falcon71

Just one detail to consider: The Orbx version is already outdated. They still have the displaced thresholds on the runway, which no longer exists. This can make a huge difference with the tight performance calculations at this airport.

I think from a pilot perspective, ground returns would be interesting next, along with Ground Clutter Suppression (GCS) and a ground mapping mode (I always assume, this is what people are talking about whenever they are requesting a terrain radar).

Are you all on 2024 or do you also see problems with 2020? I have never ever had a WASM crash before and I fly every day. Yesterday I had my first WASM crash with the 777 in 2020 (manifesting in frozen screens and switches). I find it odd, that I get a crash all of a sudden in that old platform, now that you all report crashes as well. The only thing I changed was that I installed VRAAS recently (more Simconnect traffic?). Or could the navdata be the missing link? I was using Navigraph cycle 2603 rev 3.

The cockpit door can be opened when moving the door lock/unlock switch on the pedestal to the unlocked position. This is not at all how the real cockpit door works, but I guess this is done to confuse bad actors.

The JF A300 is a B4-200 with steam gauges and a three man cockpit. This is true old-school flying. The ini is a -600 with a highly automated two man cockpit and glass displays. It's like comparing the DC-10 to the MD-11. Externally similar, but a totally different flight experience.

The scenery was released in 2024. At that time the terminal was still under construction and the scenery does depict the airport in that state. The terminal was just opened in July 2025, I assume they will update their scenery at some point.

I think just because now they finally can. This is a personal love letter from them and they have made enough money so they can make the aircraft of their own dreams. I'm sure this is not a profit driven decision, but a personal one.

Are you not using Navigraph? They improved the localizer ranges a while ago and your numbers match theirs: https://navigraph.com/blog/localizerranges

That is really bad, I also bought LGSK on the marketplace. I don't understand why static aircraft are still used these days. Aerosoft ENAT is also an airport where you cannot disable static aircraft. With Drzewiecki Design I learned to never buy on the marketplace either, as those have statics. But you can disable them when bought elsewhere. Luckily you can transfer their sceneries to other stores. Finally I'm still sour at iniBuilds. They usually let you disable static aircraft or only use them at long-term parking. But at OMDB many gates still won't become available when you disable the static aircraft. I would never buy the 2024 upgrade because of this.

The only issue I have with the Taimodels version, it is unusable in IMC conditions. As Bob mentioned before, the elevation is way off. If you follow the glide slope of the ILS or the VNAV profile of your plane, you well end nowhere near the runway. This means, you can only ever do visual approaches. I wrote the author last year, but he can't seem to do the terraforming to correct the elevation. Yet SDG managed to get the elevation correct...

Yes, I meant Justsim EDDL, I'm sorry! No complaints with JustFlight.

I'm really surprised that devs don't pay more attention to this. Other prominent examples are iniBuilds OMDB, Taimodels HECA and JustFlight EDDL. These airports look nice, but are absolutely unusable in IFR conditions, since both ILS and RNAV approaches are affected. We can finally have beautiful sloped runways in MSFS and the devs make their airports completely flat again.

Are you sure this is turbulence? It looks more like the autopilot is over correcting and induces the oscillations itself. Is it smooth when you turn of the AP and let go of the controls?

RSR mentions, that you have to uninstall and reinstall the liveries. Does this apply only for the official liveries or also the liveries from fs.to? If so, is there a way to transfer them, without having to hunt them all down again?

Static aircraft that cannot be turned off are the worst. Gates that still remain unavailable when statics are turned off comes second (looking at you iniBuilds...)

This is really sad. Especially since iniBuilds and Contrail offer a transfer from the Marketplace with screenshots as proof. You can transfer almost anything there, but no KPDX. I'm certainly not going to buy it full price.

I just learned, that in the new iniBuilds OMDB scenery, some gates are again permanently blocked, even if you disable static aircraft. This is a show stopper for me and I'm quite shocked that iniBuilds still does this, even though most other developers move away from static aircraft. But I don't just want to complain, but solve this problem and I'm willing to learn the scenery editor. I would like to know, is it possible to import a third party ground layout into the scenery editor and add the missing gates or would I need to start from scratch?

It really shouldn't matter whether you prefer Fenix or FSLabs, this is good news for everyone. FSLabs has always raised the bar. They know that they have competition, so their aircraft will likely be the new No. 1 A321. Now, do you guys believe Fenix will just sit idle and stay the No. 2? Competition has always been good, I think the next few years will be very interesting for us Airbus drivers of any camp.

I love, that they properly display the messages on the ND. Does any one know how they do it? Is this some hack, that may cause other problems down the line?

Has anyone seen a topic on the Microsoft forums that we can upvote? Is Asobo even aware of the issue?

Does SayIntentions actually understand what you ask for or does it always allow whatever you want? I wonder, what would happen if you request doing aerobatics over a busy international airport, would it allow that?

I had the same observation at ZULS recently. I checked SimBrief afterwards and those numbers looked a lot more plausible. Remember to open a ticket at Fenix, so they can reproduce and fix the issue.

Best request it on the JustFlight forums. I guess the KLN is still under the radar. I hope this will change once the Dukes are released and people can see what it's like. Version 1.0 of the KLN is ready to go and stable for developers, I'm just waiting on the Dukes here.

It does show. But for me, it shows the VS deviation. When I'm above the path and I pitch down to the target VS, it shows on track, even though I would be still above the path. I was expecting it to still show that I would be above the path.

One thing I'm very surprised nobody is talking about, is the VNAV deviation bar. For me, it seems to only show the deviation of the current VS to the target VS. Based on the FCOM, I understand that it should however show the deviation to the VNAV path in feet (Like any other aircraft). I can fly above or below the VNAV path and the FMC also never shows any significant deviation. Did I understand the VNAV deviation bar wrong, am I the only one with this issue or do you all just live with it?