iowahawkeyedave

26 months and counting.

The FF A320 is notoriously hard on performance, so getting 47fps with that is probably not too bad, especially when you get 119 fps with the Cessna. The FF A320 just had an update to version 1.1.3 so maybe that will help.

Thrustmaster Hotas X, no CTD so far. Running the Steam version of MSFS.

I've noticed that AA is a big FPS killer, along with reflections. Do you get better FPS running in other planes other than the A320? That seems to be a plane that's very heavy on the FPS. I can't speak about some of the plugins you are running since I'm not currently running them, so just check the plugin admin.

No, amateur hour was what they were doing before with releasing patches without testing them. This is a professional decision, nothing amateur about it.

Unfortunately the only way the a320 will become usable, is when Asobo fixes it up. Until then the Flybywire guys are doing their best to put lipstick on the pig. That's not bashing the Flybywire guys, they're doing the best they can with the tools at their disposal.

Been bouncing back and forth between X-Plane and MSFS. X-Plane when I need my IFR fix or fly airliners for OnAir or play around with Air Hauler 2, and MSFS for when I just want to fly VFR with NeoFly or do bush flying. So I guess you could say I'm enjoying it AND waiting for it to mature. It really is a wonderful time to be a flight simmer.

I'd be one of those flight simmers. I had a very old copy of X-Plane which I never used because I had low frame rates, jumped on the MSFS bandwagon got sucked in for 400 hours and realized that I wanted to learn more about how planes really work and the planes were just broken, and each patch made my experience worse. Jumped over to X-Plane with Vulcan, and have been a happy camper with the higher frame rates, and better planes. The scenery might not be quite as good but it's still good to me. With how many bugs there have been with MSFS, MSFS has been a great sales pitch for X-Plane.