Fenix A320 or PMDG 737

[dmarques69 316]

Im usually lazy so Airbus is always my first choice, im still a big fan of the FBW, they keep updating the plane and imo is still very capable and with some details that i like a lot, and all for free.

When i feel that i need some extra work then i fly the 737.

[jarmstro 2,405]

1 hour ago, jbdbow1970 said:

All talk the FBW still have years to catch to the Fenix like Fenix have years to catch up to FS Labs.

Really? In what way? At least with the FBW I can lock the cockpit door and hear the Captain and cabin crew.

Edited April 12, 2023 by jarmstro

[Aamir 2,909]

3 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Once I have a little more data I will open a support ticket. I work in IS and I like to give as much information as possible. I'll keep some good records for a few days to document it.

This is perfect, thanks!

[Maxis 1,889]

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Really? In what way? At least with the FBW I can lock the cockpit door and hear the Captain and cabin crew.

Depends on what you view are your must haves. 

If you value the need to hear a cockpit door close and related ambient noise then yeah .. I guess The fenix cant compete.

However, If you want to properly  fly an RNP AR approach into Kathmandu or Santos Dumont you wont be doing that in the FBW.

It would also be nice to have the missed approach segment of the flight plan be properly imported so it is there when you need it.

The second MCDU should be independent for redundancy purposes.

Secondary flight plan feature of the MCDU is missing.

I'm sure the FBW team are aware of these issues and are feverishly working on them. But in the mean time .. on a Navigational feature set comparison .. there is quite a bit of work to do.

Just my humble opinion.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Maxis

[JBDB-MD80 1,492]

1 hour ago, jarmstro said:

Really? In what way? At least with the FBW I can lock the cockpit door and hear the Captain and cabin crew.

Just great so that makes FBW better than Fenix/PMDG or Toliss etc.? get out of here

[jarmstro 2,405]

1 hour ago, jbdbow1970 said:

get out of here

No! And yes, things like cockpit announcements, a working printer, great sounds and a working cockpit door are important to me because I'm not stupid enough to believe I'm flying a real plane. And nor do I wish to. You think the Toliss is real? Hahaha.

Edited April 12, 2023 by jarmstro

[JBDB-MD80 1,492]

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

No! And yes, things like cockpit announcements, a working printer, great sounds and a working cockpit door are important to me because I'm not stupid enough to believe I'm flying a real plane. And nor do I wish to. You think the Toliss is real? Hahaha.

 I flew the FS Labs in FSX 10 years ago. Nothing beats is as a A320 Toliss is better than FBW

Edited April 12, 2023 by jbdbow1970

[jarmstro 2,405]

16 hours ago, jbdbow1970 said:

 I flew the FS Labs in FSX 10 years ago. Nothing beats is as a A320 Toliss is better than FBW

Maybe in your opinion. But the Toliss is flying in a world of dog word not allowed.😀 

[flyingpauls 66]

On 4/12/2023 at 6:58 PM, jbdbow1970 said:

You want something challenging Fly the Maddog. Makes the A320 or B737 a snoreffest.

Did that in X-Plane. It was a lot of fun. But I do not know how the MSFS version is. Good? It is not cheap.

[mholden020 31]

On 4/12/2023 at 2:46 PM, Maxis said:

Depends on what you view are your must haves. 

...

I'm sure the FBW team are aware of these issues and are feverishly working on them. But in the mean time .. on a Navigational feature set comparison .. there is quite a bit of work to do.

This, 100%.  When I was using the Fenix I did notice the navigational capabilities were miles ahead of the FBW's.  I've struggled to get an RNAV approach to work in the FBW at all, but it worked just fine when I tried with the Fenix.  Same for the go-around stuff, as you mentioned.

But also like you mentioned, it's down to what your "must haves" are and whether you see the value in the extras the Fenix provides in this area.  Flybywire announced an in-house aircraft model on the way, so with time it's possible the differences between the two will narrow.  I also feel the EFB in the FBW plane is better and more intuitive to use, with the Fenix's takeoff calculator being a major plus, but I'd been using one on my own iPad so that's not a big deal.  Personally, I struggled to find the extra value in the money paid for the Fenix but I found out they have a refund policy so I went with that option.  Now, going back to the FBW 320 I don't feel like I've lost anything at all in moving from the Fenix.  It's a great product, just not my thing I guess.

[BrammyH 477]

15 hours ago, mholden020 said:

This, 100%.  When I was using the Fenix I did notice the navigational capabilities were miles ahead of the FBW's.  I've struggled to get an RNAV approach to work in the FBW at all, but it worked just fine when I tried with the Fenix.  Same for the go-around stuff, as you mentioned.

