The 64 bit FSlabs Concorde is higher in fidelity than the X-Plane Colimata and DC Designs.

Feel free to ask any Concorde questions. 

 

 

 

Edited December 24, 2025Dec 24 by charliearon
embed video

1 hour ago, Joshua757 said:

The 64 bit FSlabs Concorde is higher in fidelity than the X-Plane Colimata and DC Designs.

Far better than the X-Plane Colimata, which flight dynamics on landing are the worst possible (since version 1), which Florian himself admitted and said that a fix would compromise behavior in other phases of flight, a flawed argument, since FSLabs in all versions of their Concorde (FSX, P3Dv3 and v5), did an excellent job.

Edited December 20, 2025Dec 20 by Hamilton_

41 minutes ago, Hamilton_ said:

Far better than the X-Plane Colimata, which flight dynamics on landing are the worst possible (since version 1), which Florian himself admitted and said that a fix would compromise behavior in other phases of flight, a flawed argument, since FSLabs in all versions of their Concorde (FSX, P3Dv3 and v5), did an excellent job.

Agreed. It should never reach FL600 so soon during max cruise. It goes far beyond that into lack of systems fidelity too.

Systems fidelity might be good. but graphical fidelity is disaster taking into account price and year of publishing.

17 minutes ago, Beardyman said:

Systems fidelity might be good. but graphical fidelity is disaster taking into account price and year of publishing.

Are you referring to the 32 bit version? The 64 bit one looks great 

7 minutes ago, Joshua757 said:

Are you referring to the 32 bit version? The 64 bit one looks great 

Looks great ? - beauty sits in the eye of beholder, but this model is as simple as FSX version.

FSL is known for their high systems fidelity, poor customer service and low 3D graphic.

Edited December 20, 2025Dec 20 by Beardyman

On 12/20/2025 at 8:03 PM, Beardyman said:

Looks great ? - beauty sits in the eye of beholder, but this model is as simple as FSX version.

Can you post details of your CPU and GPU? In Enhanced Atmospherics mode the cockpit takes on a completely different look. But you do need a minimum of a RTX3000 card and 4 is significantly better.

It’s nothing like the 32-bit version which was excellent when you consider the 3.8Gb VAS limit.

10 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Can you post details of your CPU and GPU? In Enhanced Atmospherics mode the cockpit takes on a completely different look. But you do need a minimum of a RTX3000 card and 4 is significantly better.

It’s nothing like the 32-bit version which was excellent when you consider the 3.8Gb VAS limit.

Ray, i have this bird from day one. I have reported to FSL all their mistakes and shortcomings from very beginning. No any EA or other trick will save this model - 3D modelling is simple and chunky, texturing is of low quality and plane lacks of details. Even cockpit windows geometry was broken as i remember...

For me it will always be the Queen PMDG. All the way back to FSX Days with version one.

2 hours ago, Beardyman said:

Ray, i have this bird from day one. I have reported to FSL all their mistakes and shortcomings from very beginning. No any EA or other trick will save this model - 3D modelling is simple and chunky, texturing is of low quality and plane lacks of details. Even cockpit windows geometry was broken as i remember...

I asked you for your CPU/GPU but you haven’t supplied them or even confirmed if you run in EA mode. I have also reported some elements requiring attention but none prevent me from flying her.

Looks are subjective. What you cannot deny is the excellence of the flight model and that all the systems work.

33 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I asked you for your CPU/GPU but you haven’t supplied them or even confirmed if you run in EA mode. I have also reported some elements requiring attention but none prevent me from flying her.

Looks are subjective. What you cannot deny is the excellence of the flight model and that all the systems work.

What CPU/GPU info has to low quality of 3D modelling and texturing?

As we said, 'visual quality' is subjective - absolutely.

Flight model and systems are excluded from my comments here. 

1 hour ago, Beardyman said:

What CPU/GPU info has to low quality of 3D modelling and texturing?

As we said, 'visual quality' is subjective - absolutely.

Because I’m trying to judge your system and whether you run with EA on or off. On gives much higher realism but it sounds like you’re dissatisfied either way.

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Because I’m trying to judge your system and whether you run with EA on or off. On gives much higher realism but it sounds like you’re dissatisfied either way.

You are correct 👍

I can only agree that it is a very good addon! Very immersive to fly! Sometimes I only do a flight up until cruise but it is so much fun following all the flows, etc. 😁

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Because I’m trying to judge your system and whether you run with EA on or off. On gives much higher realism but it sounds like you’re dissatisfied either way.

Yeah, after upgrading my GPU I can confirm it's visually better. Besides, what's so great in a slightly more glossy concorde (fxp) when many systems are inop and not even modelled 😞