57 minutes ago, blueshark747 said:

I DO NOT WANT TO PAY A SUBSCRIPTION FOR ANYTHING GAMING RELATED IN 2023.

Good luck with that 😄 Almost impossible these days.

1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

Good luck with that 😄 Almost impossible these days.

Yup as it totally makes sense especially concerning BeyondATC and AI voices.

Pretty much every AI Text2Voice app on the internet follows a paid subscription/monthly character limit model these days.

29 minutes ago, blueshark747 said:

Yup as it totally makes sense especially concerning BeyondATC and AI voices.

Pretty much every AI Text2Voice app on the internet follows a paid subscription/monthly character limit model these days.

I use Ceres and Ivona voices. I got them on sale. No subscription.

Anywho, I am glad you found a potential solution to your LNAV issues.

On 11/10/2023 at 2:37 AM, Fiorentoni said:

As I explained two posts above this one, that‘s the MSFS default LNAV behaviour which already happened back in 2020 with the A32X. Default LNAV can‘t handle STAR-to-approach transition, like at all, and will very often just shut down for good. That‘s probably why they haven‘t responded to your issue yet, because it‘s only solvable once/if they have their own custom LNAV; there‘s no way and/or point in trying to edit MSFS default LNAV.

I'm not sure that's entirely true given what Salty, FBW, MasterRob and Horizon have been able to improve default VNAV behavior in the in the past.  Even with subsequent releases of the FSS E-jet the VNAV and ILS has improved drastically since the first iterations so I don't buy that there is "no way" to edit default LNAV system.  And from what I have seen they have been able to exact changes in how the LNAV works as the path that is drawn and the timing of the turns is very different from the first few releases of the aircraft.  Many of these improvements could be related to the AAUs for this particular jet but I know they were able to exact changes around 0.9.7 long before the AAUs.

On 11/10/2023 at 2:34 AM, Fiorentoni said:

He didn‘t say it would take 2 years for the Fenix‘ sharklets. He was talking about FSL and you‘d have to ask them why it took them 2 years.

As for your question sharklets drastically change aerodynamic behaviour, so here‘s a couple of things they‘d have to get right / realistic when doing sharklets:

1) New fuel consumption, but differently different in different phases of the flight
2) New drag, again differently in different phases of flight
3) New flare behaviour, that‘s probably the hardest part, since the sharklet-flare is slightly different but different enough to make it quite hard to get it right.

Obviously all that matters only for a study-level product, other devs might just put the winglets onto the wings and sell it for a 20 dollar expansion.
 

He didn't say 2 years, but the Fenix A 320 was released in May of 2022. So quick maths, it's already been a year and a half. Considering the entire CFM version of the airplane was created in 2-2.5 years it seems like you could get a sharklet version done in a few months at maximum.

And FSL is bad example to follow considering their products were so late to the game and they continue to be so far behind the curve. Especially, considering the reddit legal battle over the malicious system files and the poor PR that ensued in the aftermath.   

10 hours ago, aniiran said:

I'm not sure that's entirely true given what Salty, FBW, MasterRob and Horizon have been able to improve default VNAV behavior in the in the past.  Even with subsequent releases of the FSS E-jet the VNAV and ILS has improved drastically since the first iterations so I don't buy that there is "no way" to edit default LNAV system.  And from what I have seen they have been able to exact changes in how the LNAV works as the path that is drawn and the timing of the turns is very different from the first few releases of the aircraft.  Many of these improvements could be related to the AAUs for this particular jet but I know they were able to exact changes around 0.9.7 long before the AAUs.

I'm not sure you even understand what "VNAV" means since you are saying "with subsequent releases of the FSS E-jet the VNAV (...) has improved drastically"... the FSS E-jet has no VNAV. At all. Also the was never any "default VNAV" in MSFS. At all. FBW ended up making their own custom VNAV, which consequently was used by Horizon in their A319/321neo mods. The AAUs are - again - something completely different because they use the Working Title LNAV&VNAV which is NOT used by FSS, so has no impact on that.

