2 hours ago, Maxis said:

If it has my needs ill buy/use it. If it doesn't .. well it just doesn't

That's what anybody should do. That said, there's value in criticising or praising stuff publicly, because this can influence what you might get (or not) in the future. E.g. If there wouldn't have been that much amount of flak from basically anyone for the Aerosoft A330, other devs might think of doing the same in a similar situation.

3 hours ago, Farlis said:

No. You can't change them. Pick any Waypoint in the FMS go to Constraints and all the options will be greyed out and a big amber message saying: "ALT CSTR NOT ALLOWED AT ----"

Oh well that's surprising. But I surely hope that's a bug/oversight, because it would be ridiculous to call that airplane "VATSIM-able" if that feature wasn't even implemented yet. That's basic stuff.

EDIT: Found my own answer from our fellow Avsimmer Lucky over at Discord:

"You may enter altitude constraints for approaches and departures but there's a bug where you can't for enroute legs at the moment. THIS GOES FOR ANYONE ELSE WITH THIS ISSUE"

 

 

Edited November 3, 20241 yr by Fiorentoni

6 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Oh well that's surprising. But I surely hope that's a bug/oversight, because it would be ridiculous to call that airplane "VATSIM-able" if that feature wasn't even implemented yet. That's basic stuff.

If I recall correctly this feature is currently also missing in their A32N. If you want to meet any constraint given to you by ATC on VATSIM you have to use the descend arrows that the aircraft draws you on the PFD depending on your speed and rate of descend.

Edited November 3, 20241 yr by Farlis

13 minutes ago, Farlis said:

If I recall correctly this feature is currently also missing in their A32N. If you want to meet any constraint given to you by ATC on VATSIM you have to use the descend arrows that the aircraft draws you on the PFD depending on your speed and rate of descend.

Negative, I can set constraints during CLB, CRZ and DES in the A320N but it will ask you if it's for CLB or DES.

Edited November 3, 20241 yr by BuboBubo

22 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

"You may enter altitude constraints for approaches and departures but there's a bug where you can't for enroute legs at the moment. THIS GOES FOR ANYONE ELSE WITH THIS ISSUE"

Ah, now that explains it. I wanted to preplan my stepclimbs by using constraints and it wouldn't let me.

A little healthy competition is fine. Ill try both (eventually) and fly what feels better. Still trying to narrow down my focus so I can learn more about each aircraft I want to spend the most time in. 

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

That's what anybody should do. That said, there's value in criticising or praising stuff publicly, because this can influence what you might get (or not) in the future. E.g. If there wouldn't have been that much amount of flak from basically anyone for the Aerosoft A330, other devs might think of doing the same in a similar situation.

Agreed in general. But there is point where it becomes too much. I don't know where that line is .. for everyone its different. I just say my piece without trying to get too involved. If the Dev does better and fixes the deficiencies great. If they don't. well.. meh. Hopefully someone else is able to cater to what i am looking for.  If not.. ill wait patiently. 🙂

It'll likely be fully featured before FBW's is. 

This doesn't mean that FBW's will have fewer features. I expect the opposite, but probably when iniBuilds delivers its finished product, FBW will be still in beta. 

This isn't a knock on either developer. It's simply the difference between an open-scope, open-source free project with tons of moving parts and a company throwing money and bodies at its project with likely clear timelines and budgets for profit. 

Edited November 3, 20241 yr by Abriael

My main concern with Inibuilds is that they are trying to do a bit too much at the same time. They already have the A300, A310, A32N for MS/Asobo/MSFS,
Then they are making/have made A330 + Beluga for MSFS24 + that they are working on the A350 + A380. Will be allot to support at once.

32 minutes ago, BuboBubo said:

My main concern with Inibuilds is that they are trying to do a bit too much at the same time. They already have the A300, A310, A32N for MS/Asobo/MSFS,
Then they are making/have made A330 + Beluga for MSFS24 + that they are working on the A350 + A380. Will be allot to support at once.

I thought so too but then I learned that they basically recycle their systems stuff for each of their Airbusses. The A320neo has the LNAV of the A300, the A330 will have the LNAV of the A300, the A350 will have the LNAV of the A300 and so on... same for stuff like hydraulics etc. That works quite well, because Airbus are after all quite similar and most people don't spend 20 minutes on the hydraulics page anyway.

It certainly feels like they're trying to stake a flag on basically everything they can. 

Good for them of course, obviously they have the money and manpower to do a lot, and so far it seemed to work relatively fine. Hopefully, it'll stay that way. 

Edited November 3, 20241 yr by Abriael

I've got a copy of the FBW 380 and it is very impressive. But for my tastes it's a bit too impressive, systems wise. I'm not a serious simmer, in the "serious pilot" sense, and struggle with anything that insists I know all sorts of airliner and piloting stuff. I can hand-fly it fine, but I like to be able to set up a flight plan with the minimum effort, ideally via the MSFS world map, and have the sim take over the piloting if I want to actually bother with a whole flight.

I think I've seen a couple of clips of 2024 that imply that the new sim/update will handle automatic flights a lot better than currently, and I would hope Inibuilds aircraft will support any new such function, especially as they supply aircraft for the sim. I doubt FBW will want to consider such features though. In that sense, I guess I'm hoping that the Inibuilds version will be what a lot of people will no doubt consider less "study level". Although I don't see why any aircraft can't support both types of operation - every last whistle and flute for the cockpit folk and full automation for the ctrl-e folk.

I bought the Fenix A320. It's better than the FBW, and I don't regret the purchase, but I don't think I'll see the need to spend that kind of money again for the quality jump, because while it is better, it's not *tons* better. It's not like we're talking PMDG vs Carenado here.

I'll be a little surprised if the Inibuilds A380 is a hot seller given how good the FBW 380 already is.

 

1 hour ago, eslader said:

I'll be a little surprised if the Inibuilds A380 is a hot seller given how good the FBW 380 already is.

 

What are you even talking about that Ini A380 will sell like hotcakes on the Marketplace and for XBOX if its at a reasonable price. What are people forgetting here? Ini is not in no rush to release a A380 at this time as people on PC can simply enjoy the FBW at the monent.

 

Edited November 4, 20241 yr by JBDB-MD80

To all the nitpickers, whiners and naysayers...

The FBW A380 is in ALPHA. The FBW A380 is a gratis add-on.
Cut the guys a break, willya?