CAP1234

I think I'll pass this one - Despite being the world's largest commercial passenger jet, I do not see myself flying this much. Almost all flights are 2 hrs or above long and I simply do not have the time to do long hauls. The fact this particular plane (Code F) is also restricted in terms of what airports you can fly it from - the options are limited. For almost £70 for an airplane that I'll be flying barely at all I cannot justify spending it - A350 is already sitting in my hanger at idle for months.

You might want to check this thread - someone has indeed created a utility tool which allows for third party liveries to be installed.

Me too - transferred over to inimanager, it was super quick and easy. At least now we don't have to wait full week for a update - I must say however in last few release patches, it is getting better then what it used to be on release.

Although I'm quite sceptical regarding AI ATCs (Never used one myself) - my question is will this also include variations between different regions you would expect to find in real life? We all know that ATC procedures and phraseology vary drastically across different countries - US vs UK for example, Is this something considered at this stage or will it be included at some point?

Its hit or miss apparently - for me on V1.0.3 (current public version) I have certainly noticed slight improvement in performance. Its not completely there yet but it is getting there. Have done few flights this week and tried all sorts of stuff (holds, RNP approaches) Holds needs some refinement but it is in pipeline. This plane flies RNP approach quite perfectly actually once you know how to do it properly. Some glitches in textures, switches, simulation etc but developers are open and have acknowledged them, many are already being worked on. For now we're expecting weekly updates (Every tuesday I think) with 1.0.4 lined up for this Tuesday with quite a lot of improvements. Have a look here for further details as to what to expect in 1.0.4 - https://docs.synapticsim.com/changelog For anyone considering this - I would say give it few weeks of further updates or at least till when it appears on inbuilds store so that frequent updates can be accessed via inimanager. As it is right now with the mercy of marketplace if something gets broken in next build - we don't get instance fix and have to wait for week for next update cycle.

I totally agree with your post above. When I'm buying an addon - I am not expecting it to be perfect like real aircraft, the very least is for basic functions to work and the performance is steady and reasonable. Yes I get it software development is difficult but that does not mean that developers should release unfinished and unoptimized products on the market. When you are charging in excess of $60 for a product - I'd expect it to be somewhat stable and flyable. Its my hard earned cash after all. Look at PMDG - going back to FSX era, their products come heavily optimised and are stable on release, I'm not saying they don't have bugs and errors - they are stable enough for someone to fly from A to B.

Yes Absolutely and highly recommended. These days all addons regardless use Navigraph integration and what you get in ultimate subscription is quite substantial to be honest. I prefer Jeppesen over Lido charts - particularly true when flying IFR in GA aircraft. Navigraph app on iPad is sort of like skydemon or foreflight which is used in real world flying. It allows live tracking, charts at ease, weather overlays and various other bits. The app is constantly updated with new features being added constantly. I have been Navigraph's subscriber for past 7 years and it has never let me down. If you fly for example on networks like Vatsim, PilotEge or IVAO then - Navigraph is a must tool. If you fly primarily offline (not on the networks I mentioned above) and are happy with Lido charts then very least - Navigraph's nav data update is actually recommended which is slightly cheaper then ultimate subscription, Allows you to use latest airac on simbrief.

I personally prefer service based failures or live aircraft status, I do not simply activate failures myself unless I decide to do a training flight which is completely different scenario based (for example practising V1 engine failure cuts and so fort). For normal flying - if addon aircraft has realism settings where things break if you exceed or do not operate the airplane as prescribed in the airplane flight manual then I will leave that on. The only setting turned off is default collision and crash settings - I personally do not like that. Otherwise I leave most of the realistic settings on - I'd expect the engine oil levels to decrease over time, Brakes wearing off. Etc. Things that pilots would consider in real life, Many addons nowadays simulate this quite nicely which is what I like about them. For GA aircraft I prefer A2A's concept where aircraft ages over time and as a pilot how one would have to take that in account before every flight. Almost all of Pre-flight checklists have maintenance and aircraft status as first item - I like running that check as per as real life. Previously when I had time, I even created excel spreadsheet with different aircraft noting down numbers hours flown as well as any events or concerns raised on the flight. Always used to go back to that spreadsheet before next flight - in fact it was my virtual aircraft logbook.

