FSLabs review by "Into de Blue..."

[Bigt]

42 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

So does the 99.50% flight simmers out there that have no clue what the RWP's are even demonstrating but pretend they know. FSL released is a superb product for MSFS but for what reason? Claim superiority  over the Fenix (after years of development time) in who makes the best airbus? Lets just hope it was for another reason though cause its not going to generate the sales they believe they can.

These are entertainment products after all and of no real use for real world training but people can believe what they want. Its a sub 100$ addon trying to mimic the real thing.

BTW Into the Blue gave a honest review and it was good to see.

"FSL released is a superb product for MSFS but for what reason? Claim superiority over the Fenix...."

Um.......what? They probably developed it because they were in this business before Fenix and it was only a matter of time until they moved their aircraft into MSFS. Additionally, why wouldn't they finally bring their aircraft into the 2020/2024 ecosystem? Why do you, and some others, seem to have such an issue with competition in this space? Don't buy it if you don't want to. I'm personally waiting for the NEO and A330 as Fenix suits me well enough at this point but competition is good for us all. 

[JBDB-MD80]

2 hours ago, Bigt said:

 

Um.......what? They probably developed it because they were in this business before Fenix and it was only a matter of time until they moved their aircraft into MSFS.

No they are trying to move their product into a new market that they are clearly behind on the curve ball in because their previous market has dried up and trying to survive with their ESP customers jumping on the new bandwagon. Nothing more they did not even take MSFS serious until PMDG and Fenix released High Quality addons (over 2 years ago) on a gaming market as they once called it and now trying to stay afloat in that sector but whatever people want to believe so be it. Would they even tried to improve their product in P3D if MSFS did not exist? And no FSL did not work on MSFS addons before Fenix announce their A320 that came out of the blue in 2021.

Edited December 19, 2024 by JBDB-MD80

[KatiePilot]

It's interesting to read about FSL's systems depth being superior to Fenix.

They both have extremely high systems depth and fidelity, and I think people tend to forget how deep the Fenix simulation goes - That because it is so pretty, it must be "less good" when you start stress testing it, but having done that myself, I can confirm, it works as expected in the majority of situations, in fact I used it quite extensively when preparing for my command upgrade sims.

From my understanding, they have both been developed to simulate the physical wiring of the aircraft, and as a result are extremely good quality.

I genuinely can't tell any difference in accuracy of systems depth between the two, are there inaccuracies? Yes of course there are - but, they're pretty few and far between!

Now what really sticks out for me, is that the FSLabs of course has the MEL function which in my view is it's jewel in the crown and really makes you think before jumping in and going flying, the same way we have to IRL.

But purely in terms of systems depth and accuracy, and "doing what I expect it to do when I do something" - in my view they are very much on the same level.

I'm not going to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't buy. But, hopefully that gives you a little bit of context on the actual standard these two aircraft are at.

Edited December 19, 2024 by KatiePilot
To fix a sentence that didn't make sense! Doh! :D

[jcomm]

15 minutes ago, KatiePilot said:

It's interesting to read about FSL's systems depth being superior to Fenix.

They both have extremely high systems depth and fidelity, and I think people tend to forget that because Fenix is so pretty, it must be "less good" when you start stress testing it, but having done that myself, I can confirm, it works as expected in the majority of situations, in fact I used it quite extensively when preparing for my command upgrade sims.

From my understanding, they have both been developed to simulate the physical wiring of the aircraft, and as a result are extremely good quality.

I genuinely can't tell any difference in accuracy of systems depth between the two, are there inaccuracies? Yes of course there are - but, they're pretty few and far between!

Now what really sticks out for me, is that the FSLabs of course has the MEL function which in my view is it's jewel in the crown and really makes you think before jumping in and going flying, the same way we have to IRL.

But purely in terms of systems depth and accuracy, and "doing what I expect it to do when I do something" - in my view they are very much on the same level.

I'm not going to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't buy. But, hopefully that gives you a little bit of context on the actual standard these two aircraft are at.

Out of curiosity, have you been able to test the FSLabs under engine-out scenarios ? 

I find the Fenix more forgiving than I would expect when the aircraft is manually flown, until you switch on the AP, and including the sideslip / beta target cue logic which appears to be buggy (?). 

Does it work any better in the FSLabs?

Edited December 19, 2024 by jcomm

[KatiePilot]

3 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Out of curiosity, have you been able to test the FSLabs under engine-out scenarios ? 

Hey! I have tried both, and didn't really get on well with either - but I don't think I can blame the developers here... single engine in MSFS I never really get on with, primarily because I don't have rudder pedals! And the issue with single engine manual flight in flight sim is that there is no force feedback, IRL you just put in whatever rudder you feel you need initially and then transfer your view to the beta target. - But because you don't get that feel in the sim, it's extremely hard to quantify what is and isn't "right" in terms of FM.

