GearUp180

Sadly, I don't think that we should be surprised: as mentioned by Microsoft, the concept is to keep the third-party addons thriving. Practically, some people should be able to offer some products to address the long list of deficiencies that this platform suffers. That's using, of course, a half-baked SDK (let's be consistent). With a bit of marketing, those developers should be able to grab the money from some of the new comers. While other platforms (such as Apple with all the complaints that someone could have with other aspects of their business) are a bit more strict in term of quality control, MS has obviously decided to maintain their long time strategy with Flight Simulator: doing the bare minimum (or even less). Therefore, how can we expect Microsoft to enforce Quality Control on third-party content when they struggle to enforce their own? They seem neither interested nor able to do it.

You might want to watch this video (and specifically from 13:23): https://youtu.be/Ok9-70ieRlg?t=803

If having some broken functions compared to the old FSX doesn't bother you, keep founding this kind of software.

Honestly, that's the very least of my concerns considering the one mile list of defects / not implemented functions of this aircraft. I do not use the crappy ATC anyway.

I've just checked on my side (luckily without any CTD) : the MSFS ATC doesn't tune the RMP (note that the old default FSX A321 does it). At this stage, trying to fly this plane seems like acting as an alpha tester: not for me, thanks.

As far as I am concerned, it is the side effect of MS policy to deliver half baked product and "let third party developers finish the job". That's also not surprising in an industry where poor Quality Control is widely spread. MS could require ad-dons to be distributed through their market place after proper QA review (including copyright, conformity of the product with what is advertised...) and for a reasonable fee: that would deter some of the scammers.

Roger. I am away from my computer therefore, it is hard for me to check it now. I wouldn't be surprised it it was one of the many hugs on this aircraft. You may check the flight simulator website or the Fly by wire project to see if it has been reported (and may be being addressed).

I think that @andyjohnston.net was referring to the physical location of the panel on the central pedestal, not the MCDU page:

For information (video from 2019):

FCOM (INDICATING/RECORDING SYSTEMS / ECAM DESCRIPTION): Most warnings and cautions are inhibited during critical phases of flight (T/O INHIBIT – LDG INHIBIT), because most system failures will not affect the aircraft’s ability to continue a takeoff or landing.

I don't know what messed up with your approach but I figure that the G3000 on the TBM is very much still a work in progress. Yes indeed: you can be vectored by the controller to the final approach segment or the final fix (IAF) to save time, fuel, or for sequencing. Yes. Unfortunately, there are only 3 instrument approaches for EYW: RNAV on both runways and NDB on 09. https://skyvector.com/airport/EYW/Key-West-International-Airport Incidentally, in real life, I found flying VFR to this airport to be a bit challenging. Depending on the traffic, you may have to dodge the airliners departing from runway 09 while keeping an eye on the traffic pattern of the naval base station (KNQX) just before (coming from Miami). Flying VFR using a NDB: I am confused. I guess that you are referring to a visual approach following an IFR routing. You then may use the (offset) VOR EYW (2.8 nm from the airport) or the TACAN NQX (4.5 nm from the airport). I would suggest to watch some Steve1kenivo videos on his TBM 850 (I believe that he may have few videos of EYW since he is based in Florida): https://www.youtube.com/user/steveo1kinevo For reference, here is the Garmin manual for the TBM930: https://static.garmin.com/pumac/190-02046-01_A.pdf Section 5.8 covers the approaches. Good luck!

We may get an announcement somewhere on the future for an alpha implementation in the following patch...

Flight simmers stop caring about fps? We are on the verge of a cultural revolution!

FAA AIM 2-3-6 Other Markings: Marking and Lighting of Permanently Closed Runways and Taxiways. For runways and taxiways which are permanently closed, the lighting circuits will be disconnected. The runway threshold, runway designation, and touchdown markings are obliterated and yellow crosses are placed at each end of the runway and at 1,000 foot intervals.

😅 I guess that we could ask: "what's the purpose of ATC in this sim?". I see it as a revamped version (with a new UI) of the crappy FSX ATC: it was already bad in the mid 2000s. But don't worry: just prepare your credit card for when a third party developer comes to finish MS job.