On 10/4/2024 at 5:17 AM, Noel said:

Only lateral navigation so it's up to you to manage vertical.  They keep saying it's part of FMS2 which was available to the public then I think they pulled it to complete other aspects of their planned update.  

 

FMS2 was necessary in order to develop full RNP support. Putting working into it before-hand would just create double work as FMS2 was a complete restructure of the FMS to better adhere to how the real thing functions.

5 hours ago, SimianFlu said:

hmm rnav vertical worked for me. The dev version is much better actually, there's also missed approaches and terrain radar

I stopped using the dev version some time ago sounds like I should re-try it.  At the time I was having perf issues w/ dev so switched.

12 hours ago, SimianFlu said:

hmm rnav vertical worked for me. The dev version is much better actually, there's also missed approaches and terrain radar

That's funny because I just asked on their Discord channel if and when vertical RNAV will be implemented and they said:

tracernz [Z+13] — 10/05/2024 7:27 AM
Definitely coming. Just a matter of available time with other projects on hand....There's still a bug in the flight planning code that needs fixed before it can be finished.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

That's funny because I just asked on their Discord channel if and when vertical RNAV will be implemented and they said:

tracernz [Z+13] — 10/05/2024 7:27 AM
Definitely coming. Just a matter of available time with other projects on hand....There's still a bug in the flight planning code that needs fixed before it can be finished.

I think he was confusing standard VNAV which as far as i know is presently enabled or was enabled when i last used FBW versus Actual  RNAV/RNP used in "Final Approach" which is not currently implemented in the FBW

FBW saved us tubeliner's flyers from from 2020 to to 2022 but there are simply better products out there but no shame on them. I gave a good donation and looking forward to the A380x project.

 

I saw one comment regarding better 'fps'.  What the consensus regarding performance for Fenix compared to the current or very recent Dev version of FBW320neo?  As a NV DLSS FG non user performance is a major consideration.  I have found the current Dev version to be significantly harder on performance than the stable version. 

I think it can be argued that fenix has slightly worse performance.  However for a rig like yours I don't think it could be noticed much.  I know I've said it before to you Noel.  But it's the best plane you've never flown before!  I find it to be the most enjoyable plane I've used since the early 90s.  I've enjoyed other like the FSLabs, Leonardo Maddog, Majestic Q400.  But the fenix hands down is the most immersive plane I've ever owned.  

PS: They don't pay me commission!

3 hours ago, Noel said:

What the consensus regarding performance for Fenix compared to the current or very recent Dev version of FBW320neo?

Not tested between them in quite a while, but the Fenix was harder on performance than the stable version of the FBW.

That said, I can only echo micstatic's comment. The Fenix A320 is hands down the best overall airliner in MSFS.

With a 5800X3D and the Lossless Scaling app, I just finished a Fenix A321 flight into WFSS' VHHH. Was also running AI Shipping, PSX AI traffic at 30%, SamScene3D Hong Kong, Macau and Shenzen city products, the default VHHX installed, and overcast clouds in ActiveSky. Landing on 07L (facing the city) I dropped to 23 FPS native at worst, so 46 FPS with frame gen, despite running all of those add-ons.

What I love about the Fenix aircraft is that my fuel planning was wrong and it became an issue. A 25⁰ bank to the right from base to final caused a left tank low fuel caution and a x-feed advisory on the ECAM. The fuel level rectified itself after rolling back to wings level. It's that sort of attention to detail that isn't available (AFAIA) in other dev's Airbuses. And that's before we touch on the high quality systems, texturing, lighting, sounds, and animations.

5 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Not tested between them in quite a while, but the Fenix was harder on performance than the stable version of the FBW.

Thanks for that.  Would you mind trying the current Dev version and give me your impression of it vs Fenix for simply unlocked frame rate at the same exact setting.  I don't use frame generation so my ideal low end FPS is locked at 45.  My G-sync display helps cope with rates that drop below 45 and I've seen as low as 34 in very rare scenarios.  I just reinstalled the Stable FBW and really it was the same as the Dev version so I will go back to Dev version which is definitely more developed with features not present in the Stable version.

