I’m happy for everyone who likes Airliners, personally I’m looking forward to A2A Comanche as I’m primarily interested in GA aircrafts, but this beauty really looks impressive.
Well, this really sounds more like wrongful defamation than ‘fun speculation’. I can’t say I care much for your unfounded claims based purely on uniformed speculation. Let’s keep it civil around here.
6 Likes
Hey Matt, do you know if it will possible to sell aircrafts on the marketplace if they are running outside the sandboxed enviroment?
Some of the issues regarding planning/changing the route mid-flight concerned me.
TBH I just settled on the WT-CJ4 at that point.
And I was so bummed by the A320Neo when MSFS first came out, I’ve not brought myself to the point of going for the FBW (sorry guys, it’s me, not you).
Been tempted by the DC6, but I like the idea of a full-fidelity A320 over the admittedly quite impressive DC6. I’ve hovered over that Buy button a few times!
I don’t think I’ll be hovering over this one, though. I got my excitement chip buzzing the same way as when I first saw MSFS. That’s just me.
1 Like
Aaah you’re like a connaisseur on your hangar. Haha 
The CRJ issue with the planning seems to be somewhat’ish fixed after the last update. Its not fully fledged PMDG quality yet but I’ve either learned to work around it or they did a good fix on it.
The DC6 is a very rewarding aircraft to fly. She’s a handful but that AFE takes a lot of the workload when you need him.
But anyway, stick to your guns and do what feels good for you. I just mentioned the CRJ because of your speed-remark. That plane goes up like a rocket for the first 15,000 feet. Really awesome flight dynamics and it’s fun how you feel they’re designed for hopping around on short hauls. A plane operating between Berlin and Frankfurt has quite the different working relation with its pilot than a B738 en route from Amsterdam to Cairo.
1 Like
You are wrong about this.
The Fenix plane is going to connect to a server running the FFA320 for XP, send the datarefs and take back the result then inject that into MSFS to display the plane position.
Same for each button, it just sends the event to the FFA320 via de Fenix server in Liechtestein and then get the results back and show them.
[Edit] Removed the part where I said “it can’t run on Xbox because it uses your GPU to mine criptocurrencies” because it seems some people actually could believe that was true and the post was flagged. My comment was just humorous the plane will NOT mine criptocurrencies with your GPU it will only use it for SETI @ Home to search for alien signals.
9 Likes
hahaha Luis you have me grinning here more often than you realize. 
I cannot even look at default airports. Since the launch of MSFS I think I have flown twice to or from a default airport. With hundreds of amazing freeware airports, you do not even have to spend money. But I still buy one or two payware airports each month. It is like night and day for me.
1 Like
wow. what an awful post you made. Like where did any of that stem from?
1 Like
Why would it not be possible? It may not be possible to sell it on Marketplace, but it’s definitely possible to sell it elsewhere, which is what FlyInside Bell is doing.
My bad, I meant sell it on the marketplace. Sorry.
I hate that – had that happen to me as well.
I used atsu as well but the plans get messed up . Even simbreif gives us like not the right plans at
Times
For
The flight . Any suggestion where
To get real
World routes from ?
The sim has no mechanism to install or start external programs, so from a technical perspective, no. It’s also kinda against the spirit of the platform, so I doubt if it would be allowed either on those grounds, but it’s been an evolving conversation within the team.
-Matt | Working Title
1 Like
But it’s TOTALLY within the spirit of the platform to allow 3rd party developers cannibalize default (and not so default, such as Working Title CJ4) avionics and slap those into aircraft that have nothing to do with those avionics… RIGHT?
I get what you’re saying, Matt… However, if you look at something like FlyInside Bell, it uses an external flight model (at least, according to them) and it doesn’t require the sim itself to start or install anything. So I imagine if Fenix A320 will use something external, it will be automatically done “in the background” and pretty much seamless and invisible to the user… Good examples of that would be Majestic’s Q400 in P3D which uses a lot of external stuff, but you could never tell. Nothing ever pops up or anything of the sort. PMDG does it to extent too in P3D. FSLabs actually has a few “loading” windows pop up when you select their Airbuses before the “normal” loading of the flight begins. So they do it too. If it’s seamless to the user, is there harm?
8 Likes
Well, I can’t vouch for everyone using all the defaults, but yes, the idea with continuing to build and improve upon the default avionics is very much in order to make a healthy avionics base for third party developers to build on top of. At the very least, they’re still operating within the sandbox and utilizing the sim platform. Whether or not the addons themselves are presently of a high quality is not really for me to judge, in my present position.
The FlyInside Bell runs its flight model from within WASM, in the sandbox. It does also have an external program, which is used only for DRM purposes.
In any case, since it would not be possible for the sim to install external programs or run them when the addon loads, this discussion is a bit of a moot point. If users want addons that operate in that way, nobody is preventing them from being sold elsewhere and for users to start those external programs on their own.
-Matt | Working Title
10 Likes
I’m looking forward to seeing this plane in the skies of MSFS
1 Like
Getting tons of stuff into this A320 is nice, but maintaining a high framerate at the same time is the art.
I hope that it will to be as agile in pitch as the real one.
Just compare the pitch rate with the present A320 in MSFS…
Yeah, Aamir did state that even in the pre-optimisation code they are just a few framerates behind either the default or the FBW A320.
Of course, there are features that they no doubt still have to flesh out and implement, and every line of code has the potential to use up a framerate, but here’s hoping that they can pull it off. It’s essential that they pull it off, and SU5 may assist in that regard too.
Actually looking at the fselite article it’s a few frames behind the default A320 but noticeably ahead of FBW A320 - FBW’s CPU load is 20% higher.