Aamir

Hey! We include 6 wingviews/cabin seat views by default, but MSFS orders the cameras in a pretty special way: camera dropdown > internal > instruments > scroll down to find all the included wing/cabin views.

A video would be good, for sure, just so I can have a look.

With that being said, some common things to check based on the initial report:

1) Make sure your MSFS icing is switched off, we don't play nice with this (for now).

2) Make sure you're not using toolbar pushback, it leaves a tug attached to the nose and the airplane wobbles around all over the place.

3) If you're using FSRealistic, make sure you've got the "low altitude turbulence" setting switched off.

If all those are as they should be, then a video would be great to see where the issue may lie.

The FWC (flight warning computer) is looking for this, so if you don't do it in time, it will flag it and set off the "ding" to let you know "hey, this isn't in a detent and you've not hit the instinctive disconnect, you know about it?", the timings and FWC logic is simulated. So, feel free to just slap it right into idle, the engines have a reasonably realistic spooldown rate, so you won't end up with 0 thrust instantly.

The master caution might ding off if you're idling the thrust levers too slowly. 

2 hours ago, Claudius_ said:

it's bugged and we know that it pegs the CPU randomly

It's 3 lines of code, so it is surprising if it were hammering your CPU - but I agree that the support response has been inadequate, I've picked up your ticket and discussed with the team member in question to ensure they're aware, for this I can only offer my apologies. They will reach out to you shortly requesting more information so we may debug the issue for you.

Alternatively, a lot of people have posted a potential solution for your problem, above. Remove the command starting bootstrapper from your exe.xml, this will inhibit bootstrapper from ever launching, and manually start fenix.exe when you want it. 

4 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

I want to share everyone else’s belief in this project but I just don’t see it yet. From the outside, it seems like buying ProSim’s code was a shortcut to launch but has been hinderance ever since. 

Different strokes, et al. Part of the updates has been improved VNAV descent angle math, changes to flight dynamics that now put the aircraft at an average of 0.1 degrees margin to engineering data w.r.t AoA during approach and flap deployment phases. But to each their own, you're entitled to your opinion on the matter, hope it changes at some point 🙂

26 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

Where are they though?

I'm not sure if you're being obtuse or literal - but the last delivered update was 7/11/2022, just over 2 months ago. The update before that, was 1 week and 6 days before that. The update before that, less than a month. The update before that, 4 days. So on.. so forth. Large gaps, and small gaps. Both exist. Some tackle big issues. Some tackle small.

Tackling big issues, i.e building a completely independent external physics model for a turbofan engine, isn't just knocked out in an afternoon after a nap and some beers. It's months of data collection. Months more of code to prototype. Weeks thereafter to refine. And further weeks to test, iterate, and bugfix. That's before it goes into beta testing.

That's one thing. We are also rebuilding the rendering pipeline and solution for the displays to eek out more performance, as this is a common complaint with the aircraft. A render pipeline rebuild is... just absurd, frankly, in terms of work required. Absurd. 

And then we're rebuilding the front-end of the displays also, to address the "fonts are wrong" complaint. That's another set of weeks of data collection, analysis, comparison before the first line of code is written. Then you write the code and it takes a month or two to completely tear out the old inaccurate displays, and build them up to pixel-accuracy. 

The visual model is getting a completely free overhaul (substantial enough we are calling it V2) because we learned from our first build and know where we can improve. So we are doing it as we are indeed aiming to output the best quality of work we are capable of producing. But once again, it is not cheap, nor fast. But it will be good. 

As the saying goes. It takes 5 seconds to type out a complaint about something, and 5 months fixing it. I guess with that in mind, it's quite difficult for some users to comprehend the amount of work that goes into fixing things that people complain about, but at a certain point we must take a breath, and focus on the long term improvement projects to the aircraft, instead of delivering updates every 3 weeks. Otherwise none of the "big stuff" ever happens. That's just how software goes.

2 hours ago, BWBriscoe said:

- The AP logic on the Fenix A320 is, I'm sorry to say, miles from where it should be and does not replicate how the aircraft actually performs.

Could you please expand on what you mean with this? It's extremely vague and makes it difficult to help or debug your issue.

2 hours ago, BWBriscoe said:

- The AP on the Fenix A320 kept disconnecting randomly for no reason (and I couldn't get it to engage until about 3,000ft...again totally against the logic Airbus developed).

It's not random and definitely not for no reason, we'd have a few thousand complaints otherwise. Sounds to me like a control deadzone issue, or controller noise. Inputs to the sidestick OR rudder will cause the autopilot to disconnect. Worth looking into. This does also track for the issue you mention afterward. An Airbus does not engage the AP if there is an input being held in.