Fenix sounds too good to ignore.  I am very focused on scoring in SLC + APL and not quite as focused on depth and quality perhaps than some others.  I'll look into it more deeply thanks for your input.

34 minutes ago, Noel said:

Would you mind trying the current Dev version and give me your impression of it vs Fenix for simply unlocked frame rate at the same exact setting.

I'll do that tomorrow as it's very late here.

I'll post again here when I've done a few performance tests.

12 hours ago, F737MAX said:

I'll do that tomorrow as it's very late here.

I'll post again here when I've done a few performance tests.

I appreciate that a lot thank you in advance.  I really like the FBW but clearly Fenix is worth a super close look!

3 hours ago, Noel said:

I appreciate that a lot thank you in advance.  I really like the FBW but clearly Fenix is worth a super close look!

Here you go:

EGLL - FBW:
https://ibb.co/Q8ZmkhM
https://ibb.co/PQsCyvS

EGLL - Fenix:
https://ibb.co/4s5hyyJ
https://ibb.co/ss92dMJ

 

KJFK - FBW:
https://ibb.co/YcKsgwf
https://ibb.co/8ckckds
https://ibb.co/VMftJcr

KJFK - Fenix:
https://ibb.co/zRb19qr
https://ibb.co/fqLtq5D
https://ibb.co/fNhSYcn
 

For reference, I used the Development version of the FBW.
No AI aircraft in use to keep variability down, nor did I use the Lossless Scaling app (Frame Gen) per your request.
I did use iniBuilds versions of the respective airports; Orbx landmarks London city pack, Orbx region GB South; SamScene3D Sightseeing NewYorkCityTimes; REX AccuSeason; native Road Traffic at 15% and ActiveSky (which unfortunately changed the live weather conditions on me between the JFK tests).

1 hour ago, F737MAX said:

For reference, I used the Development version of the FBW.

Thank you for that which took some time!  It looks like they're quite similar overall from those captures.  If you feel like it I'm wondering if you could do one more smaller set using this method for each capture for each plane sitting on the runway ready for TO:

• Reboot PC before each of two captures
• Start MSFS w/ Accuseason, but w/o Active Sky, w/o AutoFPS or similar, w/o FSLTL etc
• Pick CLEAR as a weather pre-set in MSFS
• Pick an airport and go to a specific runway, same time of day, start at the runway and get engines etc up and ready for TO.
• Screen capture in Dev Mode before the plane has moved on the runway, and a second  after 20 seconds of rolling for TO.

If not no worries you were very gracious to do that already!

Cheers

22 minutes ago, Noel said:

Thank you for that which took some time!  It looks like they're quite similar overall from those captures.  If you feel like it I'm wondering if you could do one more smaller set using this method for each capture for each plane sitting on the runway ready for TO:

• Reboot PC before each of two captures
• Start MSFS w/ Accuseason, but w/o Active Sky, w/o AutoFPS or similar, w/o FSLTL etc
• Pick CLEAR as a weather pre-set in MSFS
• Pick an airport and go to a specific runway, same time of day, start at the runway and get engines etc up and ready for TO.
• Screen capture in Dev Mode before the plane has moved on the runway, and a second  after 20 seconds of rolling for TO.

The EGLL captures between the two dev's airliners were within 10 mins of each other (1515 - 1525Z).  At KJFK they were within 15 mins (1620 - 1635Z).
They will give you comparable data sets.

Let me know three of your preferred test locations - hopefully I have a payware scenery airport that matches.
I'll run vanilla everything except AccuSeason, payware scenery of choice, and the two A320 airliners.

2 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

I'll run vanilla everything except AccuSeason, payware scenery of choice, and the two A320 airliners.

Awesome thanks again!   I think KJFK is great and choose a runway aimed west perhaps for maximum object density.  Set all sliders to Ultra as long as nothing hampers your GPU and TLOD to 100 is good enough. 

Thanks!