29 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Except for Katie, another real A320 pilot, criticized the FSL for being "too much on rails". So maybe don't just only consider the one opinion that confirms your bias?

There is no bias here. I do not own the Fenix or the FSL Airbus, and the chances are high that I never will. All I am saying is that Darren's extremely detailed and informative report indicates to me that he spent a considerable amount of time trying to get the feel of the FSL Airbus to match that of his own real world experience as perfectly as possible. It just sounds to me like it was almost a personal crusade!

6 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

There is no bias here. I do not own the Fenix or the FSL Airbus, and the chances are high that I never will. All I am saying is that Darren's extremely detailed and informative report indicates to me that he spent a considerable amount of time trying to get the feel of the FSL Airbus to match that of his own real world experience as perfectly as possible. It just sounds to me like it was almost a personal crusade!

Fair enough.

20 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

There is no bias here. I do not own the Fenix or the FSL Airbus, and the chances are high that I never will. All I am saying is that Darren's extremely detailed and informative report indicates to me that he spent a considerable amount of time trying to get the feel of the FSL Airbus to match that of his own real world experience as perfectly as possible. It just sounds to me like it was almost a personal crusade!

Obviousy Katie also spent a lot of time giving feedback to the Fenix team to get the Fenix to fly as close as possible to what she experienced.

Anyways, I already said that both the FSLabs and Fenix are very well done add-ons based on the reviews from IRL A320 pilots that I have read or watched so far. A non real life A320 pilot can’t go wrong with either (except Fenix wins the edge with textures).

My Airbus training since May 2021:

FSLabs A320X P3D4/P3D5 ($139.95).
FlyByWire A32NX MSFS2020 ($ Free).

I enjoy flying both.

No current plans to purchase MSFS2024 or train in any other Airbus products.

On 12/21/2024 at 7:03 PM, lwt1971 said:

Given that the FSL apparently uses the legacy flight model in MSFS (of course with lots of customizations/overrides) it doesn't surprise me as Katie observes that it flies a bit much "on rails" given that was the trademark characteristic of FSX and P3D flight dynamics.

This total myth needs to be put to rest. There is nothing in FS2020 or FS2024 that is more, or less "on rails" than "legacy" methods. For those who have never opened or edited a flight mode file it is important to understand that neither Legacy or "new" flight model methods have much of an advantage over the other. But actually not many are aware that the core of f/ms in FS2020 and FS2024 are DIRECT copies of flight models from as far back as FS95 and before. The "new" method actually has several key parameters taken away. But largely the core of FS2020/2024 f/ms are a text-based translation of the graphical tables (or hex code look up tables) from even way before FSX. Whether they produce "flying on rails" aircraft is a function of other factors like the way the sim handles or demonstrates turbulence or unstable air and largely has nothing whatever to do with the core flight model method.

Edited December 23, 20241 yr by robert young

23 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/658190-reported-fsl-has-just-released-their-a321-for-msfs2020/page/9/#findComment-5285378

 

here's an extract from Rob Youngs (one of the most prominent FM gurus around, for those who are not familiar)  post. It might put some order in some of the myths and cliches being thrown around:

"I'm afraid your post highlights a continuing myth that is simply untrue.

Fact No.1 : Whether or not a flight model feels like it is "on rails" is nothing connected with the method or system used, only the individual design of each individual flight model, or the movement or lack of movement of air through turbulence or zero turbulence.

No.2 Actually, the FSX/P3d core flight model file is equally if not more detailed than the FS2020/2024 method. The latter looks more complicated because the parameters from FSX were directly translated in to text files from the original look up tables.

No.3 Many of the parameters that were quite useful in the "legacy" flight model were deprecated and some were not replaced with anything better. A few additions were made but more key params were taken away than added.

No.4 The feeling of "flying on rails" is mostly a function of still air or lack of turbulence, or up and down draughts, and is very little to do with a particular flight model. Also contributing is the amount of inertia within a simulated aircraft.

No.5 In still air all well designed aircraft fly in very good harmony. That is to say they are very stable in pitch, fairly stable in roll and reasonably stable in yaw unless (1) the pilot is uncoordinated or (2) over-controls.

