Dear Mr. Neumann,
I’ve been a Microsoft Flight Simulator customer for years, and I’m writing because SU5 has me concerned about something more important than any single bug.
Some background on where I’m coming from. I work in software, and in a previous role I spent years as a knowledge manager supporting the U.S. Department of Defense. In that world, you learn quickly that the inability to roll back a deployment isn’t an option; it raises the bar for what you’re allowed to do, because the cost of being wrong can cost lives and material. I understand that this is just a game, but what is truly disturbing is the business practice. SU5 shipped anyway, with stability issues that volunteer beta testers had flagged before release [reference: April 23rd, 2026 MSFS Weekly Briefing - Microsoft Flight Simulator ].
That combination is what I want to put in front of you.
I spent close to two weeks after SU5 troubleshooting what I assumed was failing hardware. It wasn’t. But the application crashes I’m still seeing match a Frame Generation issue your team has already identified and patched in the SU5.1 beta, meaning the bug was known internally, and customers like me spent significant personal time chasing a problem you could have characterized in the release notes. I’m not asking for compensation for that time. I’m telling you that it happened, because I don’t think the scale of it is fully visible to you from inside.
I’d ask you to think hard about three things:
The beta-to-release decision on SU5 deserves a real internal retrospective. If volunteer testers raised stability concerns and the build shipped anyway, the next beta cycle starts with that institutional memory whether you address it or not.
The “primarily affects console” framing of SU5.1 is doing PC users a disservice. The Frame Generation CTD alone affects a large segment of your highest-spending PC customers. Calling it out by name in patch notes would cost you nothing and rebuild trust.
There’s a quiet population of technically capable customers — developers, engineers, sysadmins — who would give you much higher-signal feedback than typical forum traffic if you built a channel for it. We notice patterns. We have language for them. Most of us don’t say anything because the existing channels feel like shouting into a void.
I enjoy this product as I am also a private pilot and want this product to succeed. I’m writing because I think the team is capable of better than what SU5 demonstrated, and because staying quiet when I notice these patterns feels like part of how they continue.
Thank you for your time.