The Chancellor414 works just fine as well! The PMS GTN750 is too dark however.

12 hours ago, carlanthony24 said:

What do you expect with a new sim. If you haven't already read the blog. An important part I have posted below. People are being able to complete flights others are suffering problems....

However, a disclaimer before we continue: We consider MSFS 2024 support entirely experimental at this stage and DO NOT consider 2024 compatibility an “advertised” feature, and as such we have not updated our store etc to reflect - this is down to the fact that we do not yet feel confident in the stability of the new simulator/platform, and do not want to begin taking customers’ money on this basis while being unable to guarantee a smooth experience. As a result, please be advised we will not be considering refund requests on the basis of MSFS 2024 experiences/issues - additionally, we will not be accepting customer support tickets in the 2024 environment at this time. We’ve created a community forum area for 2024 so folks can discuss things amongst themselves and we can have some sort of visibility into how things are going, though.

Hence why PMDG will not release in this state.  They never have an never will.  Some can use this as an opportunity to take digs at PMDG but if they realized their planes were "experimental" and couldn't support them then they wont release them.

The lengths some will go to turn this into a dig against PMDG is farcical when Fenix has stated:

Quote

 

We consider MSFS 2024 support entirely experimental at this stage and DO NOT consider 2024 compatibility an “advertised” feature,

this is down to the fact that we do not yet feel confident in the stability of the new simulator/platform, and do not want to begin taking customers’ money on this basis while being unable to guarantee a smooth experience.

additionally, we will not be accepting customer support tickets in the 2024 environment at this time.

 

I can just imagine the flames if PMDG released a product with that last statement...

I am not taking a dig at Fenix AT ALL by the way just pointing out the blatantly obvious to some of those here with their PMDG bias... 

I mean how do you expect a commercial developer to release a product (that is also in the Marketplace) to the masses that they can't support.  But sure, keep throwing fuel on the fire.  

Edited November 25, 20241 yr by psolk

10 minutes ago, psolk said:

Hence why PMDG will not release in this state.  They never have an never will.  Some can use this as an opportunity to take digs at PMDG but if they realized their planes were "experimental" and couldn't support them then they wont release them.

The lengths some will go to turn this into a dig against PMDG is farcical when Fenix has stated:

I can just imagine the flames if PMDG released a product with that last statement...

I am not taking a dig at Fenix AT ALL by the way just pointing out the blatantly obvious to some of those here with their PMDG bias... 

I mean how do you expect a commercial developer to release a product (that is also in the Marketplace) to the masses that they can't support.  But sure, keep throwing fuel on the fire.  

Just no. There's a big difference between releasing an "experimental" version that, based on initial report, seems to work pretty much great and someone writing a monologue blaming Asobo (as usual) for their own antiquated programming techniques and how that prevents a product from working at all. Especially when the party releasing the "experimental" version didn't even have access to the new sim until the rest of us did and the party blaming Asobo was part of the developer preview...

There are those who always look to put the blame on someone else instead of looking at what they can do better, and then there are those who just get on with stuff and look for solutions. I'll leave you to judge who's who.

For me the only bugs are.. 1)No liveries. 2) Sluggish EFB and contol responses and 3)You have to start the Fenix app before you fly because my sim wont autostart it. Apart from that, the experiment is over. It works thank God. EDIT. No somethings not quite right. Just had a failed flight EGGD to EGPH. Autopilot lost its mind.

Edited November 25, 20241 yr by jarmstro

11 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

1)No liveries.

Reinstalling the liveries from the Manager will make them available in 24. Or, you can copy the Fenix livery folder from 2020 to 2024 community.

58 minutes ago, Speedbird 217 said:

Just no. There's a big difference between releasing an "experimental" version that, based on initial report, seems to work pretty much great and someone writing a monologue blaming Asobo (as usual) for their own antiquated programming techniques and how that prevents a product from working at all. Especially when the party releasing the "experimental" version didn't even have access to the new sim until the rest of us did and the party blaming Asobo was part of the developer preview...

There are those who always look to put the blame on someone else instead of looking at what they can do better, and then there are those who just get on with stuff and look for solutions. I'll leave you to judge who's who.

There is also a big difference when you have to release it AND support it in Marketplace.  Fenix does not.  

You are arguing when even Fenix said they will NOT support it or field trouble tickets.  They probably found out most of it worked so they said have at it which is great!!!  Do we really believe they re-engineered it for 24 in 4 days when the sim was barely playable?   PMDG found API calls that would cause crashes and said we aren't releasing.   They also do not have the tools to support it no different than Fenix so one released as experimental the other said no way.  It's pretty logical. 

Can you imagine PMDG releasing something to marketplace and then saying they aren't supporting it?    

 

 

Works wonderfully.  Only the somewhat sluggish EFB is a bit annoying. 

2 minutes ago, psolk said:

There is also a big difference when you have to release it AND support it in Marketplace.  Fenix does not.  

You are arguing when even Fenix said they will NOT support it or field trouble tickets.  They probably found out most of it worked so they said have at it which is great!!!  Do we really believe they re-engineered it for 24 in 4 days when the sim was barely playable?   PMDG found API calls that would cause crashes and said we aren't releasing.   They also do not have the tools to support it no different than Fenix so one released as experimental the other said no way.  It's pretty logical. 

