sidnov

It's much simpler than that. Dev team adds new code and features, while it's upto the media team to cover those updates through posts at their own pace. A feature may be released a while before it receives a promotion post. In this case EFCS is already in experimental for a week now.

EFCS updates were pushed into experimental a while ago (about a week now). (it's independent of the announcement and progress update which is scheduled and managed by the media team)

Just like the 320, we have a team of pilots and engineers who work on the 380 in their day-to-day life. Most of them have been associated ever since the project was announced (considering the time available to them during lockdowns and flight cancellations during COVID), and the rest joined in when they heard of the 380 simulation we're developing through pilot forums. In addition, a decent amount of documentation is available through sources undisclosed.

The improvements to the current VNAV implementation will be seen on experimental, where it will have thorough testing before release. Some of those features include CDA, Flap Pseudo Waypoints, and more, and we'll try and replicate the inaccuracies of those systems as seen in the real bus.

Folks, let's not feed the troll. If they want something called a "proper VNAV", they are most welcome to start contributing fixes to the A32NX, and they might as well contact the FMS manufacturers to improve logic in systems that calculate managed descent parameters IRL to make it more accurate. Like we've mentioned this plenty of times before, we work based on feedback from type-rated pilots, engineers, and information from documentation, not other simulator add-ons.

We appreciate every contribution, both development-wise and financially, but there are no intentions to go down the payware route in the foreseeable future. However, feel free to check out the FBW OpenCollective here: https://opencollective.com/flybywire

Though donations through OpenCollective are entirely optional and we truly appreciate any help to keep the CDN services active to allow fast downloads, the add-ons we develop will never be made payware or donationware, staying true to the ideals we stand for.

I don't deny that at all, the Fenix 320 is a good released product, while the FBW A32NX is an aircraft still in open alpha. There's no catching up to do since there's no competition. The goals are just different

That's not entirely correct. The A32NX is free and open-source. The 3D model is currently the only thing borrowed from the default, though that too has been heavily modified to support things like the printer, EFB, etc. to name a few. Systems-wise, we don't rely on any default code from the Asobo 320Neo. A fundamental reason why such a collaboration is nearly impossible is, Fenix is a for-profit company selling aircraft add-ons, whereas FBW is and will remain open-source organization, with the goal of making the most accurate Airbus simulation available till date on desktop platforms, which is simply not viable commercially for a company looking to make profits.

Maybe because it's not a sim limitation, after all. Fenix probably will figure it out with time.

Before this comment is taken out of context, just making it clear without any intentions of hijacking this thread. Andreas had personal reasons due to which he needed to take a step back from active development, and he did not leave the team because of Fenix or any other reasons.

Though Andreas isn't an active developer at FBW anymore, he still has the same level of respect from everyone for the work he has put in, not just for the team but for the entire community. Even now, he wouldn't think twice before helping another development team out to make a product better for the community, and that's exactly what his intentions seem to be here. We really do not deserve his efforts if we are going to throw **** at him for sharing perfectly valid feedback that is going to make a product that you worship even better, do we?

He's expressing his opinion on the Fenix and sharing technical feedback (that you might see getting implemented on the Fenix sometime soon, who knows?), just like plenty of others have on this platform. Like it, cool. Don't like it, just move on. No one appreciates these unpleasantries.

Make sure to set the tiller axis as per the doc I've linked above if you have twist axis+rudder pedals. Else, if your tiller and rudder are being controlled by the same axis, the separate tiller on the EFB option should be disabled, like you observed previously

The Fenix 320 and the FBW A32NX are unrelated. @Roy Warrenhttps://docs.flybywiresim.com/fbw-a32nx/feature-guides/nw-tiller/ This should help.