I got the neo version 
And yes, I have been following his video’s for a while now. He’s the reason I got into airliners to start with. 
2 Likes
Good stuff! Its a great add-on… Honestly the FBW A32NX is brilliant IMHO, it is fairly close to the X-plane add-ons for just straight up flying a route not for the finer details… The problem is and nobody ever wants to hear this, but it is the base sim that is letting it down, as it does most add-ons. Its just a few fixes away from being amazing but ASOBO are dragging their heels…I feel anyway.
2 Likes
Not so sure about the base sim dragging it down. It’s the fact that what makes it an Airbus to a large degree - the managed modes - don’t work. If that is a sim-related issue, then the default A320 should be removed, pronto.
So the base sim will also drag down the Fenix Airbus? Not sure about that.
They already stated, that FLS is already implemented. (Read their last blog post again maybe 
)
The base SIM is why the crj can’t use the flight planner and the A32nx goes dir to RWY and also the auto pilot.
It’s all the base SIM…
No because they have rolled their logic entirely
A32nx is still based on the ASOBO.
1 Like
People defending the SIM as usual… Not even understanding then ask yourself why is the WTCJ4 The only plane that actually works and doesn’t trashh your plan, and the only plane that fully follows your flight plan? Because it’s not using the default SIM stuff and is also why it is being made part of the SIM soon.
USR/USER waypoints? Direct to runway at the start of an approach?? That’s what let’s down add-ons unless they work around it .
Stop getting salty and jumping to defend things without thinking about what is being said.
I must of missed that… In any case I was right to be presumptuous.
Glad they are going town on this.
But Fenix Is implementing, so they say, proper LNAV and VNAV because they are building it custom. So the base sim isn’t holding them back. They are building custom code around it. No base sim platform out today will satisfy a developer seeking deep complexity, functionality, and fidelity. As the blog stated, this will hopefully prove out again that a project of this magnitude CAN be done today.
I never said anything about fenix SIM. I said that the base SIM holds back the A32nx mod. I’m not saying what complexity can be achieved in the SIM.
What I am saying is the blatant and fixable flaws in the base SIM hold back the A32nx mod and other add-ons. Not every Dev can work around it outside of the SIM.
If you read this thread that will be obvious why… if you want to argue every point in defense of the SIM than fine, but what I am saying is not wrong.
Working Title performed miracles with the CJ4 and that’s why they are now essentially part of the primary dev team and MSFS management structure.
Their work on the G1000NXi looks to be equally astounding, and their flight planning work is geared for all of MSFS (I think I’m right in that, I’m sure @Bishop398 can confirm or call me out on this). WT are also devs in the core sim too, these guys are seriously talented.
So this should all benefit the default airliners and the CRJ range, IMO.
This is well covered across the forums, we’re here for the Fenix A320. As far as we can ascertain, these guys have implemented their own system, and with the integration with Simbrief. We will not see any USR waypoints.
Just like the CJ4 you’ll likely spawn into your chosen departure with no destination set in the World Map of MSFS. From there you’ll program the FMS manually or via an import, setup your SID, perf, and away you go!
From there, and this is the big difference for me, you’ll have 2 fully operational MCDUs for all of the ops and STARs you desire.
Sure, the deep deep feature set looks amazing, but the trust in the Fenix A320 to perform what you set is paramount. Notwithstanding the GPS alignment degradation which will no doubt boil my brain at times 
So as I can see it, the Fenix has everything custom coded, and uses the sim purely as the hosting world/environment if you will.
It’s not often I’m right, and I could be wrong. Again.
Perhaps someone more enlightened can correct me 
4 Likes
You are 100% Correct IMHO. All I am saying is there are some disingenuous comments being made against the A32NX mod. I am trying to point out why or one of the biggest flaws of the A32NX mod is not the fault of the A32NX Team but it is an issue rooted deep in the sim which yes hopefully WT and ASOBO will fix. The CRJ has ILS Capture issues in certain circumstances too, all this can be easily fixed in the base sim. If add-on dev’s can use some of the base aspects of the sim because they actually work or fit in with the project then this not only reduces development time, but I would also imagine cost.
If people stop jumping to the sims defence and actually push for the changes this opens so much more potential…and who knows it may mean that many add-ons even complex ones in the future wont rely only on custom Flight Plan formats, thus making the add-on more accessible and better yet none of those waypoints and odd behaviours.
I feel they should leave the current planner alone, I know why they done it that way its kind of obvious, but they should provide a “Pro-Planner” option for those who want it using WT’s code.
1 Like
We’ve all had MSFS for so long now, we probably all forget what the very first experiences were like, with regards to the menu system and features. We dropped in to the menu system and had to figure it all out by ourselves.
The new Xbox crew are about to experience it all, first time, again.
Who knows, so maybe there already was, from day one a “Pro-Planner”, you just did the X-plane thing and set a departure with no destination! That’s it! We’ve always had this “feature”!! I see it all now 
Except, when mid-flight, you selected that STAR/Approach, or tried that Direct-To in mid-flight 
. I remember December well 
. BUT that was all fixed. And more will get fixed. That’s why GA was easier to cope with (CTDs aside) you just ignored it all and went YOLO to the runway
This is golden. Very thorough, so only for the Airbus freaks among us 
Thanks a lot.
1 Like
Nice overview:
4 Likes
Just watched this myself. Certainly a good endorsement of sorts, I hope they contact him to help with the testing and V1 Simulations, both very good at explaining things, and know what they and talking about, and of course Real Air Bus Pilots.
@SuperSixBravo , I actually agree with what you pointed out about well-known base navigation issues. They do indeed need to be addressed by Asobo. This would fix the very standard functionality within the sim.
However, I also feel that developers cannot expect any platform, MSFS or any other, to provide everything in the base product. That is why we have third-party developers. To actually develop capabilities above and beyond what the base product provides. Whatever is “lacking” can often be developed around. It’s also a way for developers of payware products to differentiate themselves with added-value capabilities.
I referenced the Fenix A320 project announcement to demonstrate that the sim, flawed or not, is not the factor. What they are reporting to achieve needed to be coded as custom anyway. The same applies to FBW. Working Title have done the same.
The base sim is just that. A base for the talented pool of 3rd-party developers to build from.
Yes same here I love a pmdg study level 777
I found those, not sure how helpful they are, have only looked into them briefly.
2 Likes