No.6 The larger the aircraft the more stable it is generally. When you see videos of Boeing or Airbus pilots sawing away at the controls, they are usually doing so when flying a manual approach and trying to keep dead on the localiser and glideslope. Some use excessive movement, others use a lot less according to their own technique.

No.7 When you hit turbulence, particularly when shooting an approach, there will be a lot of correction needed, but in benign conditions the opposite is the case.

I personally tweaked a few FS2020 aircraft privately using both current and "legacy" methods and neither was better or worse than the other most of the time, although a few parameters that were very useful were taken away and not replaced.

There is nothing wrong whatever with designing a flight model using the "legacy" method. In practice it is at least equally powerful and in turn equally flawed as the "new" method."

Is it possible use "travel to function" or how much simrate u can use?

1 hour ago, dexspeed said:

Is it possible use "travel to function" or how much simrate u can use?

It has its own “jump ahead” function so that it not only teleports to any waypoint in the plan but also sets you there with the predicted weight, fuel ,altitude and so on.

42 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

It has its own “jump ahead” function so that it not only teleports to any waypoint in the plan but also sets you there with the predicted weight, fuel ,altitude and so on.

Does it work with normal sim rate, if yes up to which amount? Also any news about using WinWing with it (via Mobiflight)? Asking more for the NEO, in case I decide to go for it then, but I guess that will be similar to the CEO

14 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Does it work with normal sim rate, if yes up to which amount? Also any news about using WinWing with it (via Mobiflight)? Asking more for the NEO, in case I decide to go for it then, but I guess that will be similar to the CEO

Its not related to sim rate. You just select a waypoint, hit confirm, and you're there. Useful if its a long route and you don't want to waste hours in cruise - the transfer is instant and weights/fuel are as per calculations (or can be set otherwise if you wish). They had this feature in p3d as well.

There  are mobiflight profiles for winwig (FCU, Efis left and right etc.) available for download in the joystick and peripherals section of the forum.

1 hour ago, ha5mvo said:

It has its own “jump ahead” function so that it not only teleports to any waypoint in the plan but also sets you there with the predicted weight, fuel ,altitude and so on.

I had forgot about that function. Excluding the MSFS "travel to" function (that never worked correctly), is it the first time it's implemented in MSFS?

57 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Its not related to sim rate. You just select a waypoint, hit confirm, and you're there. Useful if its a long route and you don't want to waste hours in cruise - the transfer is instant and weights/fuel are as per calculations (or can be set otherwise if you wish). They had this feature in p3d as well.

There  are mobiflight profiles for winwig (FCU, Efis left and right etc.) available for download in the joystick and peripherals section of the forum.

I mean if normal sim rate works, other then that jump feature.

10 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

I mean if normal sim rate works, other then that jump feature.

You mean x2 or X4 sim rate?

I did try x2 and it works just fine. There is no designated option to run it from the mcdu like in the fenix but using, say, a keyboard assignment would give the same result. I didn't try to go x4 so I can't comment about its stability at that speed. The fenix tends to lose stability at x4 and knock the AP out (in spite of it being a designated option the recently added). I wouldn't be surprised if the FSL would also become unstable under such circumstances, though I didn't try it yet.

2 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

You mean x2 or X4 sim rate?

I did try x2 and it works just fine. There is no designated option to run it from the mcdu like in the fenix but using, say, a keyboard assignment would give the same result. I didn't try to go x4 so I can't comment about its stability at that speed. The fenix tends to lose stability at x4 and knock the AP out (in spite of it being a designated option the recently added). I wouldn't be surprised if the FSL would also become unstable under such circumstances, though I didn't try it yet.

And fuel usage increases accordingly, yes? x4 would be kind of interesting to know, so if anyone else has tried that, please let me know.

Fenix x4 works fine for me by the way, used it about 5 times since it was introduced.

31 minutes ago, Luis Hernandez said:

I had forgot about that function. Excluding the MSFS "travel to" function (that never worked correctly), is it the first time it's implemented in MSFS?

Not sure but most likely. At least to the best of my knowledge.....