32 minutes ago, rlashier said:

Whether you start with Fenix or PMDG is your choice, but it would be a shame not to have both.

I'll eventually have both but if one is more feature rich/immersive than the other I'd rather start with that although I have always been more partial to the Boeing FMC over that of the airbus. 

21 minutes ago, red259 said:

I'll eventually have both but if one is more feature rich/immersive than the other I'd rather start with that although I have always been more partial to the Boeing FMC over that of the airbus. 

The Fenix A320 will develop into a far more immersive and feature-rich add-on. But it's not complete yet.

Right now, both have a lot of positives and some negatives, with which elements are simulated fully and personal preference playing big parts in deciding which one to choose.

 

Edited November 12, 20232 yr by F737MAX

Another thing to keep in mind:

There have been many world updates where they have visually enhanced many parts of the world even further from the initial release. These world updates added detailed airports and custom scenery objects. These world updates are a separate but free download in the in-game marketplace. I would recommend you download the world and city updates starting with the ones located in your area.

I think I am leaning towards starting with the Fenix A320. I need to brush up on my knowledge. Does anyone have recommendations of good start to finish video tutorials for the Fenix A320? Also videos on flight planning via simbrief and using the navigraph charts. It has been soo long I'm going to have to relearn reading the different charts etc. Always nice to find tutorial videos that provide a full run through so you can see how all the stages of flight planning and flight fit together. 

I think I started here: 

A real world A320 pilot (yes, he recently switched to the 787).  It helped me transition to the Airbus.  He has several videos that inform you on the 320.  V1 Simulations is a good real world pilot with some tutorials as well.

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by Orlaam

3 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

I think I started here: 

A real world A320 pilot (yes, he recently switched to the 787).  It helped me transition to the Airbus.  He has several videos that inform you on the 32.  V1 Simulations is a good real world pilot with some tutorials as well.

Concur with this. How I started to transition from GA to the Airbus. Previously, I had never flown any passenger jets in any flight sim. These videos helped me learn the Airbus immensely.

On 11/10/2023 at 10:43 PM, red259 said:

That is disconcerting to hear. Maybe i will get the Fenix to start then

Try the FBW A320NX.  Fabulous, free, in continuous development.  Some folks who have both it an Fenix prefer it.

As for addon airports I'd fly first w/o any, then pick up any you will frequent in particular if you need night lighting.  There are a whole lot of excellent airports w/ the stock install, certainly compared to what was offered as default in FSX/P3D, and often I am blown away by default airports even in areas I've never heard of.  But yes, if you know the airport personally you will appreciate more accurate portrayal.

I enjoy A Pilot's Life Chapter 2 and use it for all flights primarily because its scores all flights for adherance to a large set of criteria, and that goes towards your pilot rating.

Aerosoft CRJs I use all regularly and the default 787 is very decent now since tweaked by Working Title.  Those three along w/ PMDG 737-800 are what I use in A Pilot's Life.

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by Noel

10 hours ago, Noel said:

 

I enjoy A Pilot's Life Chapter 2 and use it for all flights primarily because its scores all flights for adherance to a large set of criteria, and that goes towards your pilot rating.

 

A Pilots Life will definetly make you a better pilot. I use it all the time. 

 

As far as the Fenix PMDG discussion, I own both and have hundreds of hours in both of them.  The PMDG is more of an exercise in actually piloting the aircraft,, whereas I felt the Fenix was more of sitting on the flight deck watching the aircraft fly itself. In the Fenix, at 500 feet, you can engage the autopilot, and the aircraft does everything for you, until it is time to disconnect the AP on short final and flare. The PMDG, you are planning and controlling pretty much everything, level changes, speeds, etc,  so you are allot busier actually flying the 737. I found after awhile, I got bored flying the A 320. 

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by Bobsk8

22 hours ago, red259 said:

I'll eventually have both but if one is more feature rich/immersive than the other I'd rather start with that although I have always been more partial to the Boeing FMC over that of the airbus. 

Another thing to keep in mind that I haven't seen anyone mention is abnormals.  If you're interested in simulating abnormals / failures, and especially if you want to do any single engine work, the PMDG is basically the only choice.  The Airbus still can't do a V1 cut.  The PMDG on the other hand flies them pretty realistically, and includes dozens of other failure scenarios.

On 11/11/2023 at 8:55 AM, Bobsk8 said:

I have hundreds of flights with PMDG 737, and have never had a problem in Lnav. I wonder what these people that are having problems are doing?

It's not that PMDG's LNAV doesn't take you where you're supposed to go, it's just that the flight guidance behaves in an unrealistic manner.  It will indeed get you to the runway, but the real airplane flies an LNAV track like it's on rails.  The PMDG autopilot does an ok job of tracking the magenta line, but the flight guidance bangs around like crazy.  It's rather noticeable and annoying if hand flying.  The flight guidance is there to be followed while hand flying after all, and contrary to popular simmer opinion, it's not at all unusual to hand fly an approach.  

