Aircraft & Avionics Update 02 (1.33.8.0) Now Available

[CarlosF 1,261]

Geez, why such a big fuss about driver version and while lines. IT WILL ALL GET FIXED eventually,  growing pains, that's all. This is how it is in the development world and if you can't accept it and be patient, then don't click on the sim icon and wait, have a beer with your friends, fly XP12 demo (its not cursed with the white lines LOL), or just chill.

 

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by CarlosF

[carlanthony24 592]

1 minute ago, CarlosF said:

Geez, why such a big fuss about driver version and while lines. IT WILL ALL GET FIXED eventually,  growing pains, that's all. This is how it is in the development world and if you can't accept it and be patient, then don't click on the sim icon and wait, have a beer with your friends, fly XP12 demo (its not cursed with the white lines LOL), or just chill.

 

 

Fixed eventually the issue has been going on for a long time only now in the latest beta/update its happening a lot more. So people have a right to complain and what not.

[alexcolka 183]

And what about the one that left behind? the A320? I know, the FBW A320 which is amazing, but the stock one? Will it also have a special treatment like the other stock airliners? 

[Farlis 2,350]

2 minutes ago, alexcolka said:

And what about the one that left behind? the A320? I know, the FBW A320 which is amazing, but the stock one? Will it also have a special treatment like the other stock airliners? 

That would be a total waste of resources. The FBW A320 basically has already replaced the stock A320.

[CarlosF 1,261]

8 minutes ago, carlanthony24 said:

So people have a right to complain and what not.

Of course, I'm not against constructive criticism, but most to the time, it's the opposite and developers at Asobo are not going to hurry because "So people have a right to complain and what not."

[alexcolka 183]

Just now, Farlis said:

That would be a total waste of resources. The FBW A320 basically has already replaced the stock A320.

Yes, indeed, but the other mods like in is time WT, Salty or Heavy Division, were replaced by Asobo with the updates, and are property of Asobo / MS, that's not the case of the FBW A320. Please don't get me wrong, I love the FBW A320, is just I'm curious of the state of the stock A320.

[Farlis 2,350]

1 minute ago, alexcolka said:

but the other mods like in is time WT, Salty or Heavy Division

None of them had the depth that the FBW has in regards to avionics.

[LRBS 974]

I want to recognize the team's commitment and effort in enhancing the game with AAU2. It is a challenging and time-consuming project, and their dedication is appreciated.

For now, I'll only focus only on a few issues with B748 that are obvious, 787 later, time permitting. Even having books, the info is there, but I'm afraid that there is wrong guidance or interpretation.

Not to be taken the wrong way, the upgrade is such a positive direction but the execution needs attention. So, here we go with a few issues.

 

• During preflight, after start the LANDING ALT advisory message should not be displayed when automatic. It will show under certain conditions outlined in Air Systems, FMC desc, and app in chapter 11 or a malfunction (QRH).
• CTR CDU gets the wrong info from the LEFT/RIGHT one. Should not show RTE, DEP/ARR, VNAV, FIX, LEGS, HOLD, PROG, or NAV RAD pages.
• Hydraulik demand pump selectors will not go to AUX.
• When brakes are set to park, any full brake pedal application should release the parking brake. 
• Fuel system needs adjustment on logic, especially when XFEED message is displayed, if you follow the procedure you get the wrong messages.
• RTO function, it does arm correctly at 85 but, in case of reject, if the brake pedal is applied will disengage the RTO to the OFF position and manual braking is available as necessary.
• Wrong flaps indication on PFD during t.o. in reference to flap maneuvering speed for flaps retraction. As an example, FL20 for t.o. should show only 10, 5, 1, and UP speeds for flap retraction on speed. The same applies to FL10, which should show 5, 1, and UP.
• After t.o. inbound first WPT if you want to create ALONG TRAK WPT you should be able to create it without getting the wrong message ALONG TRAK WPT N/A.
• Many times after clean-up, during climb out I notice speed limited at 240 below 10,000 ft. Default is 250 and during climb-out based on weight, the minimum clean speed can be in excess of 250 below 10K. During descent below 10K default by FMC is 240 or whatever is restricted by STAR.
• If DRAG REQUIRED msg shows should not have "DRAG REQUIRED VNAV" message.
• We should have a SPPED BRAKE ARM indication when in ARM position on EICAS.
• Some issues with turn anticipation resulting in excessive bank angles in excess of 30 degrees of bank and some unusual pitch variations.
• When on HDG to intercept ILS, despite having APP selected it will go initially LOC and later will switch to APP. Correct functionality, if on HDG and arm APP mode, it will switch to APP, not LOC, and later APP. Two different modes.
• Reversers should go up to 106.6 N1 limited by EEC, not only 51%
• Brakes are very weak. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by LRBS
eec

[Fiorentoni 4,479]

13 minutes ago, LRBS said:

I want to recognize the team's commitment and effort in enhancing the game with AAU2. It is a challenging and time-consuming project, and their dedication is appreciated.

For now, I'll only focus only on a few issues with B748 that are obvious, 787 later, time permitting. Even having books, the info is there, but I'm afraid that there is wrong guidance or interpretation.

