Fiorentoni

What have you set the slider to?

In the EFB settings. You have to toggle the "Adaptive Flight Assist" setting to ON, then the slider appears below it

Well this contradicts what their dev posted on the link I gave. Mine is more recent, but well let's see. EDIT: It seems like their communication strategy is non-existent with different devs posting contradicting statements.

To be clear the post was only about the sensititivy / twitchiness. They will look at the climb rates and stuff

Here's the link to the post if you have Discord: https://discord.com/channels/1123990664934346753/1564223424954503352/1565393487912771605

According to a post on Discord from today of one of the BB devs they have now finally declined any change coming to the flight model (flight controls / sensitivity) as they think it's perfect. I don't know, I don't see any complaints - be it pilots or common users - about PMDG or Fenix etc., but a lot of them for the 757 (even from some real life 757 pilots, although opinions vary greatly between them). No matter what's ultimately at fault - hardware, users, the simulator etc. -, why does BB have to be something special here? Why not just create a result which - like PMDG or Fenix - has most people happy in the end (pilots and users)? Or at least not rule it out categorically 3 days after release. I don't get the attitude, they are all so incredibly defensive on their Discord, posting things like "How do you know the climb rate is wrong?" after someone posts a screenshot of their 757 climbing with 2500 feet at FL300 or something alike. That gives me PMDG forum vibes and I don't like that. Let's hope they also eventually get the 757 to reach PMDG level to justify that attitude. Maybe I'm just spoiled by Fenix or - can't believe I'm saying this - even iniBuilds support.

All of Avsim‘s real life 757 pilots said the opposite, so take what you want from that.

Very very well said.

Most likely it was working fine, then they changed something last minute with the beta feedback (most likely with the drag coefficient, because this is set to 0 [!] in the aircraft.cfg), then it got broken and then release date came up and they did not want to delay again (which I can understand somehow, albeit not approve from a customer's perspective). I cannot find any other explanation, because if any real 757 pilot approved this, they need to question their professional career. And I'm not really taking about doing F22 stuff in the B757 - this isn't really something people do in beta tests I suppose -, but more about the climb rates and fuel figures. Any real 757 pilot should have noticed this 10 minutes into the flight at the latest. That said from the general state of the aircraft this feels like a late alpha / early beta version. Core features complete, some additional features complete at 100%, some entirely missing (e.g. performance calcs right from Simbrief instead of a native performance calculator), and very much buggy, but flights A to B can get mostly done. Combined with 5 years of development I think it's clear this project was overwhelming to the dev team and the learning curve was very steep. I just hope they have acquired the necessary competences by now and can fix all the issues eventually and fulfill the potential the aircraft has. I think one can be optimistic, because apart from the abysmal FSS E-Jets most dev teams have been able to turn bad releases into very respectable addons.

It's not twice, about 130-150% of the correct rates. The point stands though, yes.

I bought the 737, 777 and A380 on Day 1 got a very well working product that was highly enjoyable right from the start. You know, if you added a "from a brandnew developer with no products on the market" I would have agreed. But you seem to want to make this seem like every single airplane in flight sim history was a complete dumpsterfire on release, for reasons I do not understand.

1) You said "minor". How does your second statement change that? They are not minor. 2) I did read your second statement and it's also wrong - feel free to remind me of an addon that had wrong flight dynamics, wrong fuel burn, WASM crashes and a memory leak leading to CTDs on day one. As you cited the Fenix - it had partly wrong flight dynamics (although not the exact opposite of what real life pilots say the aircraft should have, as has happened right here on Avsim with the 757) and a slightly off fuel burn (2-5%, not 40%). Apart from that I don't feel like arguing about this because I'm not hating towards the 757, I actually want it to succeed, it has a lot of potential. I'm just saying that this is as worse as it gets for a day one, let alone after 5 years of development. Looking forward to the fixes and then I'll absolutely purchase it and I'm sure I'll love it.

Likely wrong flight dynamics, totally inaccurate fuel burn, WASM crashes and a memory leak leading to CTDs are minor to you? I could hardly imagine a worse Day 1 to be honest. That said they are a newcomer and deserve more patience.

Yes it's correct. More problematic is that fuel burn is also only 60% of the real one. Both likely connected

To be fair that's public knowledge. Most developers find a way to deal with it