4 hours ago, WestAir said:

There's an extensive list on the reported bugs in their discord. Here's a short list of the things one beta team member has reported in one thread:

LIGHTING:

• Missing lights under the seat of the capt and f/o with the floor console switch
• RMP Capt doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• RMP F/O doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• RMP 3rd occupant doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888.8 when on light test + MLS knob not lighting up on ACP
• ATC panel doesn't behave correctly, LCD should show 8888 when on light test
• Cockpit door panel, OPEN doesn't light up on light test
• Rudder LCD doesn't behave correctly, should show R+L superimposed and on the right 88
• Batteries LCD should show 88.8 during light test
• Overwings exits light not illuminating with EMER EXIT Light switch is set to on
• On ANN Light Test, all cockpit door panel should illuminate : Top - Mid - Bottom + Chan 1 - Chan 2

SYSTEMS / TEXTURES / DECALS:

• On 50VU, the APU test is clickable and has some lights working but it does not trigger the APU fire
• 1FD2 shown on PFD while FAC 1+2 are tripped. In this case, even if both FMGCs are not failed and correctly powered up, FDs should not be shown.
• FAC auto test sequence is not right. It should be 4 times FAULT blink then 2 sec later 1 blink and finally after 10-15 sec a final FAULT blink. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/rv5ywu )
• Complete incorrect FD appearance on PFD.
• When a new or a FM is lost there should be a square around 1FD1 or 2FD2 or 1FD- etc etc
• Auto test sequence is not respected. The FMGC takes around 40-45 sec to power up and at the end of the test sequence, ATHR and correlated AP p/b should blink multiple times. Then triple click is heard. Then the related FD is shown if FD is pushed.(VIDEO: https://streamable.com/h0kugw )
• Missing BACK UP label on the secondary depressurization door panel (placed along the support not on the vu panel)
• EMERGENCY RAM AIR INLET FLAP (not confused with RAT) is not modeled. The flap does not physically open even when shown as open.
• The cockpit door should dim the entrance light as well as lower cabin speaker.
• Missing Ice Detection Probes (if option selected - ECAM Warning + c/b)
• AUTO LAND p/b not linked with correlated FWC (If FWC1 is tripped, AUTO should not light up (dimmer because the lower part is not separated) on Capt side and LAND should not light up on F/O side - and FWC2 is the other way) (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/wn10iu )
• External power misplacement : 108Vu should be on the left (aircraft direction) and external power on the right.
• Incorrect behavior of loop c/b and ENG Fire 1 & 2. Loop A on each engines are lighting odd lights pair (So column 1 and 3) while loop B are lighting even lights (So column 2 and 4) in the fire button. When pulling on the loop A or B and doing the test, it should not light up the correlated columns of lights. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/auhg7q )
• Missing 1 RA antenna (3 on 4)
• Sounds and effects when changing AC ESS FEED missing (Relays and some contactors sounds + like heavy load bus change lights off during less then a sec). Sometimes it also put your TR in fault and you have to do a CFDS reset or via the p/b TR reset.
• Incorrect manual mode behavior ; DITCHING should overtake the MAN mode. (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/kc8eq2 )
• Starting with cold & dark config some c/b are tripped (ENG OIL PRESS & QTY - 4) + BRK TEMP DET UNIT + THS ACTR LSSD.
• Missing : TPIS option selected but no modelling of the sensor with the shielded harness on NLG
• Wrong FWC for Master Warning, it should be the opposite, MASTER dead on capt side if FWC 1 dead for both Master Caution and Warning
• Wrong timing for DMC, it should wait the self test before interchanging the displays
• Wrong behavior of TCAS. You simulate "TCAS CHANGE MODE" on PLAN mode but the TFC should not appear.
• DCDU without any ACARS service / ATSU should show NO DATA.
• F/O and CAPT ND TERR bugs (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/tqr4zz )
• ADIRs buses + reset doesn't work properly. With ADIRs 2 & 3 reset by the c/b there is no time delay when powering up +
• Missing sounds with VOR identification through RMP / ACP (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/xzc322 )
• incorrect behavior with RMP in NAV-ILS mode : bottom button should adjust not the one on top
• Missing sounds for IM - MM - OM beacons (VIDEO: https://streamable.com/efpjzn )

This is not an exhaustive list, it's just from one thread out of thousands. I doubt many A320 rated pilots would spot half of these problems; Many of these are maintenance personnel levels of inaccuracies and some aren't even simulated in competing products. The fact that this stuff is even in the discord and being looked at by the team is why I firmly believe Fenix is the right choice for anyone who wants to buy an A320.

They're obviously serious about becoming the best, and they're not arrogant about it either.

This sounds like Antoines thread, if so, I invited him to become a Beta tester after noticing his eye for detail in the very thread referenced. We're now working with him and auditing our systems. Really cool guy, loads of knowledge about the airplane!

