2 minutes ago, AnkH said:

How do you do that? Does it have an option in the EFB or do you simply increase sim rate to 4x and call it "autocruise"?

It's done via the EFB. You select the max sim rate (2x or 4x) and then toggle the feature to either "off" or "auto". On auto it will increase up to 4x and reduce below if your FPS aren't high enough to maintain that sim rate. I've never had that happen to be fair and the feature has worked quite well for me - similar to the Fenix or PMDG.

Ah, great, somehow I missed this feature (only know it from the PMDG 777). Thanks for pointing me this one out

1 hour ago, Speedbird 217 said:

• Fuel burn Simbrief (using the official -1000 profile) vs actual is way off. I landed on fumes at KIAD and had 1.6T remaining vs the forecast 7.6T. I had to apply a P10 factor in Simbrief to give a buffer.
• Radio auto tuning with BATC is hit and miss and often doesn't work - BATC are saying this is up to ini to fix. 

I can confirm these two as well.  On fuel burn every flight I’ve done has had me running close to low fuel, thanks for the reminder of the ability to add a factor in Simbrief.

22 hours ago, FedDriver said:

Beating the dead horse but, nice gear, nice physics.
https://youtu.be/XNFtACPuRSk?t=1475
 

An example of how it should be more like using the Default 747 as ref: 
https://streamable.com/kpw6t0 (Spare the FSrealistic plane shake, forgot to turn that off)

Might be worse than I thought, the default 747 and 737 clearly behaves more like an actually heavy plane than this almost 80 dollar add on. (Which also has the best gear implementation of any airliners for msfs, which could be simply new 2024 tech that other add on developers have to make use of). Which makes me wonder if Ini is reusing old stuff from 2020 and not implementing new tech available in 2024. 

Both video's linked (there was also one like 20 pages back or so) show external view of a landing in replay (see the FCR menu onscreen).

Often some animation are missing when replaying. So I'm not sure if the statement of "there is no gear physics animated" is correct. 

I've not landed the A350 from external view, so can't definatly say it compresses on touch down. But what I have seen is it does move during taxiing. the main oleo is moving. Also the contact point in the aircraft.cfg have compression and damping values. 

I also see others start to make assumption to what I think is a wrong observation. 

 

you're looking at that video and, missing animation aside, you're seeing an aircraft settling onto it's landing gear that has modelled suspension?

1 hour ago, EGLD said:

you're looking at that video and, missing animation aside, you're seeing an aircraft settling onto it's landing gear that has modelled suspension?

uh, might indeed be lost in translation, let's try again. 

I think a conclusion was based on the first video linked by feddriver, in which you indeed don't see anything moving (go from the in the air state to on the ground in one frame). There was many pages ago a similar video from the same streamer.

But what I wanted to point out is; these are replays of a landing. In the past during replays, animations (similar to wing flex), weren't always shown. 

So the conclusion of " the gear suspension is not animated" based on those video's is I think incorrect. To me they are animated, only not shown in replay.

I've seen reports of the suspension being stiff, which I would have a similiar observation, no clue of that is realistic or not. I would have expected more mass inertia. 

And, by the way those are not landings in that video... setting(crashing) down a A350 at St. Barth, Samedan or Courchevel. 

 

ah I see, yes I understand your point

from what I've seen from cockpit shots of landings, it's almost as clear there is no obvious deflection of suspension during touchdown, but admittedly it's not as clear

Edited March 5, 20251 yr by EGLD

5 hours ago, regis9 said:

I can confirm these two as well.  On fuel burn every flight I’ve done has had me running close to low fuel, thanks for the reminder of the ability to add a factor in Simbrief.

Make sure you’re adding step climbs to the MFD if they are listed in the simbrief plan. The simbrief profiles seem fine to me in regards fuel burn. 

8 hours ago, Speedbird 217 said:

Fuel burn Simbrief (using the official -1000 profile) vs actual is way off. I landed on fumes at KIAD and had 1.6T remaining vs the forecast 7.6T. I had to apply a P10 factor in Simbrief to give a buffer.

Try the one on the ini forums, it was updated with the hotfix, it's possible the one already on the website hasn't been updated yet.

https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/24882-simbrief-profiles-a350-airliner/

Edited March 5, 20251 yr by Tuskin38

4 hours ago, bigifooti said:

uh, might indeed be lost in translation, let's try again. 

I think a conclusion was based on the first video linked by feddriver, in which you indeed don't see anything moving (go from the in the air state to on the ground in one frame). There was many pages ago a similar video from the same streamer.

But what I wanted to point out is; these are replays of a landing. In the past during replays, animations (similar to wing flex), weren't always shown. 

So the conclusion of " the gear suspension is not animated" based on those video's is I think incorrect. To me they are animated, only not shown in replay.

I've seen reports of the suspension being stiff, which I would have a similiar observation, no clue of that is realistic or not. I would have expected more mass inertia. 

And, by the way those are not landings in that video... setting(crashing) down a A350 at St. Barth, Samedan or Courchevel. 

 

 

2 hours ago, EGLD said:

ah I see, yes I understand your point

from what I've seen from cockpit shots of landings, it's almost as clear there is no obvious deflection of suspension during touchdown, but admittedly it's not as clear

Working Suspension animation here...

 

5 hours ago, bigifooti said:

And, by the way those are not landings in that video... setting(crashing) down a A350 at St. Barth, Samedan or Courchevel. 

 

they're the perfect opportunity to showcase deflection of suspension though, which is the point

I'll put in my two cents. Either I'm unlucky with investing money or I don't know, but TFDI MD11, MSFS2024 and INI A350 are complete failures. I won't talk about the first two, but the A350 is a complete disappointment. I struggled with it for a week in both simulators, but I still couldn't land it nicely.And what kind of beauty can there be if there is no smoke and compression of the rack. There is no vapor trail, at V1 it already soars into the air itself. I do not understand why you praise it? It costs a maximum of 10 dollars, on 75 it does not pull at all. This is the worst thing that INI did. I did not have time to test the 777F, flew on iFLY 737 MAX (I did not dare to buy, I thought in 2024 and so, but as soon as I tried it - I immediately bought it), so here is a perfect landing from the first flight, and you say that PMDG are not the same. They are all the same!!!

Just not feeling this plane. It's a nice simulation they done a good job but it feels too refined. I still love taking out the ini A330 and the 777 for my mid to long hauls. I don't think that I'll be flying this aircraft a lot which is a shame as I spent a lot of money on it.  Just my opinion after a few flights.

Maybe that is the «fate» of super modern planes also in RL? They are kinda boring... 🤣

2 hours ago, AnkH said:

Maybe that is the «fate» of super modern planes also in RL? They are kinda boring... 🤣

That’s how I feel flying the modern stuff, it becomes more that you’re flying the route and not the airplane. It’s why I’m really appreciative of JustFlight (I know I didn’t name the others) really shining a light on some classics.