FSLabs review by "Into de Blue..."

[WestAir]

With comparison to Fenix systems, remember how insanely real even the standby attitude indicator is. When you get the gyro spinning it's using real physics. When you load passengers it's calculating the body heat for each one based on where they are sitting in the cabin. I mean it's not a simple simulation by any means. I think it actually replicates the exact same cpu/components in the FMGS to give you the exact on-the-nose delay in response time and it changes based on the ambient temperatures. That's just crazy detailed.

So when pilots say the systems depth in the FSLabs is far superior, or in some comments that the FNX is like Captainsim in comparison, I have to question their ability to compare the two. These are desktop consumer products that surpass million dollar dedicated sims in quite a lot of different territories.

[ATRguy]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The cabin of Concorde is nothing special given it’s a 64-bit sim. I think there may have been restrictions on making the Marilake view an internal one because of the complexity of the flight engineer’s panel where every button, knob and switch performs a function.

It’s disabled by default and only recommended if you have a graphics card with 16Gb or more of VRAM.

It would undoubtably run a lot more efficiently on MSFS with the graphics engine being more modern.  When you look at the cabins of the iFly, Fenix, etc...  they're very, very high-res with lots of options inside.

[ATRguy]

5 hours 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 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.

I mean, there's a thread here about a guy that's spend "15 years on the PMDG" and tries the Fenix A320.  Claims "extensive experience".  And can't program anything in either aircraft other than a VERY basic A to B, so I generally take "simmers" reasonably unseriously.  

The Fenix is fantastic, and delves into stuff that no IRL pilot will really deal with either, like circuit breakers and all that.  It's also the best looking airplane in the game by a big margin, and that counts for a lot.

[UrgentSiesta]

23 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

So what is the price of the FSL Airbus. I went to their website/ store, and it is blank. Anyway is it more than the $49 Fenix price? 

 

https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/store/

Fenix is priced in Pounds.

It's roughly $65 US.

FSL is Just about $5 US higher.

[CaptainQ8]

5 hours 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 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.

I am currently on the edge of buying. I relay like the Mel and persistence feature. 

Normally I am mainly flying Xplane with all the Toliss aircraft. I am not a real world pilot so I have no idea if my sim planes actually fly „like the real thing“. I am also fully aware that a Desktop Simulator can never replicate the real physics fully but maybe 98% ;)….

In regards to the Toliss fleet the Fenix (i only own the A320 base package) always feels off to me. I can not exactly tell what it was but every time I switched to MSFS/Fenix I had that feeling that something is off. The Toliss aircraft have some „weight“ to them. It may be due to me being used to Toliss. Who knows?

I hope that the FSlabs can fill that gap for me in MSFS. I watched a lot of streams from blackbox711. He stated that the flight model/hand flying is more realistic. Especially during flare and landing. Would you say this is true or are they just different? For me this would be a main purchase reason.

[carlanthony24]

32 minutes ago, CaptainQ8 said:

I am currently on the edge of buying. I relay like the Mel and persistence feature. 

Normally I am mainly flying Xplane with all the Toliss aircraft. I am not a real world pilot so I have no idea if my sim planes actually fly „like the real thing“. I am also fully aware that a Desktop Simulator can never replicate the real physics fully but maybe 98% ;)….

In regards to the Toliss fleet the Fenix (i only own the A320 base package) always feels off to me. I can not exactly tell what it was but every time I switched to MSFS/Fenix I had that feeling that something is off. The Toliss aircraft have some „weight“ to them. It may be due to me being used to Toliss. Who knows?

I hope that the FSlabs can fill that gap for me in MSFS. I watched a lot of streams from blackbox711. He stated that the flight model/hand flying is more realistic. Especially during flare and landing. Would you say this is true or are they just different? For me this would be a main purchase reason.

 Katie talked about flight model here. Pretty much saying the same as ITB.

Edited December 19, 2024 by carlanthony24

[Bobsk8]

39 minutes ago, CaptainQ8 said:

I am currently on the edge of buying. I relay like the Mel and persistence feature. 

Normally I am mainly flying Xplane with all the Toliss aircraft. I am not a real world pilot so I have no idea if my sim planes actually fly „like the real thing“. I am also fully aware that a Desktop Simulator can never replicate the real physics fully but maybe 98% ;)….

