41 minutes ago, speedyTC said:

Past company history aside, I'm curious as to how many of the people here deciding in favour of the Fenix have actually bought and flown the FSL CEO offering.

Please let's not start a A vs B "war". It is a genuine question.

I've never owned the Fenix, but the FSL A321 is good enough for me to wait for the FSL NEO.

Like the PMDG 737 MAX, the FSL NEO might turn out to be the equivalent of lemon-soaked paper napkins, but I buy very few aircraft, preferring to master each one before I move on.

15 minutes ago, speedyTC said:

 

NVM delete

 

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by JBDB-MD80

The radar thing is just make-up and that's what bothers me the most about Asobo, I guess the biomes attract more people than the weather even though the weather is one of the most important aspects of the simulation.

As for the price it would be stupid if they didn't raise the price after Inibuilds sold a much inferior aircraft to Fenix at that price, it makes sense that the other studios have taken note.

35 minutes ago, speedyTC said:

You didn't answer the question.

Ill answer it.. I have never flown FSL products and based on their past and how they handled themselves ... never will. Since i returned to simming Fenix has been first hifi A320 to the MSFS market. Been productively  communicative with the simming community, open to feedback, and appear to give a word not allowed about the quality of the product coming out of their door. That's more than enough incentive for me to support them because frankly not every dev has all those qualities  nowadays.. I appreciate that and support them for it.

In all seriousness, while I am in a shut up and take my monies, it's going to come down to a battle of price and my willpower. I tend to fly older airlines like US Airways so the Neos are a little too modern for me, However, when it comes to airplanes I have no willpower. It does impact other purchases where I may pass on something to get the Fenix.

In terms of people who bought or prefer the FSL, it's your money and your happiness. Why should I care about that? I'm happy they are happy.

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by BrammyH

6 minutes ago, BrammyH said:

You seem to like admonishing people for not answering, but don't like to answer straightforward, direct questions yourself.

On the contrary. I appreciate a direct and to the point answer and I also appreciate that if you can't do that it's best to not answer at all rather than go off on a tangent that serves no purpose.

As for your question, yes, I do own the FSL but I do not have the Fenix which means I cannot express an opinion based on a comparison between the two. Hence my original question.

18 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

Would love for Fenix to focus next on an A330 or A340 🙂 
 

There's the Aerosoft A330. Not flyable but available. I knew my $$ was well invested when Fenix first released the 320. I fly it at least 3 times a week. There is no Airbus NEO race to the market as far as I'm concerned. I'm a Fenix customer forever.

5 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

@Aamir if you are monitoring this thread, based on this update from Fenix, I am wondering if all traces of ProSim code will be removed from all versions of the Fenix code (CEO, NEO, Sharklets, IAE, etc) when it's finally released.  I am just curious, because removing all traces of ProSim code is a huge undertaking and refactoring (but maybe a necessary one). Thanks in advance if you reply to this!

So this bit below from the blog says the NEO series will be all Fenix code ground-up and no ProSim:

To begin with - instead of attempting to turn our CEO into a NEO with a bit of brain surgery and ECAM fiddling, we've opted to replace the entire ECAM from the ground up at a "NEO" standard, this is wholly and solely Fenix - no longer shared with ProSim (some ammo for internet arguments). As a result, we've been able to dive down ECAM messages and functions not present even within the prior implementation - unlocking a whole host of possibilities for features we're not quite pulling the covers off yet

And then this part I assume means the CEO series will undergo same too? (That said, the "slightly less tossing out" part might mean some traces of ProSim left behind in the CEO series?):

So the NEO was not the only one to have a bit of brain-out work. We didn't build one ECAM. We built 2 side-by-side. Our NEO, in the latest shiny standard and our CEO in the standard you know and have today. We couldn't leave the CEO behind, this is the hammer with which we built the house. While for CEO customers this may not present initially as a massive immediate difference, we think this was incredibly important in supporting the product going forward - and it was an extraordinary amount of work to achieve. We rebuilt and rewired the airplane in exactly the same way, just with slightly less tossing out.
 

