Aamir

Okay, next step - can you disable Game Mode?

can you disable fullscreen optimization on FlightSimulator.exe and only run in borderless windowed mode and let me know what happens?

Have you tried the display render options in the Fenix App? It doesn't work on commanding rate of descent - it commands a G load, and with stick neutral it returns to neutral G load as defined by configuration etc. This is why we recommend setting Turbulence to LOW in MSFS, as recently in the hotter weather around Europe, MSFS's thermal V/S is ludicrous - we have on thermal debug 1800fpm spikes on clear days, which is quite abnormal with the strength and variability. Thermals do exist on clear days, but not like this.

That sounds absurdly broken - something isn't right there. What render settings are you using in the fenix app?

What exactly is stuttering? Is it the sim itself, or the displays?

Updated to match the real aircraft. Need to use CLR twice. First CLR will remove the last digit, next CLR will clear the rest.

Are you on version .200? Don't need this, it's older - the Fenix Simulations profile within Simbrief itself is updated.

This is usually related to the MCDU related process being flagged by an AV of some sort during installation. See here: https://kb.fenixsim.com/bitdefender

Do you run bitdefender?

This will be why - it will insert DECEL on any leg preceding a speed limit below greendot.

Rolled out a new patch to fix some of these issues.

Working on eliminating this issue, sent out some patches to affected users and will see what the results are. Apologies for the inconvenience.

I'm really struggling to understand the community here. Shock, horror - an external FM coded specifically for a type of aircraft is very good. Why do you think Level-D simulations are all proprietary tables? All of those are "external FMs", and do not use any globalized FDEs. Because you can mold input, expectation, effect, and response around the type of aircraft you're attempting to emulate. You guys aren't arguing about the same thing, at all. MSFS is a globalised FDE. As is XP. As is P3D. None of these are used in any "big simulators", all Level-D sims are running their own physics, coded with tables, to type. This doesn't mean that MSFS, P3D, or XP are bad. They're just entirely different things. Global FDE does not equal type specific FDE. Anyway, I leave it at that!

Given what you're saying, I guess price does have relevance as you circle back to it often. You're also taking my point very far out of context and spinning it quite hard. I'm not saying "it's only as good as a 60 quid game", you're missing my point entirely - my point is that this entire argument is laughable, as frankly speaking nothing is as good as doing an external FM, in any simulator.

Hey! If you need to reach support - you can use www.fenixsim.com/support If you're looking for a community area, that would indeed be discord!

Or a £30m Level-D sim 🙂

This thread is hilarious. People complaining about a £59.99 piece of home entertainment software (MSFS) not having incredible globalised flight modelling when even £30m+ level-D sims, specific to type, built from real aircraft test data, don't feel like the real thing. A2A had to go external in places to build it to their standards, which is understandable, because they're brilliant and build a brilliant product. What I don't get is people taking that and spinning it into "Asobo sucks!", yeesh. We had to go external on our engines and a portion of our flight model too, in this next update. It doesn't mean Asobo sucks. It means we, as developers, have specific needs and requirements from our product that we want to see - and that we can go build it ourselves. I don't think anyone railing on Asobo understands what a monumental task it is to have an FDE that is just bang on perfect for every single type of aircraft out there - including helicopters, gliders, etc, out of the box by default, and globalised. Insanity. p.s if anyone manages to do the above, perfect globalised modelling, and it's capable of running on anything less than a super-computer in real time, you're probably sat on a few billion dollars in training contracts - forget the piddly consumer market 🙂

