Another A320, wow I can't contain my excitement.

Asobo/Working title have been updating the default aircraft/avionics over the last couple years.

I guess they decided they’d rather completely redo the A320Neo instead of just do a flight systems upgrade 

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by Tuskin38

Yeah this is going to be another high fidelity, free and default addition to the MSFS lineup. Apart from giving something to the XBox crowd, (although they never cited this as a reason) this move is in line with what Jorg has said in the past, "Let's make these planes the best they can be"

MS/Asobo is definitely looking to dispense with the idea that default planes have to be junk, the same way they dispensed with the idea that scenery can only look good with add-ons.

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by Krakin

1 minute ago, Krakin said:

Yeah this is going to be another high fidelity, free and default addition to the MSFS lineup. Apart from giving something to the XBox crowd, (although they never cited this as a reason) this move is in line with what Jorg has said in the past, "Let's make these planes the best they can be"

Makes me wonder if the default 2024 aircraft will better then the default 2020 aircraft 

11 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

The neo is going to be free.

Is there a source for this?

It could be a Famous Flyer.

2 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

Is there a source for this?

It could be a Famous Flyer.

Jorg would have called it that if it was.

It wasn’t given any of the labels they give their payware aircraft.

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by Tuskin38

1 minute ago, Tuskin38 said:

Makes me wonder if the default 2024 aircraft will better then the default 2020 aircraft 

Definitely, based on what they presented at FSExpo. Better failures and deeper systems across the board.

 

3 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

Is there a source for this?

It could be a Famous Flyer.

Nah. Jorg said the only reason the Asobo A320 Neo is staying is because it is so integrated with activities, otherwise the iniBuilds version would have replaced it.

1 minute ago, Krakin said:

Definitely, based on what they presented at FSExpo. Better failures and deeper systems across the board.

 

Nah. Jorg said the only reason the Asobo A320 Neo is staying is because it is so integrated with activities, otherwise the iniBuilds version would have replaced it.

Ah, ok. Thanks. That makes sense.

24 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

I just don't get why we need so many airbus A320s.  Maybe an A330 or 350?  Or even a A220?

I mean realistically we have two good A320s, Fenix and FBW. LVFRs doesn't really count. Aerosoft took the short end of the stick on this one, they haven't even announced their narrow body Neo's yet and who knows if FSLabs will deliver anything before 2024 is out.

Don't get me wrong, I'd take an A350 over this 320Neo any day of the week but we really don't have an abundance of high fidelity A320s in the sim (yet).

Is it possible that all the work that FBW has done over the past few years will integrate into the iniBuilds A320neo?  It's quite complicated to develop and program the A320 flight systems, see Fenix and FSLabs, so either they've been working on this for a long long time, or it's going to be less complex in some way compared to what FBW has done.  They developed new systems for an A320 that came with the base sim, so how is this not the same thing?  Just curious. 

 

Inibuilds are very talented developers. We will see when the SU14 beta period starts how good the aircraft is. It really needs to make sure the missed/rav components are there.

Assuming this falls between the FBW and Fenix in terms of level of detail, it is overall a net win for the FS community. A lot of people -- probably the majority -- even on PC just use the default airplanes and airports. Maybe they might get a scenery on sale on the marketplace. 

It really sucks for the Fenix and FBW teams, though. If this A320 existed when I got the Fenix, I doubt I would have purchased the Fenix. I mean, I know me and I probably would, but it's not the slam dunk decision getting the Fenix was for me back in March.

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by BrammyH
corrections

Excellent news!

The more competition, the better. Keeps prices low, drives innovation and keeps developers engaged to do more.

I'm so glad we're transitioning from the days that have gone where there was little-to-no innovation & continued cash-cow antics (*cough* a certain Boeing developer porting the same product(s) to each platform as it came, time and time again)

--

Folks complaining - you'll never be happy. Previously it was "There's no decent 3rd party aircraft". Now it's Now it's: "There's too many 3rd party aircraft" 😁

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by flightskyc

15 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

It really sucks for the Fenix and FBW teams, though. If this A320 existed when I got the Fenix, I doubt I would have purchased the Fenix. I mean, I know me and I probably would, but it's not the slam dunk decision getting the Fenix was for me back in March.

The Neo and CEO are different aircraft other than just engines, there are other minor differences 

There are people who fly both the Fenix CEO and FBW NEO.

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by Tuskin38

10 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

The Neo and CEO are different aircraft other than just engines, there are other minor differences 

There are people who fly both the Fenix CEO and FBW NEO.

Oh, ya totally.

But even Fenix said the market for people who will pay $60usd for the CEO will shrink if there is a default A320n that is decent.

It is hard to compete with free and built in to the sim.

Folks like us will see the difference and pay for the Fenix. But it might be a tougher sell for a lot of folks.

Needless to me. FBW one is already good enough. Inibuilds, as mentioned before, needs to learn more about optimizing FPS in both their scenery and aircraft products in my opinion.

I hope it'll be optional and not mandatory.

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by edpatino