Can you imagine PMDG releasing something to marketplace and then saying they aren't supporting it?    

 

 

I will also add there is a massive difference in how the programs are coded and implemented. So whomever is attempting to compare is really doing a disservice to everyone.  Yes in the end the product will represent itself in the sim but there are very different ways to get there.

The rub of luck is favoring the external process based applications (A2A+Fenix) so far in regards to work required to get it flyable in MSFS2024. People coding in different languages  or using a different process have work to do. It is what it is no need to criticize or compare.

3 minutes ago, psolk said:

They also do not have the tools to support it no different than Fenix so one released as experimental the other said no way.  It's pretty logical. 

This part, though, is not true.

MS/Asobo did not ship the C++/WASM code PMDG needs to update their aircraft. They are quite literally blocked from doing an update until MS ships this. 

Almost all of Fenix's systems are handled via their app outside the sim. They are using MSFS for the visuals and interfaces I think. The last round of releases moved the engine model etc to their app. Also. the problems they had getting B2 out and hammering at the SDK likely made them experts in working around the SDK. Fenix had the tools they needed to make the quick changes. Even then, as folks have noticed there are interaction errors with the EFB and MCDU. Oddly, the interaction issues go away if I use MCDU via the web.

9 minutes ago, psolk said:

Can you imagine PMDG releasing something to marketplace and then saying they aren't supporting it?

Given the reaction folks have to anything PMDG do, yes, I can imagine it.

The week of launch, I actually thought PMDG would have the least issues since they don't use an external app. This was a flawed thought, for sure.

1 hour ago, psolk said:

Hence why PMDG will not release in this state.  They never have an never will.  Some can use this as an opportunity to take digs at PMDG but if they realized their planes were "experimental" and couldn't support them then they wont release them.

The lengths some will go to turn this into a dig against PMDG is farcical when Fenix has stated:

I can just imagine the flames if PMDG released a product with that last statement...

I am not taking a dig at Fenix AT ALL by the way just pointing out the blatantly obvious to some of those here with their PMDG bias... 

I mean how do you expect a commercial developer to release a product (that is also in the Marketplace) to the masses that they can't support.  But sure, keep throwing fuel on the fire.  

Fenix decisions and communication is a huge plus in our hobby. They are excellent in what and how they provide content. 

Thanks Fenix for being here!

3 hours ago, martinboehme said:

Which interaction mode are you using ("lock" or "legacy")?

I find the Airbus push-pull knobs to be pretty fiddly in "lock" mode. If this is what you're using, maybe try "legacy" instead? (I believe this is in the settings under "Accessibility".) 

 

Thanks for the tip. I will take a look at that tonight 

2 hours ago, psolk said:

Hence why PMDG will not release in this state.  They never have an never will.  Some can use this as an opportunity to take digs at PMDG but if they realized their planes were "experimental" and couldn't support them then they wont release them.

The lengths some will go to turn this into a dig against PMDG is farcical when Fenix has stated:

I can just imagine the flames if PMDG released a product with that last statement...

I am not taking a dig at Fenix AT ALL by the way just pointing out the blatantly obvious to some of those here with their PMDG bias... 

I mean how do you expect a commercial developer to release a product (that is also in the Marketplace) to the masses that they can't support.  But sure, keep throwing fuel on the fire.  

Please, PMDG release buggy betas all the time and call it a release candidate. How many updates has the 737 in MSFS had again? And how long did we wait for the tablet that apparently was in development for over a year when in reality it was done over a weekend and very basic?

Here the Fenix A320 for MSFS24 is flying well, very low fps at the airports but normal when flying.

2 hours ago, Maxis said:

The rub of luck is favoring the external process based applications (A2A+Fenix) so far in regards to work required to get it flyable in MSFS2024. People coding in different languages  or using a different process have work to do. It is what it is no need to criticize or compare.

 

2 hours ago, BrammyH said:

Almost all of Fenix's systems are handled via their app outside the sim. They are using MSFS for the visuals and interfaces I think. The last round of releases moved the engine model etc to their app.

As Aamir has stated here before, only parts of the Fenix FM are outside the sim's core engine (i.e. engine model, flare logic), and also the systems code, but there are parts of the FM and other core aircraft areas that are not external: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/636158-accusim-2-level-of-flight-dynamics-in-msfs-2024/page/4/#comment-4990988 ... note sure if they'll give more insights but the main reason I'm guessing that Fenix didn't have PMDG's problems is because Fenix doesn't use WASM?

That said, A2A does use WASM but their aircraft as built/compiled with 2020 dev tools works in 2024 so they didn't miss the WASM tools currently lacking in 2024 (this is my guess btw).. whereas PMDG needs to update/change their WASM 2020 codebase to make stuff work in 2024 so therefore they need the WASM dev tools. Would be interesting to hear how other WASM based aircraft are faring with the move to 2024.
 

Edited November 25, 20241 yr by lwt1971

39 minutes ago, Claudius_ said:

Here the Fenix A320 for MSFS24 is flying well, very low fps at the airports but normal when flying.

It seems that deactivating the motion blur improves the fps, I tested it at a gate of LIRF and I'm getting solid 60fps. But I have to test it for a planned flight.