Indeed, the support ticket proviso is that we will get back to you if we need more info - but otherwise, it's goes into the work tracker, someone checks it out - and if the report is enough, it will be actioned and closed, unfortunately the volume of tickets we are generally unable to give people play-by-plays on the ticket's status, but everything is seen and put in the right place, then prioritised. If more info is needed, as mentioned, we get back to people and go back and forth to try and figure it out. Re Discord, yes, it took a week - my DMs are quite frantic at the best of times, but I did make an effort to get back to you - I see and read everything, and like I said before, you're welcome to throw me a message, it may take a couple of days but I always endeavour to respond, especially if it's something you'd like to work on! 🙂 I did not say any usable feedback, I said that the piece of feedback being clipped is unusable. It's important to make a distinction between subjective and objective issues. The 5 things you mentioned are objective issues. Quantitatively wrong. So we fixed them! 4 out of 5 things you've listed have indeed been fixed, so it is indeed useful to point out, because we do see them on streams, reported in discord, bug reports, etc. But then when it comes to subjective feedback, or qualitative feedback - the sort you delivered in the clip, some more detail is appreciated - we can't quite do much about "word not allowed" and "garbage", but if there are handflying qualities you can pick out that you'd like to see different, we can always have a discussion about it and see where we get. Like I said before, Emi, my discord DMs are open and you know where to find them, throw me over some of your findings, and if you're game, drop me a message and I'd be happy to send you over the latest beta with the new FM in it, we're in a refinement phase now, and it's a good time to get some constructive critique in!

Ultimately, as I often say - the internet is the free world, people are completely entitled to their opinions and commentary. The clip was certainly sent to me dozens of times in the last 12 hours or so, and I found it quite interesting. Emi does have a direct line to me, and has DM'd me in the past to let me know he awarded the Fenix the "best airliner of 2022" or something of that sort on his channel, and I have indeed replied with a thanks and all that, so this came out of the blue, but nonetheless as I say, free world and people can say what they like out there! I suppose, for me, there is a difference between providing constructive feedback and simply calling something "garbage" and leaving it at that. We can really only iterate on feedback and criticisms that are helpful and constructive, and have worked toward those issues with feedback from other "real pilot" streamers such as Blackbox, V1, etc, when they shine a light on something that isn't quite right, as they often do in their live streams. No one is out there stating that the FM is perfect, but certainly other A320 pilots that create content have had some positive takeaways and some negative - the difference is we can act on their feedback as it is put across with some detail, but we cannot with Emi's. With his ability to reach out to me directly and share his concerns, and have them addressed - we could have built something around some of his criticisms to better encapsulate the feel he gets from the aircraft, but that is an aside - I don't quite have any hard feelings about any of it, I just.. don't really see much of what I can actually do with it, which is a shame - as our only interest is to address the issues that matter. In any case, we've rebuilt the flight model and rewrote the fly by wire based on the constructive feedback from other folks, inside and outside of the beta team, along with the gripes from the wider community - and this has been received very well from our team of internal testers and multiple A320 training captains with a few thousand hours on type, so I hope when V2 shows up, we can get an upgrade from "garbage" in his opinion 😁 Finally, I will just leave this here - as his point of comparison is that of a couple of simulator sessions in an A330 sim. https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/638824-difference-flare-behavior-between-a330-200e-300e-bonus-question.html

Reports are that it is better in the recently deployed beta, we are attending to this actively.

Nothing hugely new to add, work continues and we continue to move modules of the airplane forward into "V2" status. Today we deployed the new displays, FMv2, and FBWv2 into Beta. All are substantial rewrites, so we expect a fair amount of time in testing for them all, and we continue to have other V2 modules we are yet to move into beta, but the list slowly gets smaller. All in, forward movement - and our new resources are starting to click into place too, so some nice progression on the workrate.

Mini LED backlighting, so it's brighter and has better local dimming too.

I have 2, an older G9 and the Neo G9, they're fantastic imo - there's a little bit of "curving" around the edges, but all in not really noticeable to me once you spend a day or so with the monitor. Great for simming! Just make sure you can drive them, there's a lot of pixels there.

We ported into MSFS, took 2 years. PMDG ported into MSFS, took 2 years. Leonardo ported into MSFS, took 2 years. A pattern. No one is disagreeing with your original point, but you made a claim about my company and product saying it was already compatible with MSFS, it wasn't. Same case as PMDG and Leonardo, etc. Which is why it took a very similar amount of time to get to market. I fundamentally agree with your point about ROIs etc.

And how long did it take PMDG to build the 737 for MSFS? Probably better to go Apples to Apples here 😉