I'll just assume you accidentally wrote VNAV when you actually wanted to say LNAV, because that's the only way I can make any sense of it. I'll leave the judgement of if and how much default LNAV can be edited to some mod developer that chimes in here, but I'm dead sure you cannot get rid of the above mentioned failures.
Anyway this discussion is a bit theoretical since FSS themselves said they are doing a custom LNAV (which I personally doubt is gonna happen because it's a huge amount of work and they have many projects on their hands and no previous experience with airliners / FMS / LNAV etc.).

10 hours ago, aniiran said:

He didn't say 2 years, but the Fenix A 320 was released in May of 2022. So quick maths, it's already been a year and a half. Considering the entire CFM version of the airplane was created in 2-2.5 years it seems like you could get a sharklet version done in a few months at maximum.

But that's exactly what's happening! They *will* do a sharklet version within a few months, but they're working on the IAE right now. They haven't event started working on the sharklets. So no idea what you are actually complaining about. It's not like they were idling around.
Also they will do the A319 and A321 first (which I like because I'd rather have two new aircraft instead of sharklets on the one I already have) and after that sharklets for the A320 and A321 together (A319s have no sharklets).

11 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

I'm not sure you even understand what "VNAV" means since you are saying "with subsequent releases of the FSS E-jet the VNAV (...) has improved drastically"... the FSS E-jet has no VNAV. At all. Also the was never any "default VNAV" in MSFS. At all. FBW ended up making their own custom VNAV, which consequently was used by Horizon in their A319/321neo mods. The AAUs are - again - something completely different because they use the Working Title LNAV&VNAV which is NOT used by FSS, so has no impact on that.

I'll just assume you accidentally wrote VNAV when you actually wanted to say LNAV, because that's the only way I can make any sense of it. I'll leave the judgement of if and how much default LNAV can be edited to some mod developer that chimes in here, but I'm dead sure you cannot get rid of the above mentioned failures.
Anyway this discussion is a bit theoretical since FSS themselves said they are doing a custom LNAV (which I personally doubt is gonna happen because it's a huge amount of work and they have many projects on their hands and no previous experience with airliners / FMS / LNAV etc.).

Yes LNAV.  I'm sure you can improve the behavior of LNAV, masterrob94 did it with the CS777 series.  I just don't understand why so many people don't believe FSS is capable of a custom FMS and LNAV/VNAV system.  My point is that people have faith that Fenix will bring them an IAE engine and sharklets even though Fenix was not a known developer previously.  But when it comes to FSS no one has any faith even though they have kept up their end of the bargain so far. 

 

11 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

But that's exactly what's happening! They *will* do a sharklet version within a few months, but they're working on the IAE right now. They haven't event started working on the sharklets. So no idea what you are actually complaining about. It's not like they were idling around.
Also they will do the A319 and A321 first (which I like because I'd rather have two new aircraft instead of sharklets on the one I already have) and after that sharklets for the A320 and A321 together (A319s have no sharklets).

Ah, okay I found it. It just makes more sense to me to have the full version of an airframe like how PMDG does it, but I get it he needs money so Fenix needs the A319 and A321 to pad the coffers.  I'd rather have a319s and A321s than an A320 with sharklets as well.    Now, that I have read some outrageous takes other forums I understand why Aamir is a little on edge.  My apologies to him and the Fenix team. 25 bucks for each variant is a steal compared to PMDG.  American has A319 CEOs with sharklets.

To help the team out I purchased the product. 

Well, I’ve been keeping a secret from you all. It’s not a very good secret, given I believe most would have guessed what is to follow. In parallel with revamping the A320 with V2, we have also been building an A321 and A319. The improvements we've made with V2 have provided a stronger foundation to build upon for this expansion. We intend to release these by the end of the year, as a single expansion package, for £39.99 - and yes, as is with the A320, sharklets will follow, and for free. So, September for Block 2, and A321 and A319 by the end of the year. Early into 2024, we will update all our product lines with Sharklets, for free. Timelines. I hate them. But we feel it’s best if you know our targets, as I can feel that most would prefer going without the anxiety of not knowing what we’re planning to do, or when we’re doing it. You are paying customers and it feels right to share the roadmap for what lies ahead with Fenix. Some may wonder why A321 and A319 before A320 sharklets, and it’s a fair question - this is where it'd be much easier to make up some technical developer jargon-filled excuse, but we've always made a point of putting honesty ahead of PR, and the reality is, from a commercial standpoint, we’d like to make sure that the company remains in good financial-stead, enough to support the continued development of the current product line, and all the good stuff we have coming to you over the next few years.

