33 minutes ago, Aglos77 said:

Todos buscan algo diferente en un

What? - now even your posts are in Spanish, as if your quotes of other people's posts being in Spanish wasn't enough. Get a grip.

Edited June 29, 2025Jun 29 by SierraDelta

15 hours ago, Bigmack said:

Maybe you should spend a few hundred thousand dollars on a real simulator instead of $89 for a A350 toy and $150 for 2024 Sim. Perhaps then you'll get all the realistic systems and weather responses you're looking for. But for what I paid for, I'm getting one hell of a bang for my $$ and much enjoyment along with it.

 

Exactly. It’s this kind of insanity that creates developers that get bogged down in development hell trying to simulate every rivet on the quantum level (or having to redesign a pneumatic air system for the upteenth time 😉) 

people need to curb their expectations for a consumer grade program. 

47 minutes ago, SierraDelta said:

as if your quotes of other people's posts being in Spanish wasn't enough.

I'm assuming they use their browser's built in translator so it ends up changing the text they're quoting.

They probably don't know English. Or not well enough.

Edited June 29, 2025Jun 29 by Tuskin38

33 minutes ago, UAL4life said:

people need to curb their expectations for a consumer grade program. 

Or vote with their wallets when competing aircraft in the same price bracket are able to appropriately simulate the desired systems.. 

I dont tell people to curb their expectations. Everyone has their unique expectations and tolerances set relative to what everyone is typically offering in the price range. For me "at the moment" i am waiting for more systems refinement amongts other things for this product to be worth my time and dollars. For you your expectations have been met and that's fine but please do not expect everyone to accept the same value proposition.

Edited June 29, 2025Jun 29 by Maxis

Hesitantly, I would add-

Performance, systems depth and accuracy, the flight model and VC graphics are my standards.

I will never be interested in the cabin- been there done that too many times to want to “walk around” there.

Each person has their priorities but those are mine.

The performance with this build is ok- but I did have a WASM crash…. Hopefully they are working on that amidst the Asobo shortcomings…

C

 

PS- still grateful they finally solved the silly backwards mouse wheel behavior.

On 6/29/2025 at 12:31 PM, Nuno Pinto said:

Yeah that's fair. Maybe because they have their code in C++ which compiles to very optimized machine code nowadays. Most other addons run WASM which is not too close in performance even in its AoT format within MSFS.

WASM is a target bytecode. PMDG writes their codes in C++ and uses WASM as a target bytecode. Alot of developer use C++, C# or Rust when it comes to systems development but they all need to be targeted to WASM. You aircraft can either run on Javascript or WASM or a mixture of both, with the exception of externally ran systems like Fenix.

PMDG's bread and butter is their display drawcalls, they have pretty much mastered this in a way that the aircraft is very performant. Long drawcalls is one of the biggest performance issues.

On 6/29/2025 at 1:26 AM, Tuskin38 said:

Like what?

I've yet to encounter an issue that stopped me from finishing a flight. I've done dozens of 10+ hour flights with no crashes, aircraft hasn't fallen out of the sky etc.

I'm not an expert in A350 functions, but as a casual flier I've not seen anything aircraft breaking.

I’m in the process of writing up the bugs with screenshots, videos, and examples from the FCOM of what the aircraft is supposed to do. But there are numerous bug reports on the inibuilds forums from myself and from others.
 

Oh I don’t say it’s not capable of flying from A to B casually. If people enjoy that, then honestly that’s great, I’m glad people enjoy it.

 

But the aircraft is marketed as having unparalleled realism and is priced as a premium product, and as such I would expect basic systems to work correctly, correct ECAM messages, loadsheets to be correct etc.

On 6/29/2025 at 3:46 AM, Bigmack said:

On 6/29/2025 at 1:26 AM, Tuskin38 said:

I agree. I've flown dozens of flights and haven't come across any bugs or errors that prevented me from TO to landing.

Sorry but just because one can complete a flight from take off to landing does not mean that there aren’t bugs and basic systems functionality that is completely incorrect.

17 minutes ago, abennett said:

does not mean that there aren’t bugs and basic systems functionality that is completely incorrect.

I didn't say otherwise.

36 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

I didn't say otherwise.

I didn’t say you did ha

1 hour ago, abennett said:

I didn’t say you did ha

Well, that solves that.

On 6/29/2025 at 1:26 AM, Tuskin38 said:

Like what?

I've yet to encounter an issue that stopped me from finishing a flight. I've done dozens of 10+ hour flights with no crashes, aircraft hasn't fallen out of the sky etc.

I'm not an expert in A350 functions, but as a casual flier I've not seen anything aircraft breaking

BTW,

 

If you are interested, I have gotten round to writing up some of the issues with the A350 here https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/31038-a350-v110-bugs/

Best.

38 minutes ago, abennett said:

BTW,

 

If you are interested, I have gotten round to writing up some of the issues with the A350 here https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/31038-a350-v110-bugs/

Best.

Nice write up. Let's see what happens next.

3 hours ago, abennett said:

BTW,

 

If you are interested, I have gotten round to writing up some of the issues with the A350 here https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/31038-a350-v110-bugs/

Best.

Thank You. I dont know all of the airbus "isms" and their protocols but i notice a fair few of them you posted and although these protocols are possibly in the weeds for a few people who casually fly the product i would have assumed that they would be present in their product for the people who actually do notice these things.

I certainly would have noticed a few of them and wondered why its not there.

 

Thanks for posting these issues on their forums. Hopefully they will be addressed.  

Edited July 3, 2025Jul 3 by Maxis

Yep. Sadly lots of this has been reported previously and nothing actioned, this was the update they said would fix all outstanding bugs.

 

As I’ve said before, I’m not at all saying it can’t get from A-B. But then the default aircraft that I didn’t have to pay £80 for can also get from A to B. 
 

This was advertised as having unparalleled realism, and priced as such. And it is a long, long way from that.

 

There is so much basic stuff incorrect, I have to question the development team, and also the testers, this stuff happens on every flight, do the testers just not know about Airbus systems and logic? If not, why are they doing the testing?

 

Anyway, I will continue to report, and I hope it will be useful for those, who, like me, are interested in having the high level simulation that was advertised and is available in other products of a similar price.

 

I also hope that those who maybe more casual flyers, and simply enjoy flying it from A to B continue to do so with pleasure. There is no right or wrong way to sim. 

Edited July 3, 2025Jul 3 by abennett