But also like you mentioned, it's down to what your "must haves" are and whether you see the value in the extras the Fenix provides in this area.  Flybywire announced an in-house aircraft model on the way, so with time it's possible the differences between the two will narrow.  I also feel the EFB in the FBW plane is better and more intuitive to use, with the Fenix's takeoff calculator being a major plus, but I'd been using one on my own iPad so that's not a big deal.  Personally, I struggled to find the extra value in the money paid for the Fenix but I found out they have a refund policy so I went with that option.  Now, going back to the FBW 320 I don't feel like I've lost anything at all in moving from the Fenix.  It's a great product, just not my thing I guess.

I have a Schrödinger's cat relationship with the Fenix. I don't regret buying it, but at the same time I am not sure I should have gotten it. I got it during a fit of pique when FBW introduced some bugs in Expiramental version with waypoints and ETAs. 

On the whole, I lke the plane. However, landing it continues to be a challenge. I either float the thing down the runway (or it just gains altitude), or I slam it into the ground. My approach speeds are at vapp. But, I am usually about about -300 off on vspeed landings between that and the FBW. It feels like the sweet spot for a decent flare is very, very small.

For what it's worth, I also kinda slam the 737 at times, but with that I am also struggling with throttle management.

One thing I do like is I don't need Blender to create a livery.

[Bobsk8 12,914]

22 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

I have a Schrödinger's cat relationship with the Fenix. I don't regret buying it, but at the same time I am not sure I should have gotten it. I got it during a fit of pique when FBW introduced some bugs in Expiramental version with waypoints and ETAs. 

On the whole, I lke the plane. However, landing it continues to be a challenge. I either float the thing down the runway (or it just gains altitude), or I slam it into the ground. My approach speeds are at vapp. But, I am usually about about -300 off on vspeed landings between that and the FBW. It feels like the sweet spot for a decent flare is very, very small.

For what it's worth, I also kinda slam the 737 at times, but with that I am also struggling with throttle management.

One thing I do like is I don't need Blender to create a livery.

I have flown airliners in flight sims for decades, and even spent hours in an Airline Level D sim.  I coujld never get consistent landings with the Fenix. I even purchased the FSiPanel  for practicing landings, and finally decided, this aircraft is just not for me. I got the PMDG 737, and even the DC6 and they are both a piece of cake to land as are all the other aircraft I fly in MSFS.. 

[BrammyH 477]

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I have flown airliners in flight sims for decades, and even spent hours in an Airline Level D sim.  I coujld never get consistent landings with the Fenix. I even purchased the FSiPanel  for practicing landings, and finally decided, this aircraft is just not for me. I got the PMDG 737, and even the DC6 and they are both a piece of cake to land as are all the other aircraft I fly in MSFS.. 

A comment of yours from another thread has stuck with me: "It has a curious relationship to the ground."

I flew from LLBG to LCLK three times today with the Fenix, FBW, and B738. These are the LRM results for the 3 landings:

Fenix: -550/1.36g; FBW: -376/0.92g/; 738: -410/1.18g.

What is interesting is on the FBW approach, I got wrecked. I overshot the glide path and had to switch the AP off a lot faster than I usually did and then got nailed by a crosswind at 30'. That landing should have been the worst of them. The PMDG for me is very much a work in progress. LRM and Volanta were mostly close, other than being WAY off on the Fenix landing force. Volanta was 1.08, LRM was 1.36. It was bang on at -550 between them.

I do tend to catch some of the replays of streamers, and I've noticed their numbers can really fluctuate too. Easyjetsimpilot will often hit a -400 landing.

Where I am going with this long-winded, overly analytical post is other than an interesting metric, the numbers mean nothing to me. I'm not active in a VA. I keep the records because I tend to analyze things too much, but if I just blow a landing no harm no foul.

I get how VAs use this as a metric because it's probably the closest. I do wish they used landing g instead since that is probably more real world. It is probably the number I will use more for reference.

I should not let a meaningless number (to me, it's worth repeating again) affect my overall enjoyment of the planes.

 

[heathenator 0]

On 4/16/2023 at 4:49 PM, BrammyH said:

I should not let a meaningless number (to me, it's worth repeating again) affect my overall enjoyment of the planes.

 

I think there is a lot merit to that statement and one I am guilty of falling into the trap of doing. I always shoot for the 100 to 200 range to make myself happy. I am a Airbus guy and truly love the Fenix 320 but have put it on the back burner till v2 based off my constantly being in the 200 - 300 range. Got me to thinking something as meaningless as a Landing Rate is keeping me from flying something I really enjoy! Thank you for putting  my mind to work! 

[Delta111 29]

On 4/28/2023 at 5:05 PM, heathenator said:

I think there is a lot merit to that statement and one I am guilty of falling into the trap of doing. I always shoot for the 100 to 200 range to make myself happy. I am a Airbus guy and truly love the Fenix 320 but have put it on the back burner till v2 based off my constantly being in the 200 - 300 range. Got me to thinking something as meaningless as a Landing Rate is keeping me from flying something I really enjoy! Thank you for putting  my mind to work! 

 

     It will probably take Version #2  to get PayPal working just buy their product....