5 minutes ago, Aglos77 said:

The price at the end is what each of us is willing to pay, for me for example the CL650 is the cheapest aircraft I have ever bought if I do the calculation euro + enjoyment + hours used, I think discussing prices is a bit silly

I never got this analogy, it completely ignores what the initial cost is which quite frankly is the most important thing.

I bought a nice high end car and drive it everyday but it was still bloody expensive to buy. 
 

This CL650 is not a cheap aircraft. No matter how many hours you get out of it, it’s still very expensive. 

Soo, I haven't bought it yet, but am I correct to assume that once again, the A350 doesnt have any gear suspension/compression/bounce physics when touching down? And that it lands like a brick, much like all of its line up?
 

 

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by FedDriver

39 minutes ago, FPVSteve said:

Okay, well then let's see (all taxes included, prices in GBP) with some comparable addons across simulators.

MSFS

• Fenix A320 = £49.99
• PMDG 737-800 = £55.26
• TFDI MD-11 = £55.31
• Leonardo MD82 = £74.58
• Inibuilds A350 = £72
• PMDG 777 = £74.99

Average: £63.69 with PMDG 737
Average: £65.37 without PMDG 737 (if excluding Zibo below)

 

X-Plane

• Toliss A320neo = £73
• Zibo 737-800 = £0
• Rotate MD-11 = £66.51
• Rotate MD80 = £47.50
• FFA350 = £51.45
• FF777 = £70.52

Average: £51.50 (including Zibo)
Average: £61.80 (excluding Zibo)

 

I don't think I'm being dishonest at all.

You literally threw in the Zibo in there at $0 to lower the average price but ignore the FBW A320 and FBW A380 which are free? What about Fenix giving the Sharklets and IAE for free, did you factor that in?

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

6 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

Nunca entendí esta analogía, ignora por completo cuál es el costo inicial, que francamente es lo más importante.

Compré un lindo auto de alta gama y lo conduzco todos los días, pero aún así fue muy caro comprarlo. 
 

Este CL650 no es un avión barato. No importa cuántas horas le saques, sigue siendo muy caro. 

It's simple, I have more addons than I would like to recognize and many of them I have only used a few hours or even minutes.

In the end if you do the math of what it has cost you and the hours you have enjoyed it......

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by Aglos77

25 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

 

You are so selective in your choices! LOL Why wouldn't you plug something like this to your "equation " 

https://store.x-plane.org/FlightFactor-777-200ER-v2-Ultimate_p_1883.html

or this

https://store.x-plane.org/FlightFactor-777-200EREE-v2-Ultimate_p_1989.html

Exacrly! FPVSteve  just cherry picks scenarios, lol!

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by abrams_tank

I’m very firmly in the camp of not needing every little flux capacitor in the background working properly as long as the aircraft can convince me that it’s all working as it should plausibly do in regular flight regimes.  I have no interest in failures, never have.  

To that end, I suspect the A350 will perfectly suit my needs, and probably the needs of most (but certainly not all) simmers.

If Fenix is short on project ideas, there was a recent thread here that made a really good case for someone to tackle a high detail Q400…😀

 

I wasn't cherrypicking anything, I was selecting some equivalent addons. The only reason I put the Zibo in there was because it's payware quality but free (and is commonly used on X-Plane because it's so good).

I don't have a hard-on for making the point, but you accused me of being dishonest so I picked some addons and proved I wasn't being. 

 

What it does show is that the Inibuilds A350 is priced as high as some addons which have much greater systems depth than it has on both platforms - so from that perspective, it is overpriced. Whether people feel it is appropriately priced for the amount of joy it will bring them is subjective.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by FPVSteve

Does anyone know how to switch to CAPS off on EFB?

1 hour ago, Farlis said:

I think it's perfectly fine. But not at the price tag.

Remember Aerosoft? Back when they where kind of making good products?

Their Airbus fleet was a perfect example of what you describe. Decently capable, with some stupid design decisions thrown in there, like tieing the FBW system to FPS, and overall a good representation of the Airbus narrowbodies without deep systems modelling. And they were appropriately priced. They were always transparent about who they were geared towards and why that made them less expensive than the full study level aircraft that PMDG made at that time.