7 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Hey Aamir, I know you also use(d) the Warthog Joystick when flying the Fenix. Did you use the "heavier sidestick" option with it? I know it's not technically dampened, but it's certainly one of the heavier desktop joysticks...

I personally use the lighter sidestick option, it's what a few of the type rated guys and gals on the test team recommended who all use Warthogs. 

52 minutes ago, 320Driver said:

Absolutely right, controls are an important factor. I more than once came across flight model comments just to find out there is a plastic Saitek stick in use. I am using an OEM Sidestick for that matter.

 

There is an option in the MCDU specifically for your scenario, fwiw. It's called the "heavier sidestick" option. Toggle that to YES. It should help, provided you're using all the damping etc that comes with the OEM sidestick.

5 hours ago, 320Driver said:

Interesting people talk about failures when there is a much more important difference. The sensation and feel of flying an A320 is simply not there in the Fenix A320. It more feels like a 737 with Autotrim than an A320. Also the missing inertia ruins it. I don't really care if Asobo or Fenix is to blame for this, the end result is what counts.

 

"Feel" is always going to be quite interesting and subjective, I find. If it's one thing I've learned during the course of development, it's that pilot consultants will more or less often have completely different feedback from one to another. What is "perfect" for one, is "no, this doesn't feel right" to another. A lot of the times that comes down to control configurations, calibration, etc, but also interestingly, perception. We've built something that satisfies the majority of them in different areas, but I've certainly run into the case of completely opposite feedback more than once during the basic development of the aircraft. 

I also think it's slightly disrespectful to the media guys and pilot streamers to insinuate that they're saying the flight model feels great just because it brings them views. I'd offer an opinion to the contrary, I used to be in that industry after all, and controversy brings far more money and clicks overall. 

All said and done, I'm always happy for qualitative feedback from type-rated pilots, so if you have some points that you'd like me to look at in specific with regard to feel, drop me a DM with the details and I can have a look and see what can be done!

1 hour ago, RichieFly said:

the FSL has features not present in the Fenix

Curious what is missing on the aircraft for VATSIM? Holds, offsets, etc are all available, in addition to several features not on the FSL that may be required for oceanic work, RTA, constant mach, etc.

3 hours ago, abennett said:

If I am constantly hugging the bottom of the speed window on descent I will often pop into selected at the same speed as managed. I would expect the engines to spool up and maintain the same path as calculated but with enough thrust to maintain the selected speed, instead it will sometimes give a new path with the green dot suddenly jumping and leaving me well off this new path.  and  too high if I go back in to managed mode at a later point, even if that managed speed is exactly the same speed as I’m doing in selected.

 

Hugging the bottom of the speed band is something the aircraft does in real life fwiw, more so if you're in a geometric segment of descent. In an idle descent segment, it will fluctuate, but by and large, in a geometric, it will decay to the bottom of the band.

For the SEL SPEED changing the descent path, I have actually seen this myself once or twice, but I've never managed to successfully recreate it - so if you can grab it on video of some sort and chuck it over to me, or in the bug reporting system, I'd be most obliged. Even more so if you can identify a repeatable scenario in which this happens. Will get that fixed!

Re the rest of your reporting, a video would again go a long way, just to make sure I've got every single factor possible in order to look at what the systems should be doing vs what they are doing. Mostly because I've done a fair few hours in the last couple of weeks flying around and I've actually found myself reasonably pleased with the efficacy of the constraint management, albeit in fully managed modes. 

2 hours ago, abennett said:

But the buggy vnav still kind of puts me off the Fenix even disregarding the performance sadly.

Could you expand on the buggy VNAV? Curious to see what you mean.

2 hours ago, miguelpp said:

With all my respect, because this is the best ac I have ever boght (simmer since Sub Logic, I can´t buy your argument. Landing is a pain in the word not allowed. All other ac (PMDG. FBW)  perform perfectly. Maybe it´s the live weather (3kts headwind ia a hard challenge?), but how the others can deal with it? And yes, bouncing and keep the ac straigh after landing is a challenge. BTW, I don´t have FSRealistic.

Anyway, what a great product.

Miguel.

I’m not selling an argument, I’m debugging. In order to debug you need to ask these questions - as I need to know the circumstances around the problem in order to find the issue. Unfortunately I cannot simply know or assume. 
 

2 hours ago, Claudius_ said:

 

The icing is disabled (why in winter a so important feature should be disabled? because your A320 will drive nuts). I don't use FSRealistic and I'll never use it. I don't know what TP is, so I can say that I don't use these candy programs. Regarding the video, it is not useful, my suggestion is to do an online flight together you and other users. I'm using the most recent versions of FS20 and your Fenix A320, it's obvious.

