kholt

Are you suggesting that the MS/Asobo SDK/API provides full access to *ALL* ARINC data loaded via Navigraph, including for example any and all airports I might need to divert to? I’d be a bit surprised at that…. Unless that is actually the case, then things aren’t so simple as you portend. I mean, MS/Asobo don’t exactly have a sterling reputation when it comes to APIs, either in terms of completeness, accuracy, or stability. I suspect the real story is actually quite a bit more complicated, which may explain why the developer was talking around the subject without being particularly specific. Its all just speculation unless the developer is a lot more concise or there emerges a storyline from users having had considerable time with the product. Currently we have neither. Just a bunch of YouTuber’s trying to make a living by getting lots of ‘likes’.

I hope you’re right. If this is the case then I guess there isn’t going to be a problem. However, the developer on the video was the one that brought this up and he talked as if there was a problem. So let’s just hope that it’s only his communication skills that are somewhat lacking and not the product itself…. Maybe if I watched the video a second time I could parse it more carefully.

Extremely disappointed to find out they are not using Navigraph, and use cost as a reason. This strongly suggests they are targeting more casual gamers. People who are seriously invested in flight simulation already have Navigraph. More to the point however, this is just going to cause all kinds of problems as he even acknowledges. If a 3rd party airport isn’t up to date, that’s a problem with the 3rd party airport. Oftentimes there are alternatives. What he is suggesting is he’s going to make his product bad because of some bad apples in the scenery marketplace. I can work around bad airport add-ons (including flying in and out of better represented airports if I have to). What I can’t deal with is a variety of products on different ARINC cycles or worse. The only way to keep all products in sync is for every product to use Navigraph. Period. What am I to think when I plan my route in Simbrief, load the charts in Navigraph Charts, and then ATC sends me off on an approach I don’t even have a chart for? Furthermore, if he’s trying to get data out of the sim, how is that going to work with products like Pro-Sim (and eventually Jeehell FMGS) when these products sit outside the simulation platform and only use that platform for visual depictions outside? I just don’t see that working at all. This has now gone from a hour one/day one purchase for me, to an “I’ll wait and see if someone can get it working with Pro-Sim” before I even think about buying it.

What a weird thing to say…

This is exciting news. Please keep us updated on what you needed to do to overcome any issues.

If/when it comes with support for Skalarki hardware then I’m super excited. Until then it’s of no interest to me sadly. They claim they have negotiated a new deal with ProSim to remove licensing issues. So bring it (Skalarki support) on! P.S., By support, I’d like to see the equivalent of what FSLabs provides on P3D. If that happens, I can finally make the switch to MSFS. Of course it’s possible FSLabs gets there first. I’ll take either for the win.

I am very enthusiastic about this product and look forward to being an early adopter. However, as “natural” as the premium voices sound, to me they sound like Hollywood movie controllers that had a little bit too much candy and coffee. If they lowered their voices about an octave or so and came across a little bit more somber, the realism factor would be much greater.

If BeyondATC fails because customer’s aren’t willing to pay the costs of the AI, they will hardly be the first tech company to fail because they were too far ahead of their time. The great thing about the technology market is that, more so than in other industries, prices generally tend to fall over time, sometimes dramatically so. The problem for startups or businesses that have innovative new ideas ahead of everyone else is generating enough revenue to sustain themselves until the market is ready to accept them. History is replete with companies that couldn’t cross the “valley of death” to reach prosperity. Perhaps BeyondATC won’t survive, but eventually someone will come along and make AI work for this application. I’m cheering for BeyondATC, and I will be buying their product. I’m not at all concerned about the cost, as it will make a fantastic addition to my (rather expensive) hardware A320 cockpit. Hopefully there will enough serious users like me to keep them going. The costs of AI will drop, it’s just a question of how long it will take.

Please FSLabs/PMDG/Orbx, support P3D v6! I beg you! I can dream, can’t I?

Me thinks you argue too much. Where did I ever make claims based on hypotheticals? I never claimed ANY A320 was superior to another. In fact, I only pointed out some features that don’t exist in the Fenix that prevent me and some others from seeing it as a replacement for FSLabs at this time. I never “evaluated” one sim against another as you claim. Try reading more carefully next time before hijacking the thread just to argue.

No, I don’t actually. I prefer XP12 for GA flying and MSFS for low and slow sightseeing flights. Those are just my personal preferences. Never claimed one was better than the other in any general sense in all aspects as some do. Sorry you want to pick a fight over whose sim is best, but I don’t play that game. I stick to factual statements only. And yes, Working Title has done a good job with Garmin avionics.

If that’s your threshold for whether you respect another human being or not, well, what can I say?

