I absolutely love the Fenix A320 modelling! I hope their artist gets a raise!

The Fenix is in the wrong sim!

*sips tea* 😂

8 hours ago, Murmur said:

Back in the FS9 days, I was disappointed to see that the PMDG 747 had a totally unrealistic behaviour in certain edge of the envelope situations (e.g. OEI stall), whereas the LVL-D B767 behaved convincingly and flawlessly in all the situations I could put it through, possibly even better than a real Level-D simulator! This gave me the idea that PMDG was maybe a bit overhyped, whereas the less glamorous people at LVL-D showed a remarkable attention to quality in small but important details.

At the same time, I am now aware that only "OCD"-simmers like me and @jcomm are really fixated on flight model details like these, which are justifiedly of no significance to most simmers. So PMDG has certainly always made products which are overall state of the art, yet their popularity  often tends to obscure other designers that show more attention to specific details.

Interesting. 

I think Level D was before I tried a sim other than XP (late P3D 4.5). And I really only got started with P3D because of MilViz’s T-38C Talon and F-4 Phantoms. And I went for those because of their External Flight Models, if that gives you a hint as to how important FMs are to me 😎

IDK because by the time I heard about LD, everyone was speaking in the past tense.

It sounds like I missed out on something great, and that makes me a bit sad. 

Edited July 30, 2025Jul 30 by UrgentSiesta

On 7/29/2025 at 4:53 AM, efis007 said:

@JonathanC
The problem with Toliss isn't just the textures: it's the 3D modeling of the entire airplane, which, unfortunately, is far inferior to the Fenix. 😥

I saw the video of the new update released by Fenix a few hours ago, and for once, if you'll allow me, I'd like you all to watch it, in absolute tranquility, peace, relaxation, harmony, and sporting spirit.
No flames, no sides, no polemics, please. 🖐️
Let's show ourselves that we're capable of admiring and applauding even "opponent" products when those products deserve it. 🙂

What can I say? This new Fenix is a true masterpiece, a feast for the eyes, with modeling currently unmatched by Toliss models.

I absolutely love Toliss!! 💙
They're the airliner I've flown the most in years!! ✈️
It's certainly not my intention to discredit Toliss, but I very sportingly acknowledge that the Fenix Airbus is far superior in terms of modeling and texturing (and no slouch when it comes to avionics, either).

So... yes... I stand up and give him a well-deserved round of applause. 👏👏

It would be great if Toliss and Fenix collaborated to improve "our" Airbus for Xplane.
Toliss avionics, Fenix modeling and texturing.
It would be another masterpiece.
But maybe I'm overdoing it with my imagination. ☺️

One of the things that's most interesting to me in re feedback on the genuinely impressive Fenix "BFU" is how many people are talking about how much better the ground handling is and oleo compression, subtle flight model improvements to landing flare and such.

And yet those features are so much a part of every day fare for XP that it causes me to pause and wonder that they're "NEW and IMPROVED" for addons in ToS.

Not throwing shade at Msobo and certainly not at the immensely talented Fenix team; just an interesting observation on the intangible riches that XP fliers are able to take for granted. 👍

11 hours ago, Murmur said:

Back in the FS9 days, I was disappointed to see that the PMDG 747 had a totally unrealistic behaviour in certain edge of the envelope situations (e.g. OEI stall), whereas the LVL-D B767 behaved convincingly and flawlessly in all the situations I could put it through, possibly even better than a real Level-D simulator!

Absolutely agree.
The LevelD 767 was truly a remarkable product for its time.
I'm lucky enough to still have it with FS9 and fly it every now and then, and every time I'm amazed not only by the avionics accuracy but especially by the flight dynamics.
Hand-piloted, it handles masterfully, flies like a dream, and truly feels like flying an "X-plane inside FS9." 
A truly beautiful airplane.
The LevelD's only flaw was the main panel graphics, created via rather crappy 2D photography (the PMDG 747's was a little better, though not by much), and the panel wasn't in widescreen format.
But at the time, it was fine (until I decided to redo the entire main panel graphics, and so now I can still fly it today).

Just did a flight with ActiveSky for XP12, firstly in passive mode then with passive turned off - talk about immersive!  ASXP did a great job with building showers!

Nice shot. 👍
Have you tried comparing ASXP on... and ASXP off (i.e., with XP12's default weather display)... to see which one better represented the weather conditions where you took the photo?

14 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Nice shot. 👍
Have you tried comparing ASXP on... and ASXP off (i.e., with XP12's default weather display)... to see which one better represented the weather conditions where you took the photo?

Yes - default XP12 weather was very hazy with no sign of showers.  Looking at the radar image showed plenty of showers over the southern UK and northern France.

ASXP got the visibility and weather spot on.

I like that stretch of coast. Which airport is it? I'd like to try a flight with XP11 in the same area to see how it performs graphically.

Note: Due to my poor PC, I'm afraid I won't be able to use XP12 anymore (even with all the settings at the lowest, I get constant crashes due to Vulkan device loss, a real torture that started with version 12.2), so I'm currently forced to fall back on XP11 to fly with xplane. 

16 minutes ago, efis007 said:

I like that stretch of coast. Which airport is it?

Sandown EGHN.

Regarding ASXP I haven’t used it since a while. I will take a look again, as soon as they  can access the weather-api (probably in test already) and make the weather not global anymore because this has been a big immersion-break for me. I really enjoy the default weather more, although not always super-acurate but in 80% of the cases really well modelled (transitions beetween local metars and uppee level grids). Simulating the « real » weather is extremely complex and we should have some tolerance for small discrepancies 😊

23 minutes ago, Franz007 said:

Regarding ASXP I haven’t used it since a while. I will take a look again, as soon as they  can access the weather-api (probably in test already) and make the weather not global anymore because this has been a big immersion-break for me. I really enjoy the default weather more, although not always super-acurate but in 80% of the cases really well modelled (transitions beetween local metars and uppee level grids). Simulating the « real » weather is extremely complex and we should have some tolerance for small discrepancies 😊

I mostly use default weather, but when it isn't accurate I switch to ASXP.  As you say, a global weather model is not ideal theses days, so I too look forward to the day ASXP can use a local model.  ASXP can produce some really great skies as shown in my screen shot.