320Driver

LOL ! You are putting too much into it. I wrote prepare for 'certain aspects' of a sim checkride or sim assessment. Rest assured, no one would use any sim to prepare for a flight you have booked 😂

No. The scenery in a LevelD sim is not as good as you might think. What you get to see in P3D with an Addon Airport is quite adequate for the task.

there is something in between that though, and you indeed forgot P3D. I can tell you many pilots use P3D and FSLabs A320 to prepare for certain aspects of a Level D sim checkride or sim assessment. The airport which will be in use is often known previously, so it is quite common to use P3D/FSLabs to familiarize with airport/surroundings/approaches. That works best if the Aircraft does what it should in order not to get distracted by unexpected surprises. The FSLabs A320 does a great job in that regard down to small details. I haven't come across anyone yet using something else than that though.

yes, still useless. As mentioned above, who judges about it ? A beginner, an advanced simmer, a RW pilot or the developer itself ? It's as useless as the advertisement "tested by real pilots". Doesn't say anything if no one knows to what extend it has been tested, what have been his expectations, what kind of hardware equipment he has at his disposal and so on ....

it still would need to specified for whom it is study level. For a beginner, for an advanced simmer, or for a RW pilot ? And who is going to judge about it ? FBW A320 is study level for a beginner, Fenix A320 is study level for an advanced simmer, FSLabs A320 is study level for a pilot. It is indeed a completely useless term.

Absolutely right, controls are an important factor. I more than once came across flight model comments just to find out there is a plastic Saitek stick in use. I am using an OEM Sidestick for that matter. I can't tell much else other than the feel and A320 flight sensation is simply not there for me. I didn't have the time to really get more into the reason. Immediately obvious is certainly the missing inertia, but that is not all. Sorry, no intention to de disrespectful to streamers. It was just the sheer extend of things that got overseen by real pilots that made me think about some kind of, well, opportunism. Fortunately in the meantime that has changed to a more "down to earth" tone of certain things, e.g. the flight model shortcomings I noticed from the very beginning. Thanks for the info to contact you directly. I'm afraid I might not find the time, but will try.

that is future talk. I can only judge what I have now. And you didn't mention flight model/A320 flight sensation/A320 feel my original post was all about. For me this has the highest priority, Flight comes first in a flight simulation :-). However, looking at the future, also FSLabs is working on an MSFS version. Let's see what they come up with !

that's a VERY old generation of LevelD Sims though. They have certainly developed a lot over the last two decades. Try a current generation LevelD Sim, it will give you a much better picture !

it's exactly that what I understand the thread title is all about. It is not about environment or developers attitude. I very much understand though some prefer the overall environment regardless of the airplane itself. There are many ways to approach a sim or sim addon and all are valid. At the end of the day what you enjoy most is what counts most !

Interesting people talk about failures when there is a much more important difference. The sensation and feel of flying an A320 is simply not there in the Fenix A320. It more feels like a 737 with Autotrim than an A320. Also the missing inertia ruins it. I don't really care if Asobo or Fenix is to blame for this, the end result is what counts. Now, no doubt the FSLabs in P3D isn't perfect either, it feels a bit too much on rails. But overall it is a world of difference to the Fenix experience ! Don't believe me ? Even if that is still no replacement for the real plane, book an hour in a Full Flight Simulator. You willl immediately notice what I am talking about. There are many other essential things to look at, e.g. the pitch/thrust relations, which FSL got very close, but Fenix didn't. I am well aware, FSL is working much longer on the A320 than Fenix. But I guess the original poster was looking for a comparison right now. The Fenix A320 is not even close to the FSL A320 in its current state. I can imagine what is coming my way now : "BUT real world pilots X and Y have said in their videos and streams Fenix is better " Try to look behind the influencer business these days. Do you think real world pilots do this streams just for fun or because they have too much spare time ? No, they generate income with it. How ? By getting and keeping subscribers. And how do you do that if so many have moved to MSFS ? Simple. By telling users what they want to hear. One of the more important guys out there even almost lost his credibility by moving too much in Fenix direction. Fortunately he got the curve now and admits the Fenix flaws.

.

I strongly disagree recommending non study level aircraft to a beginner, especially for the A320. The Aerosoft Airbus has lots of inaccuracies, guesswork and it is partially unpredictable. This is NOT what you want as a beginner, because it can make you insecure if something doesn't work as intended. Is it the plane or is it your fault... A study level aircraft like the FSL A320 has besides it's deep systems accuracy one big advantage : It does in all phases of flight exactly what Airbus has intended the A320 to do. That is exactly what you need as a beginner, and for a routine flight from A to B it is very easy to learn. On top of that it is the most immersive package every made for a complete flight experience from gate to gate. If you have once bitten into it, and there are a lot of Youtube tutorials (e.g. those By Blackbox711) available to guide you, there's plenty of room for learning and refining for years !

I have tried all mentioned in the title and for me also FSLabs for most authentic and complete flight experience and immersion. Fenix is also very good regarding systems, it comes close to FSL. Partially it even exceeds FSL e.g. for abnormals. Just the landings and flight model (too less inertia/momentum) don't feel right, which contributes a lot to my experience. FBW is on a very good and positive way, nice to see it develop. But it can't be of the level of the two above yet Flightfactor falls short due to much less system depth and accuracy, it's a pity they more or less stopped development. So it feels like still in beta state. Aerosoft falls short in every regard, there's just by far too guesswork.

So you DO see the flare logic implemented ? If so, could you post of video of your landings ?

I am positive about the Fenix, see my initial post in the thread. But there is a difference between just hyped and oversee anything, or being positive but still critical. If you prefer an "all is good" attitude, then you may do so. I just don't get it how MSFS users just keep ignoring problems? When P3D has problems (it did and it does!!), it's the end of the world. But exactly that has lead to many better products. Now with MSFS the simmers landscape sadly has changed to this "all is good", even if it's worse than P3D. However, interesting video ! Well, I see the flare mode and its need from the pilot perspective. In a conventional aircraft you pull the yoke back and as the nose drops, also as the speed is dropping, you need to keep pulling on the yoke to control the descent till touch down. In Airbus normal law stick out of neutral is a load factor demand. So when you flare by moving the stick back you ask for a load factor and the aircraft starts pitching to give you that, and will continue to pitch as long as the stick is out of neutral. So you will have to keep releasing the stick to neutral after each backward flare movement. This will not work well for the flare, so Airbus came up with the the flare mode where the auto trim stops and from 30' you get that pitch down. The pilot can now maintain steady backward pressure like conventional aircraft and continue to land. That's all about it. The Fenix does currently not reflect that. It just doesn't feel like an A320 at that point.