I understand PMDG's time and resource constraints, and that they are the reason this hasn't yet been fixed.  It will be eventually, and the plane is far from unusable in the sim now, even on complex RNAV procedures.  But at the same time, it's probably not productive to pretend there is not a problem.  There is.  And it absolutely manifests in every copy of the PMDG 737 in MSFS, including yours.  It has nothing to do with how people are operating the sim.

13 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

It's not that PMDG's LNAV doesn't take you where you're supposed to go, it's just that the flight guidance behaves in an unrealistic manner.  It will indeed get you to the runway, but the real airplane flies an LNAV track like it's on rails.  The PMDG autopilot does an ok job of tracking the magenta line, but the flight guidance bangs around like crazy.  It's rather noticeable and annoying if hand flying.  The flight guidance is there to be followed while hand flying after all, and contrary to popular simmer opinion, it's not at all unusual to hand fly an approach.  

I understand PMDG's time and resource constraints, and that they are the reason this hasn't yet been fixed.  It will be eventually, and the plane is far from unusable in the sim now, even on complex RNAV procedures.  But at the same time, it's probably not productive to pretend there is not a problem.  There is.  And it absolutely manifests in every copy of the PMDG 737 in MSFS, including yours.  It has nothing to do with how people are operating the sim.

What I was referring to is someone stating that when flying an Rnav approach they see the heading swinging back and forth 30 degrees on either side of the course line ( like S turns I would guess) . I have never seen that. Maybe I am just lucky, but there are many videos on YouTube with people flying approaches with the 737, and you don't see that either. . On the other hand, the flying junk yard, DC6 that I have, is lucky to get you to the airport if you are using it's Rnav Gyropilot function. 

1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

Another thing to keep in mind that I haven't seen anyone mention is abnormals.  If you're interested in simulating abnormals / failures, and especially if you want to do any single engine work, the PMDG is basically the only choice.  The Airbus still can't do a V1 cut.  The PMDG on the other hand flies them pretty realistically, and includes dozens of other failure scenarios.

What's with the constant 'it can't do a V1 cut' criticism?!
The amount that people are banging on about it makes it sound like losing an engine at V1 is a regular occurence on real world flights.

The Fenix A320 can perform 200+ failures (including various electrical, hydraulic, and fuel systems problems, Flight Augmentation Computer issues, CB poputs, engine fire, and so on)...

 

If after the new engine model in block 2 arrives without the ability to encounter this apparently frequent critical moment engine failure, then perhaps you can have some complaint.

In the meantime, just like the PMDG 737, there's a lot to like and that has been simulated and there's also some missing elements.

 

Edited November 13, 20232 yr by F737MAX

Most of the heavy FPS hitters are for the tubeliners IMO.

GA Pilots are in better territory for better FPS.

I fly in the middle with the HJET.

sp

2 hours ago, F737MAX said:

What's with the constant 'it can't do a V1 cut' criticism?!
The amount that people are banging on about it makes it sound like losing an engine at V1 is a regular occurence on real world flights.

Well, an engine failure at V1, while not common in reality, is one of the most common training scenarios.  There are many many things that may or may not happen to you during a simulator training session or evaluation, but at least one V1 cut is an absolute certainty, every time. 

 Because of that, for anyone who has flown multi engine transport airplanes, it's one of the first things you're going to want to do when evaluating a new-to-you airplane type or sim rendition.  Normal takeoff, steep turns, approach to stall, normal ILS to a normal landing, and then V1 cut to a single engine ILS and landing.

It's not an "extra" or "bonus" ability of a simulation of an airliner, is what I mean.  Realistic engine-out performance is sort of a basic requirement of any simulation of a multi engine aircraft, and in an airliner that's going to look like a V1 cut.

Different priorities for different folks of course though.  I don't see it as criticism to point this out... It's just a fact.  I don't play the childish tribal "my dev is better than yours" game or anything; after all, I mentioned something the PMDG needs work on in this thread.

 

1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

Different priorities for different folks of course though.  I don't see it as criticism to point this out.

Had you said 'the PMDG 737 is currently the best airliner add-on to practice realistic engine-out procedures' there would have been no argument based on a comparison of the two (I've no idea if the Leonardo MD-80 can hold its own or not).

However, what you did say was that "the PMDG is basically the only choice" which is categorically not the case. Even allowing for your additional relative clause of "especially if you want to do any single engine work", the way it is written strongly suggests that the Fenix is not up to the task of providing realistic failures to practice when it certainly is.

It matters because someone will be using this advice to make a purchase decision.