matter.

 

There is an option in the MCDU specifically for your scenario, fwiw. It's called the "heavier sidestick" option. Toggle that to YES. It should help, provided you're using all the damping etc that comes with the OEM sidestick.

35 minutes ago, Aamir said:

There is an option in the MCDU specifically for your scenario, fwiw. It's called the "heavier sidestick" option. Toggle that to YES. It should help, provided you're using all the damping etc that comes with the OEM sidestick.

Hey Aamir, I know you also use(d) the Warthog Joystick when flying the Fenix. Did you use the "heavier sidestick" option with it? I know it's not technically dampened, but it's certainly one of the heavier desktop joysticks...

11 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I have been asking for a list of the FSLab A320 failures for some time now (asking here at Avsim, asking elsewhere too), and I have not seen a list from FSLabs, of all the failures they simulate for their A320.

 

For those want to know what failures are in the FSLabs A320, I typed out this list taken directly from the Failures menu in the MCDU:

FSLABS A320 FAILURE LIST TAKEN FROM A320-232 (IAE)
1.    ATA 21    FUSELAGE LEAKAGE
2.    ATA 21    OUTFLOW VALVE
3.    ATA 22    FCU FAULT 1
4.    ATA 22    FCU FAULT 2
5.    ATA 24    AC BUS 1 FAULT
6.    ATA 24    AC BUS 2 FAULT
7.    ATA 24    DC BUS 1 FAULT
8.    ATA 24    DC BUS 2 FAULT
9.    ATA 24    DC BUS ESS FAULT
10.  ATA 24    GEN 1 FAULT
11.  ATA 24    GEN 2 FAULT
12.  ATA 24    TR 1 FAULT
13.  ATA 24    TR 2 FAULT
14.  ATA 24    TR ESS FAULT
15.  ATA 26    CARGO SMOKE AFT
16.  ATA 26    CARGO SMOKE FWD
17.  ATA 27    FLAPS LOCKED
18.  ATA 27    SLATS LOCKED
19.  ATA 28    TANK LEAK CENTER
20.  ATA 28    TANK LEAK L INNER
21.  ATA 28     TANK LEAK L OUTER
22.  ATA 28    TANK LEAK R INNER
23.  ATA 28    TANK LEAK R OUTER
24.  ATA 29    ELEC PUMP FLT B
25.  ATA 29    ELEC PUMP FLT Y
26.  ATA 29    ENG PUMP LO PR G
27.  ATA 29    ENG PUMP LO PR Y
28.  ATA 29    PTU FAULT
29.  ATA 29    RSVR LEAK B
30.  ATA 29    RSVR LEAK G
31.  ATA 29    RSVR LEAK Y
32.  ATA 29    RSVR LO PR B
33.  ATA 29    RSVR LO PR G
34.  ATA 29    RSVR LO PR Y
35.  ATA 29    RSVR LO QTY B
36.  ATA 29    RSVR LO QTY G
37.  ATA 29    RSVR LO QTY Y
38.  ATA 31    DMC 1 FAULT
39.  ATA 31    DMC 2 FAULT
40.  ATA 31    DMC 3 FAULT
41.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 1 PFD CAPT
42.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 2 ND CAPT
43.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 3 UP ECAM
44.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 4 LR ECAM
45.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 5 ND FO
46.  ATA 31    DU FAULT 6 PFD FO
47.  ATA 32    L/G DOOR NOT CLOSED - L
48.  ATA 32    L/G DOOR NOT CLOSED - N
49.  ATA 32    L/G DOOR NOT CLOSED - R
50.  ATA 34    ADR 1 FAULT
51.  ATA 34    ADR 2 FAULT
52.  ATA 34    ADR 3 FAULT
53.  ATA 34    ERRONEOUS RA
54.  ATA 34    GPWS FAULT
55.  ATA 34    IR 1 FAULT
56.  ATA 34    IR 2 FAULT
57.  ATA 34    IR 3 FAULT
58.  ATA 34    RA 1 FAULT
59.  ATA 34    RA 2 FAULT
60.  ATA 36    ENG 1 SAV FAIL OPEN
61.  ATA 36    ENG 2 SAV FAIL OPEN
62.  ATA 49    APU FAULT
63.  ATA 49    APU FIRE
64.  ATA 49    APU FLAP FAULT
65.  ATA 70    ENG 1 BIRD STRIKE
66.  ATA 70    ENG 1 FAIL (DAMAGE)
67.  ATA 70    ENG 1 FAIL (NO DAMAGE)
68.  ATA 70    ENG 1 FIRE
69.  ATA 70    ENG 1 IGN A
70.  ATA 70    ENG 1 IGN B
71.  ATA 70    ENG 1 SURGE
72.  ATA 70    ENG 2 BIRD STRIKE
73.  ATA 70    ENG 2 FAIL (DAMAGE)
74.  ATA 70    ENG 2 FAIL (NO DAMAGE)
75.  ATA 70    ENG 2 FIRE
76.  ATA 70    ENG 2 IGN A
77.  ATA 70    ENG 2 IGN B
78.  ATA 70    ENG 2 SURGE
79.  ATA 70    ENG 1 P2T2 SENSOR
80.  ATA 70    ENG 2 P2T2 SENSOR
 

