RNAVV19R

Flew it once. Felt the same.

It's been happening on the A320 since release. There was an entire thread on reddit not too long ago.

Must just be a coincidence that it only happens with Fenix products. The floating behavior happens even when using autopilot, so it is clearly a flight model issue. One that many have noticed, including a real A320 pilot according to one of the comments:

Well, that's expected. However, most airlines have their pilots land with AT engaged, as per Airbus recommendations. That's when the floaty behavior is exhibited in the Fenix.

Nah. The 747, 787, 737, 777, the other A320s, don't have this floaty behavior.

Why does Fenix suck so much when it comes to making a believable flight model? All of their aircraft float on landing to a hilarious degree.

Yes.

It's an RNAV Visual. It has an RF leg between KLAUS and SQIRL. Pretty cool approach. Here is the chart:

I think someone may have beat you to it as this video from a few weeks ago contains an approach that doesn't seem to be available in the sim or in Navigraph. But it's good to see that it's possible.

How are you altering the magnetic heading in the database? Are you increasing it or decreasing it? Or does it depend on the particular segment?

With Active Sky you have more control over turbulence, and you can tone down the silliness in Asobo's default weather. With default weather, even 6 knot winds can sometimes feel like you are landing in a major storm. A well known issue with default MSFS weather.

I wouldn't count on it. Remember when Asobo and Navblue made this claim? https://www.navblue.aero/navblue-partners-with-xbox-game-studios-for-microsoft-flight-simulator/

Yeah, I've seen others do this as well. The 777 uses the newer navdata format which is just a big database, instead of those small individual text files, though. Similar to the Fenix A320, except I haven't found a way to add approaches in the Fenix navdata yet.

Just came across this on reddit. It's a runway 1R instrument approach at KSFO in the PMDG 777, but I see no available 1R instrument approaches in the sim's navdata (Asobo's or Navigraph's) or in the PMDG 777's. This must mean that customizing the PMDG 777's navdata is possible. Interesting!

The problem with the Fenix navdata is that, unlike other aircraft, it uses a database instead of just text files like PMDG. The data in the SQL database is spread among various different tables, and it is difficult to see how approaches tie together. Doing this for the PMDG or for the navdata in the sim is easy. I guess I will have to ask Fenix directly.

The Fenix A320 comes with a navdata database in SQL. I am able to open and read it with TablePlus, but I am not sure how to customize it. I would like to add my own approach to a specific airport. I've read that someone has been able to do it, but I am unable to find any info on how to do so.

These guys are cooking. Easily the most interesting ATC app at the moment.

These guys are cooking. With GPT-4o you now have much faster response time, more accurate responses, and the price will be reduced.

Their site says it supports IFR, which I assumed it would support IFR approaches as well. This is definitely disappointing to hear. I will hold off on this now.

From my experience with Active Sky (version 8883) the turbulence seems much better on approach than default weather. In calm weather, everything feels very smooth. Windy and gusty weather will push the plane around more, but it doesn't feel like you are landing in a hurricane. It's not perfect, but it feels better than default weather. The issue with turbulence I've experienced was mostly at cruise. On every flight I encounter heavy or severe turbulence that results in extreme banking which even the autopilot can't compensate for. This is a known issue that they are working to fix.

The Fenix A320 fails on quite a few of the departures tested. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MubloGDNCNSqmfNcQe5PmnvsAUF_FK8zYhmuSHa-UUw/edit#gid=0

Robert posted this on the PMDG forum. The 777 (followed shortly by the 737) will have full PANS-OPS compliance. Apparently aircraft from other devs do not, according to him (not sure how accurate that is.) Great news, nevertheless. Many many developers beat us to using Navigraphs new format, but part of the time lag for us was the implementation of the entire ARINC 424/PANS-OPS with full compliance for all leg types. This is a pretty significant change, and while many developers have been reading the ARINC 424 for some time, they aren't actually doing the full suite of path computations with associated control logic to ensure the airplane complies with the defined path for specific procedural legs. https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-forum/general-discussion-news-and-announcements/293866-may-the-fourth-be-with-you-2024-ah-the-cone-of-silence-but-we-are-nearly-through-it?p=294539#post294539

Does BATC allow you to request a specific approach and runway? Or are you stuck with what it gives you?

Asobo has had 4 years to get it right in MSFS 2020. The odds of them getting it right in MSFS 2024 are virtually zero.

The conversation shouldn't even be about visuals. The biggest positive in favor of AS is that it fixes Asobo's broken turbulence and wind, which is absurdly unrealistic with default MSFS weather.