Not to be taken the wrong way, the upgrade is such a positive direction but the execution needs attention. So, here we go with a few issues.

 

• During preflight, after start the LANDING ALT advisory message should not be displayed when automatic. It will show under certain conditions outlined in Air Systems, FMC desc, and app in chapter 11 or a malfunction (QRH).
• CTR CDU gets the wrong info from the LEFT/RIGHT one. Should not show RTE, DEP/ARR, VNAV, FIX, LEGS, HOLD, PROG, or NAV RAD pages.
• Hydraulik demand pump selectors will not go to AUX.
• When brakes are set to park, any full brake pedal application should release the parking brake. 
• Fuel system needs adjustment on logic, especially when XFEED message is displayed, if you follow the procedure you get the wrong messages.
• RTO function, it does arm correctly at 85 but, in case of reject, if the brake pedal is applied will disengage the RTO to the OFF position and manual braking is available as necessary.
• Wrong flaps indication on PFD during t.o. in reference to flap maneuvering speed for flaps retraction. As an example, FL20 for t.o. should show only 10, 5, 1, and UP speeds for flap retraction on speed. The same applies to FL10, which should show 5, 1, and UP.
• After t.o. inbound first WPT if you want to create ALONG TRAK WPT you should be able to create it without getting the wrong message ALONG TRAK WPT N/A.
• Many times after clean-up, during climb out I notice speed limited at 240 below 10,000 ft. Default is 250 and during climb-out based on weight, the minimum clean speed can be in excess of 250 below 10K. During descent below 10K default by FMC is 240 or whatever is restricted by STAR.
• If DRAG REQUIRED msg shows should not have "DRAG REQUIRED VNAV" message.
• We should have a SPPED BRAKE ARM indication when in ARM position on EICAS.
• Some issues with turn anticipation resulting in excessive bank angles in excess of 30 degrees of bank and some unusual pitch variations.
• When on HDG to intercept ILS, despite having APP selected it will go initially LOC and later will switch to APP. Correct functionality, if on HDG and arm APP mode, it will switch to APP, not LOC, and later APP. Two different modes.
• Reversers should go up to 106.6 N1 limited by EEC, not only 51%
• Brakes are very weak. 

You might want to @MattNischan to ensure it gets duly noted 🙂

[ShawnG 1,823]

1 hour ago, carlanthony24 said:

Fixed eventually the issue has been going on for a long time only now in the latest beta/update its happening a lot more. So people have a right to complain and what not.

Sure, but complainers don’t have special rights to not be questioned.  If their complaints are incorrect, or as is usually the case, there is a valid concern that is inflated and overblown to ridiculous levels, it’s perfectly ok to question them.  You’d think Jorg personally hacked into these guys hard drives and deleted their OS and stole their credit card info by the tone of some of this stuff.

[carlanthony24 592]

20 minutes ago, ShawnG said:

Sure, but complainers don’t have special rights to not be questioned.  If their complaints are incorrect, or as is usually the case, there is a valid concern that is inflated and overblown to ridiculous levels, it’s perfectly ok to question them.  You’d think Jorg personally hacked into these guys hard drives and deleted their OS and stole their credit card info by the tone of some of this stuff.

The thing is even the streamers who were part of the beta with close ties to Asobo mentioned it. It has not been overblown. We pay for a product to be beta testers then they should be working with us but if anything this doesn't seem to be the case for some things. 

[LRBS 974]

34 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

You might want to @MattNischan to ensure it gets duly noted 🙂

Thank you for the suggestion. I did try, but..........

I attempted to report some issues through the website. However, the process to report a bug was very time-consuming as I had to navigate through several menus and answer numerous questions. On the other hand, when I collaborated with other developers, reporting a particular discrepancy was easy and straightforward. We only needed to point out the issue, and if they required further clarification, we provided it without wasting time. Their system was efficient and worked perfectly.

[Muds 31]

3 minutes ago, LRBS said:

Thank you for the suggestion. I did try, but..........

I attempted to report some issues through the website. However, the process to report a bug was very time-consuming as I had to navigate through several menus and answer numerous questions. On the other hand, when I collaborated with other developers, reporting a particular discrepancy was easy and straightforward. We only needed to point out the issue, and if they required further clarification, we provided it without wasting time. Their system was efficient and worked perfectly.

i think the most straight forward way would be to join their discord and tag the list in each of the 74 and 78 channels

[Fielder 3,825]

As we all know, the white dot was created to help Xbox console players using the Xbox controller. 

[cj-ibbotson 82]

14 hours ago, jarmstro said:

Disconnecting stuff will not get rid of the white dot. You have to delete the conflicting stored profiles. In my case, deleting the assigned bindings for my joystick hatswitch got rid of it. The hatswitch on my yoke seems to not cause an issue and I still have a console controller connected but I've deleted all bindings except those used in drone mode. So it's possibly anything you have assigned on a peripheral  to Look Up, Look Left etc.  The white borders, however, remain. 

Thanks though on my profiles I do not have any look type movements on my hatswitch assignments as I use TrackIR to look about.  Figured unplugging would work since the controller no longer appears as an option if its not plugged in. Not getting the dot tonight, have tried the mod, but the white borders is a pain in the A**, what on earth is the purpose of those?