Enjoy.

I  use " light" for my Warthog work's fine for me

disregard

Edited January 8, 20233 yr by mikealpha

4 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

As for FSLabs, aren't they known for their excessively slow pace of development?

 

We're 7+ months following the Fenix release and I still can't properly save my airframe settings in the EFB. If FSL is slow, then so is Fenix. 

The FSL Airbus was my favourite aircraft in P3D and the Fenix A320 is my favourite airliner in MSFS.  I do miss the variants that FSL has (A319, A321, IAE) but I expect we’ll get those eventually in the Fenix.  I’ve long removed P3D from my computer since I wasn’t using it, so it’s Fenix all the way for me.

My only real outstanding gripe is that I can’t use my Skalarki Desktop (ie not going to take business away from Prosim because i was never a potential customer) Hardware but I understand that‘s more an issue of Prosim being stubborn than anything Fenix can do.  Still it’s an annoyance on an amazing product.

But all in all, MSFS is a great sim and Fenix is a great aircraft so I’d suggest the OP take the plunge.

If someone is asking for a comaprison between the FSL and Fenix A320, shouldn't we just stick to the A320?

Now, I've seen a few people saying that the Fenix does not have as much system depth with WX radar being the obvious exclusion but what else is missing. Can you guys actually mention some of those? I mean even Aamir asked but I haven't seen a proper response to the question.

Let me preface this by saying it’s great when you as a customer have different options of the same aircraft(I’m assuming this will be the case if FSLABS release their A320 series) in front of you based on your pocket size and simulator needs and of course personal preference. 
 

The FSLabs A3XX series was by far my favorite aircraft addon in P3D, and despite the controversy they were involved in, just purely from a simulator standpoint it really set the bar of how immersive a desktop simulation can be. Aside from the system technicalities and depth, the fact that the GSX integration and ATSU operations were so realistic, and made you feel like you were part of an airline operation rather than just operating the airplane by itself in a sterile environment, really placed it above a lot of other addons in the community. The sound environment was also on a different level. 
 

The FENIX is a great value product and their support seems to be pretty good with a lot of customer interaction. We need more of that in the community. Their aircraft model is also very beautifully done, and it seems like a lot of hard work and dedication went into even the tiniest of details. The fact that their product is priced at a level that makes it accessible to a lot of people is also a great positive. 
 

Having said that, and please correct me if I’m wrong, it seems like FSLabs write their own code from the bottom up, and doesn’t necessarily rely on another software/platform to make their product work. I don’t know much about Prosim, but from my limited knowledge gathered here and on discord, a lot of the code isn’t written by FENIX themselves and therefore exposes them to the “flaws” of Prosim, which might be more difficult to correct at that point. This also leads me to the question of future products, if they were to venture into developing future aircraft that don’t necessarily have the Prosim framework available. But I’m assuming with all the money they’ve made from the sales, they probably have a good team of developers. 
 

I’m very excited about the future of flightsimming, and hoping we will see a lot of new exciting products in the near future. 

The big challenge for fslabs in msfs is going to be upping their texture and modeling game. They have always been great at systems realism and pushing creative boundaries. But they have lagged behind somewhat in graphics. 

40 minutes ago, Krakin said:

If someone is asking for a comaprison between the FSL and Fenix A320, shouldn't we just stick to the A320?

Now, I've seen a few people saying that the Fenix does not have as much system depth with WX radar being the obvious exclusion but what else is missing. Can you guys actually mention some of those? I mean even Aamir asked but I haven't seen a proper response to the question.