A note with the last update stated that development of systems is basically on hold as the team is concentrating on bringing out the E190/195. Make of it what you will....

(I'll probably buy reluctantly. Just to have a Flybe 195)

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by jarmstro

14 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Anyway this discussion is a bit theoretical since FSS themselves said they are doing a custom LNAV (which I personally doubt is gonna happen because it's a huge amount of work and they have many projects on their hands and no previous experience with airliners / FMS / LNAV etc.).

They're not actually developing their own LNAV/VNAV, they shared some time ago on their Discord that it was being developed by "another developer for another airplane" that they didn't disclose, and that "theoretically" all of the logic had been programmed.

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what that means. They basically said we've got it all written down and it might work, but also we have another dev from another company working on another project we're expecting to deliver this... I'm extremely, extremely skeptical about this.

17 minutes ago, mspencer said:

They're not actually developing their own LNAV/VNAV, they shared some time ago on their Discord that it was being developed by "another developer for another airplane" that they didn't disclose, and that "theoretically" all of the logic had been programmed.

I'm sorry, but I have no idea what that means. They basically said we've got it all written down and it might work, but also we have another dev from another company working on another project we're expecting to deliver this... I'm extremely, extremely skeptical about this.

Uh what? They are going to use the FMS of another airplane? I don‘t get it, but yeah sounds really weird, like they bought the LNAV from Aerosoft‘s A330 or something and are gonna tack it onto the E-Jets

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

Uh what? They are going to use the FMS of another airplane?

I think it might just be better to wait for FSS to actually release the LNAV module before jumping the gun.

Bear in mind, a number of planes share a lot of the same logic because it just works. If FSS is using the LNAV of another aircraft, it may be that both aircraft use the same avionics suite. For example, the A320 and A380, share alot of the same LNAV logic, among other things.

7 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

I think it might just be better to wait for FSS to actually release the LNAV module before jumping the gun.

I know nothing about programming but for some reason a bespoke FMS/LNAV/VNAV is beyond some developers. Just Flight are exactly the same and shy away from it despite promises. I doubt FSS are up to it either. Why, I know not. Ain't going to happen for the 146 and it ain't going to happen for the EJets. But for some reason Just Flight get a pass for the 146 who's FMS is laughable.

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by jarmstro

11 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

But for some reason Just Flight get a pass for the 146 who's FMS is laughable.

Care to expand on that comment?

The BAe 146 FMS isn't nearly as refined as the Boeing 737 or Airbus A320. The real world aircraft even had basic FMCs retrofitted.

9 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Uh what? They are going to use the FMS of another airplane? I don‘t get it, but yeah sounds really weird, like they bought the LNAV from Aerosoft‘s A330 or something and are gonna tack it onto the E-Jets

Yeah this was from their Discord - they did not disclose the aircraft but shared a testing image where the flightplan was EGLL-VHHH, leading me to, completely unfoundedly, believe it may be the TFDi MD-11. No evidence at all for that though.

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

I know nothing about programming but for some reason a bespoke FMS/LNAV/VNAV is beyond some developers

Cause doing it right is.. a very complex task. You can’t even do the calculations too correctly because then it won’t have the idiocrancies of the real aircraft. It’s a pretty massive undertaking to put short. Even PMDG, a renown developer has shortcomings with its LNAV.

 

2 hours ago, jarmstro said:

But for some reason Just Flight get a pass for the 146 who's FMS is laughable.

Not sure I understand this. The BAE 146 came out with no FMC, it was a VOR aircraft through and through. It was later then retrofitted with the PL21 FMS that provides lateral guidance or the UNS-1 which was a bit more involved but again lateral guidance and some rudimentary vertical advisories via the FMS display. It currently has the PL21 and functions more or less as the real one would with a lot of functionality stripped cause it’s not applicable to the aircraft.