marlon445

Exactly. I’ve heard the same thing from experienced A380 and A350 captains—that both aircraft handle with incredible agility, and you often find yourself surprised by it. I trust their feedback more than that of simulator pilots who say, “The plane is heavy; it has to handle sluggishly.”

I consider the flightmodel feedback from the community to be rather irrelevant, given that a large proportion of respondents to a popular survey assume they can land a real A320 lmao

It looks terrible. The exterior design is completely wrong, and the cockpit is a total mess. It's as if they just experimented with the wrong proportions and fonts. In this regard, no one can beat the ini A350; the exterior model and cockpit are among the most beautiful in the simulator. However, there are issues under the hood, particularly with stability (WASM, etc.), which is why I'm more excited about Rhodiumcode's system-level capabilities.

Is that because of Beyond or the Fenix? The last time I flew it, the VNAV was completely useless, and I couldn't make a single descent without using speed brakes the entire way down. I actually have a nice screenshot where, on final approach with flaps 2 out and a 12-knot headwind, I’m gaining speed at 900 FPM instead of losing it. Needless to say, I’ll never fly that thing again. In the A350, at least, I haven’t had any issues with the descent anywhere; everything went smoothly in Frankfurt yesterday. And the new instruction to fly over a STAR point at a certain altitude and then continue descending makes it even easier. The only annoying thing is that Beyond always makes you fly through the entire transition instead of using sensible shortcuts.

I once asked on Discord why Beyond always uses approaches that don't seem to make sense. In Singapore and Bangkok, for example, it always uses RNAV approaches instead of ILS ones. The response I received was that Beyond prioritises approaches that connect to the final waypoint of the STAR, and that many of these are not ILS approaches. Of course, it still doesn't make sense for Beyond to rely on a visual approach in the US (the flawed logic you mentioned), but it would probably be a different matter if the STAR led to the final approach. At KSFO, a visual approach is always used, whereas when approaching from the east at KLAX, I always get the ILS.

For me, TC leaks memory like the Titanic at every airport. I'd love to use it because Beyond Traffic has a significant impact on performance and Live Traffic isn't suitable for me as I don't fly in real time in the simulator.

I tried it out at Narita this afternoon and was actually very satisfied, except that, unfortunately, there were cargo planes at the terminal and many of the 747s in the cargo area had the standard livery, with both AIG and FSTL installed. Might hive FS Hud a try. It uses AIG plans directly and it's vectoring and spacing is excellent. I immediately deleted AIG Traffic Controller because it uses an absurd amount of RAM, which I will never tolerate (in Narita it was 14 (!) GB).

It wouldn't surprise me at all if they had illegally accessed Flightradar's data. They were stealing the AIG models with impunity until AIG rightly put a stop to it.

I just had my first WASM crash in over 8 months with the A350. Five steps backwards, again.

Exactly! We had SODE (SimObject Display Engine) for that, which could handle multiple jetways. Unfortunately, the developer didn't see any added value for MSFS and has taken his site offline and made it password-protected. Frankly, I'm also frustrated by the fact that boarding an A380 can take up to an hour when there's only one jetway available.

The A350 is one of the easiest aircraft to fly. In a positive sense. Airbus has really thought about how to make the aircraft as intuitive and comfortable as possible for pilots, and once you get the hang of it, it's like riding a bike. Some of my procedures only have 2-3 steps, the entire engine start-up, for example. But you have to like it, it's definitely not for everyone.

Since 1.1.7, I haven't had any problems with the aircraft at all. Sometimes GSX acts up a bit by only letting a single passenger board, but a quick Simbrief reimport and boarding usually solves that. In terms of pure flight, I didn't notice any problems in over 1000 hours last year. Not a single WASM crash either, PMDG's 777 is the new king in this regard for me.

I agree completely. That's why I'm always extremely suspicious, even of Microsoft. If they lose interest and abandon the project, we'll be left looking pretty stupid. The fact that almost all flight planning centres on Simbrief doesn't make it any better. PFPX was better in that respect.

I don't have any problems in Munich or London, but KSFO is really bad, for example. I usually end up at 5,000 feet with an ILS intercept at AXMUL, which, of course, doesn't work at all. KEWR is also poor because you have to fly the entire STAR for 22R, and then they vector you back 30 miles before you can start the approach. As mentioned in this thread, the only way it works properly for me is if you go directly to the FAF via any available transition. Edit: Today I flew to VTBS, where he always wants the RNAV on the two outer runways instead of the ILS on the inner runways, which is also complete nonsense. I really wonder whether the developers have any expertise in this area, or whether he just takes whatever procedure fits into the flight plan loaded from Simbrief, regardless of how logical it is.