I think that you know better than us the limits of your airplane, please don't waste your time with obvious questions and find the way to make your A320 better.

Given I must debug the issue, and have debugged a few hundred other issues, I have reasonable experience enough to say a video will suffice to start. I’m not sure what online flying together will achieve, however, this is not something I can offer to do. I do not deem my requests a waste of my time.

As you do not seem to want to provide a video or any further explanation, I am happy to arrange a refund for your product as you do not seem satisfied with your experience. I am unable to proceed with resolving your issue with the information you’ve given me or without a video.

As much as I’d like to simply just find a way to make the A320 better and fix your issue, I cannot do this without your cooperation. This involves me asking for information and you providing what I need in order to find the issue, despite the questions seeming basic and/or obvious.  Unfortunately I do not inherently possess the knowledge of what you do and do not have installed on your system, hence I must ask :)

If you’d like to proceed with the refund, feel free to DM me your order number and I’ll have it arranged by one of the support team. 

9 minutes ago, spitzer45 said:

So why this a/c is bouncing sometimes even if touchdown v/s and g is good and a/thr is on?

The suspension kinematics and dynamics are simulated, so compression and rebound, etc - this in conjunction with a too-smooth or over-flared landing will cause the energy and lift state of the aircraft to want it to go back into the sky. Check this video out, demonstrates what I'm talking about exactly: 

Then the spoilers will deploy, the lift is removed and the aircraft comes back to the ground. 

34 minutes ago, Claudius_ said:

We could try an online flight together, a touch and go series with the brick Fenix A320 should be very challenging. 😅

Heya, a few others and myself have tried to help but you haven't answered any of the questions put forth - making it very difficult to figure out where your issue is.

Could you please answer the following questions:

1) Do you have MSFS icing enabled or disabled?

2) Do you use FSRealistic?

3) Do you use ToolbarPushback?

4) Would you be able to upload a video of this behaviour?

5) What version number are you on?

1 hour ago, Claudius_ said:

it's very hard to land it manually

Worth checking if you're on the latest version. I've not had any bad reviews sent to me on landing dynamics from any type-rated pilots or streamers (both in beta and out of) on the latest version - most are very positive and say it's the best it's ever felt to them.

Failing that I'd highly recommend taking a video of the issue you're experiencing and posting it here or sending it to support as I cannot debug the issue from your description, I need a lot more information to see what's going wrong.

1 hour ago, Claudius_ said:

fly this thing with little joystick movements

That's mostly how you're supposed to fly an Airbus, with your finger tips!

I've had 3 IRL flights cancelled in the last 24 hours, the original, the re-book, and the re-book of the re-book - all out of Gatwick.

Then I saw the title of this thread and wanted to cry 😛

Here's hoping flight no. 4 works out tomorrow... 2 days after I set off from home!

We've announced several times that a remote MCDU will come - it's NOT hardware and has nothing to do with ProSim. 

It's a simple question of what benefits the consumer more? IAEs or a request from a small (relative to the size of the entire customer base) portion of customers?

Definitely IAEs. So our resources are there right now. This is also why we are currently hiring.

7 hours ago, Dillon said:

1.  Fenix A320 - Version 1.0.2.104 had great sounds a nice flight model and overall was a great product.  With each subsequent update the sounds were reworked for the XBOX gamers among us. Now when in the cockpit it sounds like you're sitting right over the engines as if you're in the cabin.  Actually, moving to the cabin still sounds right compared to what you hear in the cockpit.  The latest update brighten the cockpit to accommodate some among us who feel cockpits are too dark now.  For those of us that don't share this view it looks washed out now.  These are just two examples, but the list goes on with this product.  Honorable mention would be the flight model that took the product back instead of forward when it comes to flares upon landing.  There were some nice advances along the way but overall, what was released originally was better.

 

I'm not sure how much time you've spent on a A320s flight deck with the engines switched on but all I will say is that the crew use noise cancelling headsets for a reason. 

Re the FM, well - https://youtu.be/ocWDdm825B0?t=6124

What was released was far from perfect in the FM department, with flap drag values being all over the shop. This is a significantly more accurate FM from a quantitative perspective, but also qualitative as noted by V1 above. 

2 hours ago, jcomm said:

I just experienced it a couple times. Last one was this last weekend. Speed was on spot, no significative weather...

We've been trying to find this one, but it's a tricky little bugger to get. We're still looking - just know that we're aware and doing our best to find a repeatable pattern.

1 hour ago, RobJC said:

You need to look for a less expensive way to distribute them. Check out how BMS Falcon does it. 

Yep! That's what I'm talking about it my post, it's called delta updating. We've built a new installer system to support it. Soon we'll be able to push 5kb updates to system software instead of distributing the entire 1.4gb installer.