I beg to differ that unfourtanetly - on their discord server there are loads of bug reports ranging from performance to FMS to WASM crashes. The fact that they had to release a patch soon after release to address the FMS route page lagging issue - Again don't know why this was not picked up during beta testing. With another update lined up next Tuesday addressing the performance and WASM issues - Yeah this is not what I would call a "finished product" It is great addon I must add - but they do need to address the issues raised.

My first impressions of the this product after having flown few flights - There is still room for improvement. There are several issues ranging from performance to FMS. Sounds are quite good and I personally like the engines howling sound during spool up. Manually flying this is great - The speed trim logic works spot on, So much so that I did some manual test flying between FL200 and FL300 and found the plane to be responding appropriately. The nose does have tendency to drop down quite quickly on touchdown - I'm not too sure if that's how real plane does but many people are saying that's accurate. Yeah if the developers can optimise this further and fix the errors and bugs then this will be a great plane to do short to medium hauls in.

Yep - Last night people were going nuts on their discord server after they announced that both 100 and ACJ will be separate paid products. The devs immediately responded back by saying "cost" as the prime reason. They also mentioned that work required on 100 and ACJ was significant and simply it turned out to be a completely new product in all, They wanted to ship all together in one product but overall purchase price would have been significantly higher. However the only additional differences they mentioned are Cabin with accurate configuration, Fully integrated HUD, Functional steep approach capability, Fully functional circuit breakers throughout electrical and avionics bay and obviously 100 and ACJ variants. They also said that these features will be updated free of charge to 300 variant when 100/ACJ releases. However no indication of failures support.

Thanks Ray, I'll give that a try later this afternoon.

I was flying out of Aerosoft Heathrow professional the other day and it seems something has messed up within GSX as sode jetways don't seem to work, However flew into Flytampa Amsterdam and it was working fine down there. Even on my return flight back into Heathrow the jetways won't work - gave me an error saying "Sode connection lost" - it did not happen previously and have used it countless times. I am using the sode profiles that Aerosoft had made it available for their professional sceneries, I am using the latest Sode for P3D. I'm thinking whether if my EGLL sode file got corrupted. Any feedback/suggestions?

Thanks will give it a try later!

Liveries are now live in inimanager

Do we know if this works with P3D V4 by any chance? Although I think before PMDG pulled their plug - I managed to download most of the liveries but in case in the future if I want to download any other liveries?

Looking forward to this release, A220 has been the most anticipated airliner to arrive on flight sim and it seems despite delays and long time in development Synaptic has done good job with it. I was looking at the last showcase video released by inibuilds and so far it is looking like a good addon to me, There could be some improvement to the sounds - But to be honest for now I'll accept it. Also fact that inibuilds has confirmed that marketplace order can be transferred to inibuilds store when it releases there - I can safely pick it up next week when it releases. Finally something different then your typical Airbus or Boeing.

Here are my favourites - do note that these are across multiple sim platforms (P3D, MSFS 2020/2024) Airliner - B737ng (all variants) from PMDG and Fenix A320 series, Ifly 737 max is also in this list too. I was going to put 777 and MD11 in there too but unfortunately due to real world commitments I do simply do not have time to do any long hauls although I do fly short hops here and then. Turbo prop - Has to be Majestic Dash Q400 pro version on P3D. So far have not found any turbo prop commuter that even comes close to majestic Q400. Bush flying - Black square's Caravan professional and their Duke collection, Can't go wrong there. MEP (multi-engine piston) - Barron professional from Black square, Top notch and best MEP you can fly in the sim so far. A2A's Aerostar is also good option if you want a fast MEP. Personally though I like Barron tiny bit better then Aerostar but that's just my opinion. Cows DA42 is also in there but I prefer old analogue gauges than glass cockpit G1000. SEP (Single Engine piston) - A2A's Commanche, This has to be my top choice for SEP, So much so that I have done 2 transatlantic crossing in this. Followed by Black square's Bonanza professional which is also another good high performance SEP. Cows DA40 is also good choice for low level VFR flights. Business Jets - C750 from FFX, This by far the best business jet I have flown so far, The new phenom and sovereign are potentially good candidates too but I do not own them yet so can't comment from my prospective. Of course there are more addons to this list but these are ones I would say fit the best for me at least. If I were to choose only one from the above - I would choose Majestic Dash 8 400, By far the most advanced airliner I have flown so far in terms of flight dynamics, physics and systems simulation.