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by lwt1971

14 minutes ago, Bigmack said:

There's the Aerosoft A330. Not flyable but available. I knew my $$ was well invested when Fenix first released the 320. I fly it at least 3 times a week. There is no Airbus NEO race to the market as far as I'm concerned. I'm a Fenix customer forever.

True. While I await the Fenix A330 to arrive some day, the ini A330 in MSFS 2024 will be my go-to A330 as that has darn good fidelity for a default bird.
 

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by lwt1971

15 hours ago, Pilot53 said:

Correct me if im wrong, but i think the only real difference between the a321neo, lr, and xlr is the number of aux tanks fitted and max gross weight.

not really, with re-designed center tank for XLR only

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by amm693

19 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

I'm curious about this statement.  I wonder if he means FOQA instead of DFDR data?  Access to DFDR data is pretty tightly controlled in the US and at the European airlines I'm familiar with, being that it is an accident investigation tool.  The airlines themselves typically cannot read it.  It is not the type of thing that would typically be available to a video game developer. 

If they actually accessed a large amount of DFDR data, I'd be curious to know how and why.

Tagging @Aamir because after thinking about this some more, it's not just curiosity - this requires clarification.

Did you really mean DFDR data, or did you perhaps mean FOQA?  From a desktop sim standpoint the difference is negligible; either would have contained the information your team needed to adjust flight dynamics.  But from a professional privacy standpoint for those of us who do this for a living, there are significant differences.  FDR data should not be getting archived, and certainly should not be available to a commercial entity making entertainment software.  If you really obtained DFDR data, I would like to know from where. 

I really suspect you meant FOQA, precisely since FDR data SHOULDN'T be getting archived; it's typically continuously overwritten on a 25 hour loop by the recorder, and never accessed except in the event of an accident.  FOQA on the other hand is de-identified and aggregated precisely for commercial use.

I understand that it seems a pedantic point to the sim community.  I ask because I'm involved with safety data at both my airline and ALPA and there are rather strict agreements in place regarding collection and use of this data, and if it's somehow being made commercially available to a video game developer, we need to know the source. 

Thanks!  👍

2 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

True. While I await the Fenix A330 to arrive some day
 

they are releasing a 330 ?

4 hours ago, speedyTC said:

Past company history aside, I'm curious as to how many of the people here deciding in favour of the Fenix have actually bought and flown the FSL CEO offering.

Please let's not start a A vs B "war". It is a genuine question.

I own the FSL A320 for P3D and the Fenix for MSFS. The FSLabs was my favorite aircraft in P3D by a mile. Fenix is my favorite aircraft in MSFS by a mile.

I'm sticking with the Fenix because they plan to add FSL features like MEL'S, tailstrikes, icing, etc while expanding on their own offerings. 

1 hour ago, fluffyflops said:

they are releasing a 330 ?

I meant that as a wish/hope, nobody knows what they have coming in the future.
 

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Did you really mean DFDR data, or did you perhaps mean FOQA?  From a desktop sim standpoint the difference is negligible; either would have contained the information your team needed to adjust flight dynamics.  But from a professional privacy standpoint for those of us who do this for a living, there are significant differences.  FDR data should not be getting archived, and certainly should not be available to a commercial entity making entertainment software.  If you really obtained DFDR data, I would like to know from where. 

I really suspect you meant FOQA, precisely since FDR data SHOULDN'T be getting archived; it's typically continuously overwritten on a 25 hour loop by the recorder, and never accessed except in the event of an accident.  FOQA on the other hand is de-identified and aggregated precisely for commercial use.

I understand that it seems a pedantic point to the sim community.  I ask because I'm involved with safety data at both my airline and ALPA and there are rather strict agreements in place regarding collection and use of this data, and if it's somehow being made commercially available to a video game developer, we need to know the source. 

 

Hello!

Strictly speaking there is only DFDR "data", "FOQA data" I guess would be the wrong way to refer to this? Where it comes from (the QAR - which I guess can be interchangably with FOQA?) is the difference, given the digital nature - and of course we do not access the FDR for this, it is probably too low resolution anyway. The QAR/FOQA logging is typically both higher resolution and more informative. I am happy to change this in the original post if you feel it to be misleading 🙂

Thanks,

Edited March 29, 20251 yr by Aamir