I experience some rocky phases of flight every now and then. I’m assuming its the clear air turbulence from either RealTurbCAT and/or ActiveSky, but it kinda feels trim-related too. Even knocked out the A321 autopilot at some point.
Anyone else?
I find Fenix aircraft very sensitive to RealTurb CAT, unrealistically knocking the airplane all over the place. I disable it for Fenix airbuses or I use very low settings for them, like 20/10/10 (Cloud/Enroute/Terrain scalar).
2 Likes
Thanks mate, I’ll try my next flights without it
1 Like
I still use in game ATC (I know, I know), with the A320, I am able to progress to within 5NM of TOD and then manually request a descent. On the A321 and A319 ATC always commands me to descend approx 20-25NM ahead of TOD. Every time. What governs this and why the big difference? Seems very early.
I’ve only used the A321 for a few flights so far and with MSFS ATC, the descent guidance has been somewhat inconsistent, with an instruction to descend, in advance of TOD just once out of around 4 flights.
I suspect that it might have something to do with whether the approach you enter into the flight plan, before takeoff, is the one that ATC will eventually guide you onto and/or how much longer or shorter the resultant route would be than the original descent into landing. The choice of Via can make a significant difference.
2 Likes
I have kept an eye out for changes of destination runway and vias, and it does have an impact for sure, and I just had a flight right now with a change of runway that impacted my TOD, but I’ve had others where the flightplan is as expected yet still get descended early by ATC. At least the aircraft just descends at -1000ft/min until the VNAV catches up, but it’s annoying non the less. The A320 was spot on (on one flight I’ve done) for some reason. I’ll need to get more data points, but it seems that on the A319/A321 it’s nearly always off. I’ve not noticed this with other airliners so consistently before.
1 Like
I’m just in the process of choosing an ATC solution that is VR friendly and, among other features, at least sometimes respects the altitude constraints on SIDs and STARs.
There are currently a few options, but it would probably be more sensible for me to wait and see whether the FS2024 ATC is any better than FS2020. I’m not expecting any significant improvement, but we’ll see. 
1 Like
Agree, the default ATC is a shambles, but its a shambles I’m familiar with and know all the quirks and workarounds. They went all quiet and said they couldn’t say when the ATC in FS2024 was brought up at one point. So it’s a big unanswered ? at this point in time, but unless they have partnered, it may ot change much as they haven’t managed to fix the default ATC in 4 years so why would we expect it to be fixed in FS2024.
Agree and, back on topic, having flown the A320 series in sims, from a number of providers, the guidance always appeared to be to start the descent sooner rather than later, with a shallower descent, and then increase the rate when intercepting the desired vertical path. Of course, ATC can “get in the way” of that tactic.
1 Like
I’m getting very odd take off speeds. 153 vr on an a319 Heathrow to jersey with 5 tonnes of fuel
The apparently new takeoff calculator does appear to prefer to use far more of the runway and I actually prefer it to the previous incarnation, where rotation would often occur with almost half of the runway available. I’d assumed that the Flex setting was designed to be as fuel efficient as possible and using more of the runway would appear to be in line with that.
1 Like
Are you using the EFB takeoff perf calculator? Are you using the final load sheet values for it? I’m getting 122 VREF at EGHI with 5.7 tonnes of fuel, Flaps 1, Flex 68C and a 10KT head wind component in the A319 (CFM).
It’s the engine derate on A319s, they use a much lower power setting than A320s. Stick it in TOGA and you’ll see a much shorter takeoff roll.
1 Like
I was using the efb. My take off weight was the same as yours. This was with the iae. I flew the cfm yesterday and had much much lower to speeds.
Is it usual to take off with toga than flex in the a319? My flex to temp was 80 which seemed high
It could be a IAE engine thing. I have seen Flex temps of up to 78C so far possibly on the A321 IAE which I flew (BA) yesterday. Can’t remember what the VR was but I think it might have been 150kts.
In the efb, you can manually enter a shorter runway length and then activate it, which will bring your V speeds way down to ‘normal’. If you’re using a long runway like 10L at KORD or 8 at KDEN, try inputting a custom 7000 ft runway length, makes a huge difference
Yeah, I was wondering about that myself. Wasn’t sure if they were flying those routes with the older 321’s before the Neo’s came out. Was also hoping to replicate BOS to DUB using an Aer Lingus A321 but had the same question on whether they used the older variant.
I think the possibility to cross the pond in A321 came with the LEAP and P&W powered Neo LR and XLR variants. I wish Fenix modelled those. Let’s hope.
3 Likes
I think they said they won’t be doing the neos. Kinda sad, I like all things modern, would have much preferred the Neo to the ceo.
1 Like