FS-Hud is much better than Beyond in many areas, including traffic, the map and the airport editor. However, everything from TOD onwards is completely inaccurate, particularly the way vectors are handled during ILS interception. Nothing is right. The vectoring in Beyond isn't any better — the altitudes are wrong there, too — but pretty much every available ATC has some deal-breaking issues for me. I only use Beyond to automatically set the frequencies for FS ATC Chatter; otherwise, I mute it and ignore all the nonsense it tells me.

Nothing has worked for me since the update. ATC keeps forgetting me everywhere. I get 'Expect radar vectors for...' without a specified runway. The vectors are completely wrong and the altitudes are incorrect too. Sometimes the controller forgets me completely. Today, I was supposed to intercept the localiser at 5,000 feet in KSFO at AXMUL. Yesterday, in KSEA, the approach controller forgot about me and sent me to the tower without providing any guidance. In the A350, my frequency constantly changes to ATIS without my intervention, handover to the tower only happens by chance, and taxiing to the gate after landing is impossible. Beyond is one of the worst-developed and most misguided programs I have ever experienced, and it is truly remarkable how, for months, one pointless feature after another has been prioritised while the core product is completely decaying.

I was also thinking about switching back to pure AIG traffic. However, Beyond ATC doesn't interact with the traffic - I think only the FS HUD does that - and RAM consumption of AIG traffic controller is extremely high. Therefore, I'd rather do without it.

There might be something to it! All my crashes happen with Beyond over Urumqi when travelling from Frankfurt to Shanghai. I just flew RCTP-KLAX with the A350 and had no problems at all. Beyond has also consistently deteriorated since the LLM update. 😕

Since SU6, my sim has crashed every single time I've taken a long-haul flight in T7, and I haven't been able to pinpoint the error. I've experienced more crashes since the update than in the five years following the game's release. I'm really fed up with Microsoft. They are so sloppy with both their operating system and their software that I would be fired after a few days if I worked like this. In any case, I am putting my planned update to MSFS 2024 on hold until there is a decent patch for SU16 that doesn't break anything for once.

They are usable, but the lights are overexposed if the effects are only v4-native. There are two new values in the files — IntensityDay and IntensityNight — which determine the brightness of the lights. You can add these manually, but unfortunately this does not 'convert' the effects to v5 — the problem remains. This has been explained here: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/582896-fixing-dynamic-lighting-in-p3dv5/. But I have always failed anyway. I'm on v5.

Would you be willing to publish instructions on how to convert the effects? I have failed to do this to date, all airports that are not native v5 cannot be used at night.

Lossless Scaling is not downloadable hardware. If you can't maintain 30 FPS or the FPS you limit, there's nothing Lossless can do.

P3D is EOS (End of Service), but not EOL. I explicitly hope that LM doesn't want to rely on streaming anything for V7, because if they don't want to, the servers will run out. At the moment I'm only using MSFS, because if we're honest, it's superior to the P3D in all respects, except perhaps in Afcad editing, but that's a niche within a niche. But I still keep P3D with all its add-ons warm on my hard drive, because it will still be there in five years' time. Microsoft is a software company and if they don't feel like it any more, i.e. if they don't get enough money out of it, that's the end of the line. This has already happened twice, in 2006 after FSX and in 2012 after MS Flight. Every publisher does this, from Microsoft to EA to Ubisoft, all of whom keep emphasising that we are only buying a licence and that these products do not belong to us. That's why I'm cautious. I don't care that a new version comes out every four years or less - the P3D has also cost full price every time from V1 to V6 (Microsoft is even fairer, I bought MSFS and MSFS 24 both on offer for less than half the price), but if Microsoft pulls the plug at some point, my P3D will be ready for use again immediately.

As long as the servers don't suddenly go down, I'm still very happy with APL. The schedules are sometimes a bit strange, but I can solve that with charters. Simply flying in the simulator without progression has become too boring for me.

Go to the EFB - Options - Simulation and set Auto GPU Disco to Off. This Option removes the GPU when you have it seh to On and turn on the beacon.