5 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

It's not included because it's performance heavy.

Missing one feature isn't 'half baked'. The rest of the aircraft is excellent.

The Fenix and PMDG have terrain which I use often in mountainous approaches,  , no performance problems. 

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by Bobsk8

For me personally the terrain radar missing is not a showstopper if the rest of the AC is high fidelity.

But its right up there for the items i would like to see added (without a performance hit). I recognize that inibuilds choice of coding language /methods may influence this but as Bob points out .. two devs have implemented terrain radar with no performance loss.

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by Maxis

4 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

The Fenix and PMDG have terrain which I use often in mountainous approaches,  , no performance problems. 

Are they using the default terrain radar?

16 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

A new engine type in a future update isn't an improvement?

It *will* be (future tense). Let's agree to disagree here 🙂

1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

It *will* be (future tense). Let's agree to disagree here 🙂

Well it's Jorg that wants it, so it will most likely be done.

Just now, Tuskin38 said:

Are they using the default terrain radar?

Who cares, it works. 

Does anyone know if this plane properly flies an RF leg?

I flew it a few times last night. I am pretty impressed with it. A few general comments:

- I like it has missed approaches/RNAV.

- I really don't like the INI EFB.

- The lack of terrain radar isn't an issue. I usually plot my path via a Navigraph connection anyway.

The RNAV approaches are more likely to make me prefer this over the FBW. However, the FBW is so good, especially the sounds, I think I will fly the FBW for that.

We have needed a good, default NEO for a while in the sim. Mainly for the Xbox users, but also for folks who don't want to install the FBW outside the sim. Ini has done a tremendous job with this airplane.

Yeah, you got to remember that X-Box pilots didn't have access to any good A320s before this update, just the default Asobo Neo.

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by Tuskin38

This is also a really good A320 NEO, period.

 

 

Quote

 

avgeek_ethan — Today at 9:08 AM

is this normal, i get this every time i come in to land

 

 

Josh — Today at 9:11 AM

Does it appear briefly then go away?

 

avgeek_ethan — Today at 12:05 PM

yeah after like 5 seconds

 

 

Josh — Today at 12:05 PM

By design

 

 

 

 

As fuel sloshes around, especially at low levels, it can send false readings to the instruments

 

This is a DEFAULT plane!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, Krakin said:

This is also a really good A320 NEO, period.

 

 

 

This is a DEFAULT plane!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well this has 3 tons of fuel left unless I see it wrong. And this certainly does not happen "every time" on landing. This is a bug, not a feature.

27 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Well this has 3 tons of fuel left unless I see it wrong. And this certainly does not happen "every time" on landing. This is a bug, not a feature.

Considering the max fuel capacity of the plane, I would say that is relatively low. Just because the user said "every time" does not mean it happens every single time for everyone else. He's probably done two flights for all we know. Can't call it a bug if the dev literally says, "by design".

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by Krakin

For a default airliner it's good. I'm spoilt by the Fenix A320, as I'm sure many others are who are judging it a little unfairly.

It has some quirks that I haven't figured out yet and it isn't as refined as payware. Yet, compared to the Asobo 747-8i, the Asobo A32N, or whatever default we used to get in previous sims, this appears to be more than acceptable.

Please delete.

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by Fiorentoni

4 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

I'm not saying Ini is not doing its job. It's the *job* I'm talking about: They are contracted to do a certain amount of stuff and fixes and will do not more than what they are required to (which is fine), but obviously Asobo does not care about them giving the A310 many improvements. The A300, which has been out for a much shorter amount of time, has been superior in almost every way even on release day and has seen a massive amount of updates (additional features) since then. You can't say you don't notice the difference between the Asobo-contracted A310 and their own A300. It's night and day in regards to updates and general fidelity. Therefore I don't expect their A320neo to improve much further than as it is now either.

The difference in fidelity and frequency of updates of ini's aircraft contracted by MS/Asobo vs ini's payware birds are no where near as night and day as is their price difference 🙂... and for that price of $0, what we get in these *default* aircraft vs what we used to get in default aircraft previously in MSFS and other sims, is also night and day (and of course this applies to Working Title enhanced default birds too). Of course ini is going to pay more attention and care to its payware, that's a given but besides the point.

And no, one can't say Asobo "obviously doesn't care" about ini giving these aircraft improvements.. since obviously the A310 has received improvements, as will the A320. And Asobo also has similarly cared enough to keep updating other AAU/SU enhanced default aircraft after their first releases too.
 

Edited May 24, 20242 yr by lwt1971