Hey chaps,

For those seeing the CB message on the ECAM in the A320, a note on Fenix discord said the following..

Sunday, 21 December 2025 11:28 am
Hi, there is a known issue with users running chaseplane resulting in CBs being pulled in the A320. This is NOT a Fenix bug and we are unable to provide support for this - please refer to //42 for further information and a resolution, they are aware of the problem and are working towards a fix, thanks! 

Yup. I'm sure it will be fixed rather soon by //42. But now they are on holidays. Here's a link to the source - Aamir's message of yesterday:

https://discord.com/channels/736572376967282769/1024051725583265822/1452065251247001630

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by MaGer1965

Why would any pilot look up at the CB's in the first place. Its the word not allowed tech's job in the first place not the pilot.

11 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Why would any pilot look up at the CB's in the first place. Its the word not allowed tech's job in the first place not the pilot.

There are CBs that are required for MELs, failures, and troubleshooting - e.g if a system fails, you can pull the CB for it to reset power to it, observe it go through it's startup process, and depending on how long you power cycled it for, observe the effects of it fully resetting or not. That stuff is simulated, so if you fly with random failures turned on, there's a chance you may need to use the CBs to try and recycle power to broken things sometimes. 

12 minutes ago, Aamir said:

There are CBs that are required for MELs, failures, and troubleshooting - e.g if a system fails, you can pull the CB for it to reset power to it, observe it go through it's startup process, and depending on how long you power cycled it for, observe the effects of it fully resetting or not. That stuff is simulated, so if you fly with random failures turned on, there's a chance you may need to use the CBs to try and recycle power to broken things sometimes. 

I understand Amir but how many flight simmers could understand those procedures if they are not a RWP? Most people turn failures off and just want to go from A to B. But if Fenix is a teaching lesson to train want to be Pilots that flight sim and get familiar to real world procedures I am all for it. Thanks

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by JBDB-MD80

10 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

I understand Amir but how many flight simmers could understand those procedures if they are not a RWP? Most people turn failures off and just want to go from A to B.

Better to have and not need than need and not have 😁

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by Aamir

8 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

I understand Amir but how many flight simmers could understand those procedures if they are not a RWP? Most people turn failures off and just want to go from A to B. But if Fenix is a teaching lesson to train want to be Pilots that flight sim and get familiar to real world procedures I am all for it. Thanks

You underestimate how geeked out on every detail flight sinmers can be, including myself lol.
 

2 minutes ago, Aamir said:

Better to have and not need than need and not have 😁

Understood I will go back in my corner now, LOL.

2 minutes ago, rick celik said:

You underestimate how geeked out on every detail flight sinmers can be, including myself lol.
 

Yeah I get it.

1 hour ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

I understand Amir but how many flight simmers could understand those procedures

I actually do not purchase aircraft that do not have at least a moderate-depth failure profile because this is exactly what keeps me engaged and flying the aircraft, and the challenge of learning how and why the aircraft works the way it does, how to troubleshoot. If I was only flying A-B in an aircraft that never failed I would have left flight simulation already. That is just me, I understand that some people do just like to fly A-B with no issues, and there is a sense of accomplishment in that; indeed, some people seem to want to hang out at simulated airports and watch realistic AI traffic take-off, taxi and land, which I have absolutely zero interest in but can appreciate someone else enjoys. 

It is nice to have a range of aircraft developers and aircraft that span the spectrum from default to very deeply simulated.

16 minutes ago, Cognita said:

I actually do not purchase aircraft that do not have at least a moderate-depth failure profile because this is exactly what keeps me engaged and flying the aircraft, and the challenge of learning how and why the aircraft works the way it does, how to troubleshoot. If I was only flying A-B in an aircraft that never failed I would have left flight simulation already. That is just me, I understand that some people do just like to fly A-B with no issues, and there is a sense of accomplishment in that; indeed, some people seem to want to hang out at simulated airports and watch realistic AI traffic take-off, taxi and land, which I have absolutely zero interest in but can appreciate someone else enjoys. 

It is nice to have a range of aircraft developers and aircraft that span the spectrum from default to very deeply simulated.

Yes but I have watched V1, FD2S, Blackbox711 A320simpilot who are RWP do failures in a sim and never pulled any circuit breakers. Don't even try it in the MaddogX you would fail. LOL maybe the current NG series can carry these features to justify their pricing model. Probably not.

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by JBDB-MD80

2 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Most people turn failures off and just want to go from A to B.

Then maybe MOST people should not buy the Fenix and stick to the default INI A320Neo.

3 hours ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Yes but I have watched V1, FD2S, Blackbox711 A320simpilot who are RWP do failures in a sim and never pulled any circuit breakers. Don't even try it in the MaddogX you would fail. LOL maybe the current NG series can carry these features to justify their pricing model. Probably not.

That will most likely change when Fenix eventually bring MEL's in.

5 hours ago, Farlis said:

Then maybe MOST people should not buy the Fenix and stick to the default INI A320Neo.

Have you ever tried Vatsim on a busy event or even IVAO that can talk  to other simulators? I'd rather talk to real ATC (Real human voice completing a flight) rather than figuring out CB's with an AI and being clueless and losing me and my passengers and crash. Look I love Fenix and the MaddogX but have know idea what to do with CB's and most RWP that stream will tell you the same thing and they will tell you in general to leave those alone as they are mainly for tech and maintenance people .

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by JBDB-MD80

1 hour ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Have you ever tried Vatsim on a busy event or even IVAO that can talk  to other simulators?

All the time.

 

And resetting CB's is standard practice  for pilots on the A320 family for some issues. The QRH will tell you when to do it.

Edited December 21, 2025Dec 21 by Farlis