BrianW

What version of navigation equipment are you using? I think with GPS NAV it's handled in the GPS unit. So tune your NAV freqs there.

But this post seems to indicate otherwise: "What usually ends up happening next is that we mimic the physical structure of the system in code with as much detail as is practical. This entails modeling almost every computer, component, ARINC 429 bus, and discrete or analog signal that is documented in operational and technical training manuals. We find that this gives us the best chance at encapsulating the complexities and nuances involved in the aircraft’s systems. With performance and maintainability in mind, we then consider how we can simplify parts of the system without sacrificing the complexity we seek to model, such as coalescing identical, redundant computers into one code path. The end result of this process is something we like to refer to as emergent behavior. In essence, it grants us the ability to realistically model many non-normal states without having to explicitly account for them. These states emerge naturally due to failed or degraded components somewhere else in the chain, and from the logic of individual components. We can simply fail the primary flight control computers and watch the error cascade naturally through the components and data channels. This, of course, doesn’t account for every scenario, but it gives us a strong foundation for non-normal operations while also accounting for the core behavior of normal flight conditions." iniBuilds ForumSynaptic A220 - April 2025 UpdateAs we continue to shift things into ever-increasing gears here at the Synaptic development team, we’d like to share some of the exciting new progress made on the Synaptic A220 Airliner for Microsoft F

Well some of the systems like the electrical are very well done, it just seems odd they would skip a basic thing like the pressurization system that most other products in this category simulate. I do like a lot of things about the product, so I hope they can fix what's missing.

You will get indications, but the cabin rate of change goes to zero, and the cabin altitudes and temperatures remain unchanged even in cruise. Even the emergency depressurization switch doesn't work unless a pack is on, which is wrong because the switch just opens the outflow valve.

I respectively disagree. take the packs for example, on a 737 they need to be turned off for engine start. If you don't turn them back on after start you won't have any pressurization or ECS. In the A220 it's "automatic" but really that means the whole system can be ignored. Try turning off the packs in the Synaptic A220 in flight and you'll see they skipped this whole system. Hopefully it will be fixed because I do like the aircraft, but there is a lot of detail missing still compared to the FCOM.

Just a WAG but is there a control lock you forgot?

Ah okay perfect, I can stop trying to troubleshoot then. jaja

I can't seem to use the Wing/Stab Anti-Ice switch. It doesn't even seem to have a clickspot. Is it working for anyone?

They have also provided a profile for each airframe here for those of us who are lazy: https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/topic/36606-simbrief-profiles/

Boeing offers several licensing options, my understanding is that PMDG has the simulator data license, not just a license for the logos and names.

Thanks for the fix, I just had these appear for me too.

Not only that, but of all things heart disease was a contributing factor in Richard Simmons death at only 76! So yeah there's certainly other factors at play.

Not in 2020 though. Maybe someone who has it in 2024 could share the options?

I've had it happen to me once prior to the 2024 compatibility update, I just assumed it was bad weather data (rapid wind shift, or OAT spike) messing it up.

Waiting for refueling to complete is the way it always works for me. I wasn't aware it had an option to board while refueling, but thanks I'll check it out. My OTP will get a lot better for those A321 flights with a large fuel uplift.

One thing that the FSLabs had in P3d was the ability to set a specific time to start boarding. I really wish this was an option with the Fenix, or at least to be able to separate fueling from boarding. The ability to board while refueling, or wait for awhile after fueling before boarding would be nice.

Are you sure you're not trying to use the key for the baggage door? Sorry, I couldn't resist as someone who's done it a few times IRL. 😁

It doesn't even work like that these days, everything is in a distributed and virtualized environment. It also could be that the volume of network traffic is just too high with everyone trying at once, more servers would just make that worse.

I'm going to state the obvious but your email password and your steam password are different I hope. Email is the key to many things, so it's important that the password for that is different from anything else, same applies for bank accounts.

It's nice to see the ADIRS and ACP models will be updated too.

I won't be impressed until I can play as a bird, but in the meantime I'd settle for in game ATIS that reports the correct sky conditions, and dewpoint.

Sorry, I should clarify that it's only on aircraft that offer it. At this point I pretty much only use aircraft that have detailed systems and failures, I've found I get bored too quickly with those that don't. That's why I'd gladly pay a higher price for something I'll use for years vs. a cheaper less detailed one that I'll never use again after the newness wears off.

No worries, but that was an important detail to leave out since ECON is the more common mode. The route length is also important because there are differences in the FMC OPT calculations between short flights (<400 NM) and long ones, but again only in ECON mode.. LRC differs from ECON in that the OPT altitude is only based on aircraft weight. Do you remember what the winds were? Maybe you just lost a good portion of tailwind at the lower altitude.

I’ve been around along time too and It does seem like that at times, and I’ve seen more than a few people with a lot of real world experience get scared away because of the “your post count is low so you don’t know anything” argument. Maybe we both need to start padding our post count with a bunch of “I agree”, or “+1” posts. :rolleyes: As for your page 16 question: Failures allow a deeper understanding on exactly how the systems and their backups are supposed to work. It also gives purpose to all the preflight tests you go through as opposed to just going through the motions. I only occasionally use the pre-programmed failures, and when I do it’s usually only on local flights, or to try an ETOPS diversion. The random service based failures I use on every flight though. The chance of a failure using the random failures is pretty low, so there’s no reason not to expect to make it to your destination. When they do happen though it adds some variety as opposed to just droning along from point A to B on every flight.

Why LRC? ECON below a CI of 35 will give you better range than LRC if that’s what you’re looking for. A CI of 0 will give you the best range.