 

Now the A350 seems to be in that category as well with a few added extras. Yet it is priced like a study level aircraft. And THAT is not okay.

 

For example I ran into a quirk today that I don't expect from a 89€ add on: After an AP disconnect in cruise I had to navigate myself back on track and did so with the help of the "Direct To" function. As a result the wind data of the whole route is lost and the aircraft can no longer compute how long the rest of the flight will take.

At this price range that is unacceptable. I can forgive a 40€ aircraft such behaviour but not one like this.

I can't describe how I understand this and have the exact feelings. This was a premium price product for non-premium features.

16 minutes ago, Aglos77 said:

In the end if you do the math of what it has cost you and the hours you have enjoyed it......

You still have the initial price to contend with. You can do all the math in the world but the initial cost remains and for some that can be difficult. It’s wonderful you can fully indulge in your hobby but for others there’s a conscious choice to be made in what add on to buy.

Soo..

 

Has anyone tried to see if this A350's RNAV approaches are up to snuff ? Has anyone tried to "circle the sink" at Kathmandu (VNKT -  RNP RWY 20 (AR))  ? Is the required navigational compliance being tracked ? Or is that part scripted ? Not one Youtuber that i saw did an RNAV approach yesterday. All did the ILS.

I love the Fenix to bits and I respect Amir, heck I’d buy a paper plane done by those guys if they released one, but I found his comments today uncalled for.

The Fenix is THE standard for me and nothing else comes close.

With that said, the ini 350 is targeting a different market and audience. If we only had developers like Fenix we’d probably have about 2 aircraft in total for MSFS right now.
Instead we got more than we can count ranging from utter garbage to exquisite simulation.
At the end of the day it’s the customer who decides what they want. I’ll buy the ini 350 but I’m not expecting Fenix quality. I think it’ll be good enough to simulate a believable flight that gets close enough to the real thing and has all systems simulated in a way I’d encounter on a regular flight. If it doesn’t simulate the drag from the mosquitos I squished with the flaps on my last approach that’s ok.
But attacking ini because Fenix could have done a 350 and made the decision to drop it seems beneath those guys.
I’ll put it down to an off day and can’t wait to hear what Fenix are going to do next - that I’m much more interested in than another day of flightsim drama.

45 minutes ago, David Roch said:

The main thing is therefore to have fun, without taking yourself too seriously and above all, without listening to the sirens of "influencers" on YT, real or false pilots, who do not always seek objectivity and intellectual honesty but more certainly profit.

Finally someone said it. There is a huge and noticeable contrast between what these “reviewers” (who all got special access mind you with strings attached) and what the general public is saying about this product. 
 

im starting to notice that even the most perceived genuine author is not actually that genuine in reality and at the very least should include that “Includes Paid Promotion” moniker on all their videos!

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by UAL4life

11 minutes ago, Speedbird 217 said:

I love the Fenix to bits and I respect Amir, heck I’d buy a paper plane done by those guys if they released one, but I found his comments today uncalled for.

The Fenix is THE standard for me and nothing else comes close.

With that said, the ini 350 is targeting a different market and audience. If we only had developers like Fenix we’d probably have about 2 aircraft in total for MSFS right now.
Instead we got more than we can count ranging from utter garbage to exquisite simulation.
At the end of the day it’s the customer who decides what they want. I’ll buy the ini 350 but I’m not expecting Fenix quality. I think it’ll be good enough to simulate a believable flight that gets close enough to the real thing and has all systems simulated in a way I’d encounter on a regular flight. If it doesn’t simulate the drag from the mosquitos I squished with the flaps on my last approach that’s ok.
But attacking ini because Fenix could have done a 350 and made the decision to drop it seems beneath those guys.
I’ll put it down to an off day and can’t wait to hear what Fenix are going to do next - that I’m much more interested in than another day of flightsim drama.

It wasn't attacking it was just expressing an opinion which  apparently a paying customer can't have opinions even when they are a CEO.

Edited February 27, 20251 yr by carlanthony24

7 minutes ago, Speedbird 217 said:

With that said, the ini 350 is targeting a different market and audience.

I think the problem is the price, at these price points the high-fidelity crowd is going to be a hawk for details.

So yeah the A350 fits the bill for a good majority of people but those who usually pay these prices may have been a bit more disappointed by the finer details