In regards to the Toliss fleet the Fenix (i only own the A320 base package) always feels off to me. I can not exactly tell what it was but every time I switched to MSFS/Fenix I had that feeling that something is off. The Toliss aircraft have some „weight“ to them. It may be due to me being used to Toliss. Who knows?

I hope that the FSlabs can fill that gap for me in MSFS. I watched a lot of streams from blackbox711. He stated that the flight model/hand flying is more realistic. Especially during flare and landing. Would you say this is true or are they just different? For me this would be a main purchase reason.

A few posts back, an Airline pilot that flies the A 320 in real life, says the Fenix and the FSL handle about the same. What can I say, she's not a sim expert, she is a real pilot expert. 

[JonathanC]

If FSLabs was in 2024, I might have given it a shot. $70 is doable and I enjoy deep planes.. but the lack of 2024 support for now, and the previous questionable business practices with FSLabs makes me wait.

If I hear in say six months that they have 2024 support, have become a more "normal" developer and have decent customer support with no weird issues, I will certainly consider it. 

It's a good thing if we have multiple developers creating very detailed planes and I would love to see more of this. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

2 hours ago, ATRguy said:

It would undoubtably run a lot more efficiently on MSFS with the graphics engine being more modern.  When you look at the cabins of the iFly, Fenix, etc...  they're very, very high-res with lots of options inside.

Those aircraft are nowhere near as complex as Concorde. Time will tell.

[JonathanC]

Some people confuse a lot of wires and gauges and a cluttered cockpit with it being difficult to code, while a modern A320 with deep systems depth is apparently easy to code because most of the complexity is hidden behind the glass cockpit. 

Usually this is due to a complete lack of knowledge about software programming, so it's not worth discussing this any further with people who make such outlandish claims. 

Back on topic (we are discussing MSFS and FSlabs, right? Not dead sims like P3D and Concorde which will never be updated in P3D?), I do look forward to seeing what's next from Fenix and FsLabs for 2024, besides the simple upgrade to 2024 for existing aircraft. 

Be nice to see a Concorde in 2024, actually. Or else a proper A350 - I know Inibuilds is making one, but I'd expect Fenix/FsLabs to do it better. 

 

 

 

 

[chapstick]

16 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Those aircraft are nowhere near as complex as Concorde. Time will tell.

Well, we don't really need time to know because we already know that MSFS handles complex, higher-fidelity 3d models better than P3D ever did. The Concorde doesn't change that fact. 

[Epikk]

Another thing the FSLabs does (and has been doing "the right way" for years) that the Fenix doesn't do is proper Winter OPS... I still don't understand why pilots and simmers still act like it's just gimmicks and still want to continue flying in a simulator where icing conditions have ZERO effect on your plane and the way your approach/plan your flight, etc... Strange to me... 

Edited December 19, 2024 by Epikk

[carlanthony24]

31 minutes ago, Epikk said:

Another thing the FSLabs does (and has been doing "the right way" for years) that the Fenix doesn't do is proper Winter OPS... I still don't understand why pilots and simmers still act like it's just gimmicks and still want to continue flying in a simulator where icing conditions have ZERO effect on your plane and the way your approach/plan your flight, etc... Strange to me... 

Fenix simulates icing conditions, Ice shedding etc. So icing conditions does have an effect.

Edited December 20, 2024 by carlanthony24

[Maxis]

1 hour ago, Epikk said:

Another thing the FSLabs does (and has been doing "the right way" for years) that the Fenix doesn't do is proper Winter OPS... I still don't understand why pilots and simmers still act like it's just gimmicks and still want to continue flying in a simulator where icing conditions have ZERO effect on your plane and the way your approach/plan your flight, etc... Strange to me... 

Are you assuming or you know for a fact that the Fenix does not account for winter ops ?

[pete_auau]

25 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Are you assuming or you know for a fact that the Fenix does not account for winter ops ?

dont  know  if  they do i could  be  wrong  since  there  is  no option  i  can  find  for  de icing in  the  fenix efb or  fmc  as  fslabs  has it as  well as  icing  on  the  wings  etc  in icing  conditions

Edited December 20, 2024 by pete_auau