I understand (in case of testing and trying things out) however I don’t understand why someone would not buy it for that specific reason only. And that’s probably the case looking at the arguments that it isn’t a priority in the to do list to release such a feature.
1 Like
Because the bar has been already raised.
It was fairly normal that so called study-level aircraft does not support save/load function and I could (must) live with it. However, once you get used to usefulness of it, it becomes very hard to go back.
p.s.
If I were to choose between “perfect EFB” or “perfect save/load” as a supplement to a perfect aircraft add-on, I’d definitely choose save/load over EFB. It’s that good.
1 Like
to complete a full cold and dark start with check list fmc load and similated load time would take me 30 minutes .depending on runway 10 to 15 minutes to push and taxi .i agree i know lots of routes under an hour but to do a full light and power down how i like even on shortest routes is about 2 hours. I can normaly get to t.o.c in one sitting .load up next day 1 hr cruise . Third day t.o.d and landing performed . Yes i can shorten things take off from runway .start mid flight .but i like different portions of flight .
So i stand by what i said save and load essential for me . Maybe when i retire i can do a full days flight on vatsim but cant at the moment.
Not necessarily true. There’s plenty of short IRL routes available for widebodies, just as there’s plenty of 5+ hour routes for A320s. Pre covid aircraft like the 777 we’re doing short, sub 2 hour flights all over SE Asia. HKG-TPE is just over an hour, and HKG-MNL 90 min. Often flown multiple times per day in 777s.
2 Likes
No one is forced to fly for three hours or five hours only because of sitting inside an airliner cockpit.
One can also handfly it for fun to practice landings, nothing flies as good as an Airbus controlled by a fly-by-wire computer (the fly-by-wire computer makes the airplane even gliding along steady and with grace with one engine out, while all other airliners start to roll like crazy and need max rudder in case of an engine failure).
Or fly favorite routes based on what looks interesting on the map like hopping from island to island in the Bermuda triangle, instead of searching what exact routes real-life airliners fly 
By the way:
Next to the cockpit door locking switch is a video switch on the cockpit door panel.
Is it planned to make this switch functional, does it show the passenger cabin somewhere on the navigation display or the ECAM while pressing it? What cockpit TFT screen is this camera videofeed switch using when active?
1 Like
I don’t know, the 777 & 787 seem to have pretty capable fly-by-wire systems too. Not only that, they’re more fault tolerant than any Airbus equivalent. Full electrical failure (all engine generators including backups), no problem, start the APU & RAT, and the flight control mode can be rest back to Normal, not Secondary or Direct. The autopilot is also fully available too. Can’t do that in an Airbus.
1 Like
I know most of the routes, that’s why I said basically. However to make my point, it’s very small compared to the short routes available for A320’s. About 20 years ago I flew from Amsterdam to Paris CDG v.v. on the Varig 772. I love those short hops on a longhaul aircraft.
3 Likes
But the Airbus had fly-by-wire in March 1984, and the 777 was introduced in June 1995
Only in the A320 one can enjoy the classic first microprocessor-controlled fly-by-wire, flown by a sidestick like it was a space-ship, plus some nice failures and maybe one or another circuit breaker that needs to be put in again and a system to reboot - the spice and the essence of interesting flights…
Yes, the LNAV/VNAV in PMDG 737 is inferior to the Fenix’s. PMDG guys know it and said to bring a new LNAV/VNAV module soon.
2 Likes
The problem is that people get some kind of autoerotic satisfaction from flying real world routes, without considering that airlines fly non-standard routes all the time. I’ve done 12 minute flights on a real 757 and my shortest flight on the 737 is about 20 minutes. If people want to enjoy these airplanes they can use their imagination and simply simulate doing ferry flights to… i don’t know… pick up parts, rescue a crew, do a technical flight, position an airplane, get passengers where they belong after a diversion to the destination alternate…
The flight between climbing through FL150 and descending through FL200 is like watching paint dry. Why endure this torture (without getting paid), when you can enjoy the challenge of doing departures and approaches and malfunctions all the time.
8 Likes
Indeed, imagination, creativity, landing a 747 at a farm strip or Saba, have fun.
Now, I’m not judging how someone wants to enjoy their flights, not telling anyone what flights they have to do. Just wondering why, with all the possibilities the sim provides, one chooses to limit him/herself because one feature is not provided which you can basically and easily work around.
“landing a 747 at …Saba”. Video or it didn’t happen. 
Would love a nice routte suggestion by you.
Something different, i usually fly 1-3 hours flights
cheers!!
APU AUTO SHUT DOWN
anyone could let me know whats wrong?
fuel pumps are on, no door open, parking brake set, external power on..
this never happened.. cant find a way or why this is happening.
yesterday after take off the AP 1 or AP 2 never engaged.
Deal with it like a pilot. You have an APU fault and the automatic shutdown feature has done its thing. In real life you’d call an engineer or dispatch without APU (ground start and xbleed start). In the sim you can check your failures menu.
6 Likes
its a bug that came from nowhere. I reinstalled 2x the Fenix A320 , shouldnt be happening.
Like some people you are looking at it wrong, if you look at the individual cores you will see one or two cores are being hammered and maxing out because Flight Simulator as are most applications are programmed to use only a certain number of cores and it’s up to the dev to code it to spread the workload over as many as possible but unfortunately with Flight Simulator it’s only a few cores that get most of the workload and about two cores that get hit the hardest. Never look at the overall CPU usage number, it doesn’t tell you anything really, the sim simply can’t use all of your CPU and that’s why the overall usage isn’t higher.
1 Like
on discord another guy had the same problem. I reinstalled from a clean install the fenix app 3x already.
if anyone by any chance is having any similiar problem, lets us know
It’s a dx problem limiting to single/ few cores… it happens to every addon
Yes the Fenix is full of mysteries and interesting features.
One time my APU failed too because of this “auto-shutdown”. It was just not starting anymore, and maintenance check in the MCDU found nothing.
And one day the gear just came out for no reasons.
This Fenix Airbus is truly an interesting beast full of hidden interesting mechanics and failures, with very deep and mysterious stuff going on inside the code.
And every update promising more functional and fully simulated electric circuits with circuit breakers and exact correlated systems/TFT-screens/lights that will fail when a specific electric system fails, makes me more excited!
But the most important part was this sentence:
"We are also working on more substantial product updates such as the external engine model"
The Fenix team is probably adding an animated actual spinning turbine into the exhaust cone of the CFM-56, and the IAE V2500 Rolls-Royce turbine is also coming soon!
Oh wow this Airbus is beyond epic.
This is maybe practicing a variant of self-torture. All the guilt and shame can be cleansed by torturing oneself and sitting to a desk for 15 hours flying vom Taiwan to New York, while only staring zoomed in at the artificial horizon screen… 
“And, Johnny, what did you do during the weekend? I sinned therefore I needed self-flaggelation with grandpas ox-whip. And you Frank?” - “I used the default 747 to fly from Hong-Kong to Toronto, while setting the global weather to foggy IFR conditions…”
2 Likes