Fenix B2 question

[Zimmerbz 168]

I thought I saw this somewhere but can't find it anymore... Is it true that if you don't properly shut down engines for example, or start them out of sequence, etc. that over time it can cause failures or issues and then require "maintenance"?  Did i hear that correctly?  

[martinboehme 493]

I don't think you can damage the engines on an A320 during start or shutdown in any way - the FADEC will make sure that you don't exceed any limitations.

What I remember reading, and what you may be referring to, is that if an engine surges and you let it continue to surge, then eventually it will be damaged. 

Edited March 6 by martinboehme

[Fiorentoni 4,245]

37 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

I thought I saw this somewhere but can't find it anymore... Is it true that if you don't properly shut down engines for example, or start them out of sequence, etc. that over time it can cause failures or issues and then require "maintenance"?  Did i hear that correctly?  

There's no "over time" (between flights) failures in the Fenix. You might mix that up with the A300, which saves e.g. oil quantity between flights and will create an engine failure if the quantity is too low.

EDIT: That said - I'd except a persistant state (oil, hydraulics, tires, brakes) for a high quality product like a Fenix. I hope it's on their list; any other study level addons has this.

Edited March 6 by Fiorentoni

[Zimmerbz 168]

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

There's no "over time" (between flights) failures in the Fenix. You might mix that up with the A300, which saves e.g. oil quantity between flights and will create an engine failure if the quantity is too low.

EDIT: That said - I'd except a persistant state (oil, hydraulics, tires, brakes) for a high quality product like a Fenix. I hope it's on their list; any other study level addons has this.

Got it... I might have been getting it confused with the A300

[Aamir 2,907]

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

EDIT: That said - I'd except a persistant state (oil, hydraulics, tires, brakes) for a high quality product like a Fenix. I hope it's on their list; any other study level addons has this.

Ehhhhh I'm not so convinced on this being the value add most seem to think - I like the general concept, but we've sort of done it in our own way.

My viewpoint on this is that - realistically speaking, a line pilot and aircraft aren't going to "meet" very often. As a line pilot when you're done with the day's sectors you'll come back to another aircraft in the morning, at least in the case of short-haul aircraft like the A320. This aircraft is going to be in a "flyable" state by the time you get to it, i.e Oil is not low, tyres are "OK", so on so forth. What we've done is add some "persistence" in a way that aligns with the realistic use case of the airplane. So you come to the aircraft each initialisation with randomised engine oil, brake mass, so on so forth. These will get "used up" as you go on. If you're lucky your oil levels are good on start, and things are OK if you fly 2-3 sectors. If you're unlucky your oil is low and you'll need to call maint to sort it when you land on one of your sectors, or on a turnaround somewhere. For most other areas the failure system is MTBF - so it will fail "realistically", randomly. Obviously the aircraft are quite robust and reasonbly reliable - so it's rare, but definitely not impossible to have something or the other break. The combination of both of these things, I feel, gives you the best representation of the line pilot/aircraft experience in terms of "stuff to watch out for". 

[Fiorentoni 4,245]

1 minute ago, Aamir said:

Ehhhhh I'm not so convinced on this being the value add most seem to think - I like the general concept, but we've sort of done it in our own way.

My viewpoint on this is that - realistically speaking, a line pilot and aircraft aren't going to "meet" very often. As a line pilot when you're done with the day's sectors you'll come back to another aircraft in the morning, at least in the case of short-haul aircraft like the A320. This aircraft is going to be in a "flyable" state by the time you get to it, i.e Oil is not low, tyres are "OK", so on so forth. What we've done is add some "persistence" in a way that aligns with the realistic use case of the airplane. So you come to the aircraft each initialisation with randomised engine oil, brake mass, so on so forth. These will get "used up" as you go on. If you're lucky your oil levels are good on start, and things are OK if you fly 2-3 sectors. If you're unlucky your oil is low and you'll need to call maint to sort it when you land on one of your sectors, or on a turnaround somewhere. For most other areas the failure system is MTBF - so it will fail "realistically", randomly. Obviously the aircraft are quite robust and reasonbly reliable - so it's rare, but definitely not impossible to have something or the other break. The combination of both of these things, I feel, gives you the best representation of the line pilot/aircraft experience in terms of "stuff to watch out for". 

I'd like to have a chance to have this occur before the first flight, at least as an option (like on the Maddog, PMDG, A300 etc.). This makes checking these items more immersive, and it's also not uncommon in real world to have the oil refilled during preflight. I'd consider that a part of normal operations. For the rest I agree with you.

[Aamir 2,907]

9 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I'd like to have a chance to have this occur before the first flight, at least as an option (like on the Maddog, PMDG, A300 etc.). This makes checking these items more immersive, and it's also not uncommon in real world to have the oil refilled during preflight. I'd consider that a part of normal operations. For the rest I agree with you.

Planning on this and more - but it's a long term plan and with some other spice thrown in. With that being said, no promises as usual 🙂

[Fiorentoni 4,245]

Just now, Aamir said:

Planning on this and more - but it's a long term plan and with some other spice thrown in. With that being said, no promises as usual 🙂

I'm sure if you eventually end up doing it, it will be just as revolutionary (good) as anything else you do 🙂

[WestAir 2,522]

Yeah Fiorentoni. I can definitely see brake glow / wear, random buttons at start, and maybe even an FO program like PMDG's DC-6 in the future, too. Maybe even some visual goodies like St.Elmo's fire, lift condensation, or foggy cabins during depressurization. Whatever Aamir has in store over the coming years is going to be pretty amazing. I can't wait.

[Aamir 2,907]

Brakes are particularly interesting to me. I worked out that someone would need to do 7 landings per day, for 365 days straight - before the brakes need to be replaced - that context makes me think of implementing these things.. differently 😃

Or, alternatively, someone doing 1 landing per day would wait 7 years before replacing the brakes, provided they never missed a single day in those 7 years.

Either/or.

Edited March 6 by Aamir

[Bobsk8 12,742]

12 minutes ago, Aamir said:

Brakes are particularly interesting to me. I worked out that someone would need to do 7 landings per day, for 365 days straight - before the brakes need to be replaced - that context makes me think of implementing these things.. differently 😃

Or, alternatively, someone doing 1 landing per day would wait 7 years before replacing the brakes, provided they never missed a single day in those 7 years.

Either/or.

Then we would be flying MSFS 2031.