Sounds like you’ve failed basic reading comprehension. The original post to which I responded asked the question whether Fenix V2 made FSLabs obsolete. I pointed out that there are a few areas where it does not replace FSLabs, namely in terms of support for hardware cockpits, multi-monitor setups or weather radar. That is not some kind of claim of superiority of FSLabs as you infer, just a statement of a few facts that no one can dispute which are relevant to those of us that care about them. So no, Fenix V2 does not make FSLabs obsolete to the original point, even if it were “better” in some other aspect. Not once did I say or imply P3D is “better” than MSFS. What I did do is dismiss people who make wholly generic and sweeping statements that one is “vastly better” than the other. The ONLY aspect that I am aware of where Fenix is in fact “vastly better” is quite specifically with respect to visual fidelity. I would love to be educated on other aspects in which Fenix is “vastly” better as I haven’t found them or heard of them. I regularly fly MSFS, P3D and XP. For the A320 I fly mostly FSLabs A320 but also FBW, Fenix and Toliss. Recently I’ve been evaluating Pro-Sim and JeeHell FMGS as my hardware cockpit expands. They each have their strengths and weaknesses, but I enjoy them all for what each is good at. I am also a serious pilot and a serious simulation pilot, and as much as I love awesome graphics and scenery, I’m not so enamored of it that I can’t see past it. But hey, enjoy your nice textures with dirt and scratches….

You are comparing something that doesn't exist (Fenix V2), against a personal recollection of something in the past that has by now been superseded with newer versions (FSLabs in P3D) and which also doesn't exist yet in MSFS. Hard to take your evaluation seriously with all your hypotheticals about what may or may not exist in the future, much less the present. Outlandish statements like "far superior" without evidence or qualification regarding an unknown future smack of intellectual immaturity.

You've pretty much proven my point with your comments. In a). you imply that MSFS is implicitly better, which is only true if you weight visual "prettiness" or the ability to "play" a video game on Xbox above virtually everything else. There is no aspect in which MSFS is better than its peers with the sole exception of visual accuracy and detail and video game console support (Xbox). So if having Fenix in MSFS is what you prefer, then it is obviously because that is what matters most to you. There is nothing wrong with that. Good visuals are certainly more "fun" and more immersive. I get it. But for people that prefer a more realistic flight experience using home cockpits, multiple monitors, weather, etc., Fenix + MSFS is hardly "far superior". When Fenix + MSFS is actually better in important areas besides just visuals, I'll be there. I'm sure it will get there eventually, because the amount of development effort and funding going into MSFS and its add-ons means that day will likely come.

That’s what I’m afraid of. I hope it’s not true, but you could very well be right. Perhaps someday if MSFS has better multi-monitor support we can set up dedicated, fixed views for the overhead and pedestal, which would work for all aircraft. For me personally, I plan to have a complete Skalarki pedestal by summer, so that takes care of part of my interest in 2D panels. I doubt I will ever have a hardware overhead panel though, so I would still like to see support for my overhead mounted computer screen to display it.

It’s technically possible. AirManager could do it if someone put in the effort to duplicate with it what FSLabs has already done.

Huh?? In “real life” you have to grab a computer mouse to look around the cockpit? With all due respect, are you good on your meds?

I read the original post not so much as “who’s the best developer” but “who has the best product?”. FSLabs on P3D is a superior simulation of an A320 and airline flying as compared to Fenix on MSFS. There are good reasons for this for people who have the right priorities regarding realistic workflow (no panning) with multi-monitor support, hardware support and weather. For those that care about how well dirt, chipping paint and rivets, and passenger seats are modeled, well there’s Fenix. I’m excited about the news that Fenix will “allow” hardware cockpits. Let’s see how well they “support” hardware cockpits, and whether they do that as wel as FSLabs has done. They haven’t offered any details yet, and even if they had, talk is cheap. When Fenix is actually superior to FSLabs in aspects that matter to me, I will switch immediately. Heck, I already own both, so it’s not like I care who wins.

Not at all. FSLabs has a full set of 2D instrument panels in P3D. With three screens I can put the overhead panel on one monitor, the center pedestal on another and of course the forward view on the center monitor. Everything visible all at once with no need to pan around and mess up the workflow.

You’ve completely missed the entire point of this discussion. In a real airplane, you get tactile feedback as to how smooth your landing was. In a simulator you do not, or at least very little at best. The point of this software is to provide that feedback so you can improve your flying skills in simulator as you would in real life. Absolute numbers aren’t the point. It sounds to me like your definition of a successful landing is not blowing the tires and collapsing the landing gear struts. So in that case I guess you do get feedback in the sim. No, I have never done that myself, either in real life or in sim. My standards are significantly more discerning.

Really?? I kinda doubt you’re a real pilot. When I fly I have a pretty good clue how many feet/minute I touch down because I feel it in my butt. Same thing even as a passenger. I’ve never “felt” a hard landing in a sim, and having some actual data could surely help to improve.

Others have reported the same problem on FSLabs site. It isn’t just me. The problem has not returned for me for a while now, and I have no idea why.

This is completely useless and always will be from my perspective, because the developer has stated he has a personal disdain for IFR and airline operations. The amount of pilot/controller interaction with GA VFR flights is pretty minimal and not particularly complex, so what’s the point really? I’m looking forward to seeing what BeyondATC releases. If it’s good enough it might make me move to MSFS despite all its other problems. Time will tell.

Towards everyone? No not at all. Just people like you that bring personal issues into the discussion or suggest i’ts my fault the sim crashes or make stupid statements akin to asking if I forgot to turn the power switch on. It’t a short list, but you're now on it.