There's an extensive list on the reported bugs in their discord. Here's a short list of the things one beta team member has reported in one thread:

LIGHTING:

• Missing lights under the seat of the capt and f/o with the floor console switch
• RMP Capt doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• RMP F/O doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• RMP 3rd occupant doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• ATC panel doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888 when on light test
• Cockpit door panel, OPEN doesn't light up on light test
• Rudder LCD doesn't behave correctly, should show R+L superimposed and on the right 88
• Batteries LCD should show 88.8 during light test
• Overwings exits light not illuminating with EMER EXIT Light switch is set to on
• On ANN Light Test, all cockpit door panel should illuminate : Top - Mid - Bottom + Chan 1 - Chan 2

SYSTEMS / TEXTURES / DECALS:

• On 50VU, the APU test is clickable and has some lights working but it does not trigger the APU fire
• 1FD2 shown on PFD while FAC 1+2 are tripped. In this case, even if both FMGCs are not failed and correctly powered up, FDs should not be shown.
• FAC auto test sequence is not right. It should be 4 times FAULT blink then 2 sec later 1 blink and finally after 10-15 sec a final FAULT blink. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/rv5ywu )
• Complete incorrect FD appearance on PFD.
• When a new or a FM is lost there should be a square around 1FD1 or 2FD2 or 1FD- etc etc
• Auto test sequence is not respected. The FMGC takes around 40-45 sec to power up and at the end of the test sequence, ATHR and correlated AP p/b should blink multiple times. Then triple click is heard. Then the related FD is shown if FD is pushed.(VIDEO: https://streamable.com/h0kugw )
• Missing BACK UP label on the secondary depressurization door panel (placed along the support not on the vu panel)
• EMERGENCY RAM AIR INLET FLAP (not confused with RAT) is not modeled. The flap does not physically open even when shown as open.
• The cockpit door should dim the entrance light as well as lower cabin speaker.
• Missing Ice Detection Probes (if option selected - ECAM Warning + c/b)
• AUTO LAND p/b not linked with correlated FWC (If FWC1 is tripped, AUTO should not light up (dimmer because the lower part is not separated) on Capt side and LAND should not light up on F/O side - and FWC2 is the other way) (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/wn10iu )
• External power misplacement : 108Vu should be on the left (aircraft direction) and external power on the right.
• Incorrect behavior of loop c/b and ENG Fire 1 & 2. Loop A on each engines are lighting odd lights pair (So column 1 and 3) while loop B are lighting even lights (So column 2 and 4) in the fire button. When pulling on the loop A or B and doing the test, it should not light up the correlated columns of lights. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/auhg7q )
• Missing 1 RA antenna (3 on 4)
• Sounds and effects when changing AC ESS FEED missing (Relays and some contactors sounds + like heavy load bus change lights off during less then a sec). Sometimes it also put your TR in fault and you have to do a CFDS reset or via the p/b TR reset.
• Incorrect manual mode behavior ; DITCHING should overtake the MAN mode. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/kc8eq2 )
• Starting with cold & dark config some c/b are tripped (ENG OIL PRESS & QTY - 4) + BRK TEMP DET UNIT + THS ACTR LSSD.
• Missing : TPIS option selected but no modelling of the sensor with the shielded harness on NLG
• Wrong FWC for Master Warning, it should be the opposite, MASTER dead on capt side if FWC 1 dead for both Master Caution and Warning
• Wrong timing for DMC, it should wait the self test before interchanging the displays
• Wrong behavior of TCAS. You simulate "TCAS CHANGE MODE" on PLAN mode but the TFC should not appear.
• DCDU without any ACARS service / ATSU should show NO DATA.
• F/O and CAPT ND TERR bugs (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/tqr4zz )
• ADIRs buses + reset doesn't work properly. With ADIRs 2 & 3 reset by the c/b there is no time delay when powering up +
• Missing sounds with VOR identification through RMP / ACP (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/xzc322 )
• incorrect behavior with RMP in NAV-ILS mode : bottom button should adjust not the one on top
• Missing sounds for IM - MM - OM beacons (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/efpjzn )

This is not an exhaustive list, it's just from one thread out of thousands. I doubt many A320 rated pilots would spot half of these problems; Many of these are maintenance personnel levels of inaccuracies and some aren't even simulated in competing products. The fact that this stuff is even in the discord and being looked at by the team is why I firmly believe Fenix is the right choice for anyone who wants to buy an A320.

They're obviously serious about becoming the best, and they're not arrogant about it either.

Edited January 8, 20233 yr by WestAir

@WestAir So you're saying the FSLabs version gets all odf those things right?