If I had force-feedback rudder pedals, I could probably make an objective assessment, but maybe that's for another time 😄

[Zimmerbz]

Can someone explain what MEL is?

[CAP1234]

15 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

Can someone explain what MEL is?

Minimum Equipment list - Every operator has one and it specifies what defective equipment an aircraft can safely dispatch with without causing any operational impacts. Could be one of toilets defective or one of the ovens in the galley defective

Edited December 19, 2024 by CAP1234

[jcomm]

6 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

Can someone explain what MEL is?

Portuguese word for honey !

Minimum Equipment List in aviation, a document that describes the minimum operational requisites for the crew to decide to "fly" when some systems are non functional or partially functional.

 

[Zimmerbz]

9 minutes ago, CAP1234 said:

Minimum Equipment list - Every operator has one and it specifies what defective equipment an aircraft can safely dispatch with without causing any operational impacts. Could be one of toilets defective or one of the ovens in the galley defective

 

9 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Portuguese word for honey !

Minimum Equipment List in aviation, a document that describes the minimum operational requisites for the crew to decide to "fly" when some systems are non functional or partially functional.

 

Got it.  Thanks.  That is a pretty neat feature.  I wish the Fenix had something like that or even something along the lines (not sure if it is possible) where if you fly a particular plane at times, over time, things are more likely to wear out.  Or something like switches get left in position from flight to flight so if you don't shut down properly, the flow on the next flight might be slightly different than the last.  Anyway, I loved FSLabs in P3d and love the Fenix in 2020/2024.  Both are exceptional products 

[Bobsk8]

12 minutes ago, jcomm said:

Portuguese word for honey !

Minimum Equipment List in aviation, a document that describes the minimum operational requisites for the crew to decide to "fly" when some systems are non functional or partially functional.

 

Looking at your signature I see that you have XP12 as your main sim, and FS 2024 as a Game. Interesting. 

[jcomm]

8 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Looking at your signature I see that you have XP12 as your main sim, and FS 2024 as a Game. Interesting. 

And Condorsoaring as a training tool ... yes.

I like te Activities / Challenges in FS 2024 - they're funny !

Other than that I use it with the Fenix 320 only to play being an airbus pilot, presently using BATC for the ATC ( previously I was an FSHUD user ).

Since Say Intentions is also available for X-Plane, I am seriously considering giving it a go.

In X-Plane I try to apply my basic aerodynamics and systems modelling knowledge and learn designing or editing aircraft, then testing them, fine tuning, until I' satisfied with the outcome ( or not... ). It keeps me tied to the theoretical aspects of flight, and also those more directly related with it's simulation in desktop computers. For the Airbus I use Toliss ad I also play being an airbus pilot in XP12 🙂 but I miss the challenges and activities of MSFS...

As a glider pilot IRL, I have been using Condorsoaring since 2006 to get some more insight on the competition side of soaring, something I haven't done for many years IRL.. and is nowadays a rather technical activity, where some really powerful tools can be used.

Edited December 19, 2024 by jcomm

[omarsmak30]

1 hour ago, KatiePilot said:

It's interesting to read about FSL's systems depth being superior to Fenix.

That is because it is stuck in some folks mind that FSL being superior which is honestly, not true.

[JonathanC]

1 hour ago, KatiePilot said:

I genuinely can't tell any difference in accuracy of systems depth between the two, are there inaccuracies? Yes of course there are - but, they're pretty few and far between!

Now what really sticks out for me, is that the FSLabs of course has the MEL function which in my view is it's jewel in the crown and really makes you think before jumping in and going flying, the same way we have to IRL.

Solid comment and thank you for the perspective - helps when a real-world pilot explains what the differences are, if any. Clearly not a lot!

[CAP1234]

Fenix and Fslabs are both fantastic products allowing your average user to experience what is like to pilot A320 series. Both products has their pros and cons and it down to individual themselves to decide which product is right for you. To really know the difference in flight dynamics and systems between the two you would have to be type rated on A320.  I am happy with Fenix but also want to experience what Fslabs is all about (having operated their products in P3D for long time). Personally I am waiting for A321 Neo to appear - It is likely that their A321 neo will get more attention then A321 ceo. 

Edited December 19, 2024 by CAP1234

[Fiorentoni]

1 hour ago, KatiePilot said:

They both have extremely high systems depth and fidelity, and I think people tend to forget how deep the Fenix simulation goes - That because it is so pretty, it must be "less good"

I want to emphasize these wise words. Flightsimmers tend to do this all the time, see MSFS vs XPL for example. History has shown that indeed this cliche is often true for flight simming (-> CaptainSim, Carenado etc.), but with MSFS things have changed:
Now it's not anymore "pretty" OR "deep" - a good dev now can and has to do both!