I don't understand why some people find it surprising, didn't they already announced some time back that they are working on A380 - I think it was about time when they announced A350. The biggest question is how it this product going shape out eventually or do they go same route as their A350 - releasing 10+ updates post release. Yes I know no product is perfect but I mean common their current A350 is good example to this - Hopefully they have learned something from this, They should not rush it and release it prematurely - Take however long it takes and deliver something that customers expects and not frequent updates post release.

Aside from being 2024 native - Do we know what changes have been made to this version compared to 2020 version? I owned their 2020 version when it came out and flew fair bit of flights on it however it was incredibly buggy with either things broken or not simulated accurately. Is 2024 version any good or is similar to 2020 still ?

I was one of the people who did fill in this year's Navigraph's survey - However those numbers aren't surprising to me at all. The userbase is very small - most likely users who elected to keep this platform for obvious reasons. Planes like PMDG 747-400/800 or Majestic Q400 - There are no other options so P3D is still my go for these. However we must also consider that there might be other people out there who might still use P3D but did not fill in the Navigraph's Survey. So using survey results alone is not conclusive of actual P3D user base, but I don't expect that number to be particularly higher. PMDG recently claimed in their recent update that users using their P3D products and OC2 services has dropped significantly. LM tried to showcase their newer sim versions V6, V7 (Fuse) but failed to attract many simmers and developers. Yes they might be doing well with commercial aspect of their products but from consumer level (most simmers) - it is practically dead.

Few years ago - I was in similar boat and many people who had no aviation background whatsoever kept on telling me that you need be mathematician to become a pilot. As of now few years later & as a proud holder of UK CPL with ME IR and some 850+ hours of flying (MEPs and Turboprops) - I can positively say that's not the case. All you need is cool head, Good hands to eye co-ordination and be effective team player. These days everything is done digitally either on EFB or tablet - From mass and balance to performance calculations. Even those ones you can do it yourself and certainly aren't difficult and generally straightforward, there are various guides and examples that you can follow in Aircraft flight manuals. There are no complex formulae or equations that pilots have to remember to carry out their day to day tasks. We instead use various rule of thumb (E.G 3 in 1 rule, 5 x Groundspeed for V/S.etc) nothing too complicated, Once you do it more often and have suitable experience - this becomes like second nature. I myself do not have either science or maths background but I did study those subjects up to High school level. As long as you can do basic addition/subtraction/multiplication - there should not be a problem at all. The only time you will have to remember complex formulae and equations is when you are undertaking theory exams - I did UK CAA ATPL exams and these are considered to be most intense and detailed. During those exams I had to remember various formulae and equations so that I could answer the questions correctly. Fortunately once you have passed those exams - you can close that chapter as you will never see or use those equations ever again in your professional life.

Have you heard about something called "google" before?

Same way as it is done in real life - Going through POH (pilot's operating handbook) and looking at Performance graphs and tables. Default aircrafts - aren't modelled as accurately as real word counterpart so regardless of what you find in POH - you are not going to get same performance as depicted in the book.

Here is my opinion on this - Do remember that I have not flown IRL into EGLL before, However have flown into EGLL countless times on networks like Vatsim where they adopt IRL techniques/procedures. ALESO1H arrival typically wants you to be FL180 by ETVAX - the track mileage from ETVAX to BIG is about 30.5 miles. Now if I use my 3 degrees rule of thumb - for 30 miles I can roughly loose around 9000ft. So that already puts me high at ETVAX (11000ft to loose in 30 miles). Mind you the actual descent after ETVAX will be as directed by ATC IRL - if its busy or if they are holding at BIG then they typically slow you down to 250kts which makes loosing altitude a bit of struggle unless you use speed brakes. I have flown as passenger before into EGLL and arriving from that direction I typically see spoilers deployed for most part of the descent, Speaking to few pilots who fly there frequently - it is very common to use speed brakes to manage the profile. During my ATPL ground school - one of the instructor's opinion was that if you use speed brakes during descents then that means that you have messed up your descent profile, However in cases like above - You have to use it as there is no other option, In a jet you can't literally go down and slow at the same time. Speed brakes are your best line of defence.