Experiences with MSFS and Skalarki hardware - good, bad or indifferent

Discussion Hub Home Cockpit Builders
1

I am looking to purchase some very expensive hardware from Skalarki for a home A320 cockpit. I am curious what others experience has been.

I bought a few items for evaluation with X-Plane 12 and the Toliss and Flight Factor A32X products, I absolutely love the Toliss A320 NEO, but my experience with it and the Skalarki hardware has been rather rough, though it may ultimately work out despite the quirks and rough edges. The Flight Factor products were a complete non-starter. By contrast, the FBW seems to work reasonably well. Fenix is a great product (like ToLiss), but the license does not allow use for home cockpitt, so that leaves FBW, the rather expensive ProSim (which I don’t have - at leadt not yet), and someday the FSLabs. So I’m wondering what others experience has been. The Skalarki hardware is top notch, but it can only work as well as the software allows it.

Is MSFS a good match for this hardware?

Follow-up:

I purchased Skalarki hardware for everything now except the overhead panels. It has been great. On MSFS, I am using Pro-Sim for my home cockpit, and it does virtually everything it needs to do, lacking only an EFB (which has been announced is coming). The combination of real, tactile, authentic like hardware (Skalarki), a professional grade avionics suite (Pro-Sim), and MSFS for the visual presentation and flight dynamics has just been amazing.

The Skalarki hardware also works very well with the FSLabs A320 and Jeehell FMGS on P3D. Both are coming to MSFS eventually, so that will mean even more alternatives are available. FSLabs is a great solution, but it supports Skalarki only when it comes to home cockpit building. Not a problem for me, so I can’t wait to see what they bring. For Jeehell FMGS, the schedule is very uncertain, and it could still be years away from appearing on MSFS.

The only issue I would warn others of that might be interested in proceeding down a similar path is that since Pro-Sim does not have a virtual cockpit, it’s more difficult to add hardware components incrementally. For that, FSLabs on P3D was great, because I had the virtual cockpit until I was ready to completely let go of it. Maybe Fenix can fulfill that role on MSFS for now. I don’t know anything about that as Skalarki support on Fenix is very new.

Hope this helps someone.

2

Think you’ve answered your own question there.
Until other Airbus airliner add-ons from other developers arrive in MSFS or Skalarki finds a work around for the Fenix A320, I would be very, very hesitant to buy Skalarki hardware based on what you and other owners have said about compatibility.

Personally, I’d wait until we see how the market develops with new airliners, new Airbus hardware suppliers ramping up and a new flight sim platform in MSFS2024, than rush in and potentially make an expensive mistake. That’s just me.

3

To get around this am thinking of buying their blank panels here

image
image600×780 49.5 KB

SKALARKI electronics Ltd - A320-232 MIP Panel (skalarki-electronics.com)

Lest that way you can mitigate any comptability issues with a320 neo role your own.

4

I beg your pardon???

5

Article 6.4: Fenix Simulations

“This software must not be used in home cockpits”.

Now, they don’t define what it means to have a home cockpit. But it means they’re not eager to help you out if you wanna build one :wink:
You can do a lot with spad/AAO, so all the AP stuff works. Not sure about the FMS and if that has any external interface.

6

Use is limited to primary and secondary flight controls (yoke, rudder pedals, flaps, etc).

7

There is a difference between saying:

And:

This software is not officially supported if you use a full home cockpit.

They can’t tell you how to use something at home. Can they? Sounds pretty ridiculous to me.

If you were charging people to use it (not a home environment) then fair enough. But at home?!

8

Of,course they can. You don’t own the software, you only license it for use per their legally binding terms and conditions.

No hardware vendor will add compatibility and support such a use if it means they might get sued.

9
10

Fair enough! :slight_smile:
PMDG allow it though?

11

PMDG created their 737 software using their own internally created IP, meaning they can decide who does what with it.

Fenix started with purchased IP from ProSim, who set the rules Fenix and home users have to follow.

I guess ProSim feel more strongly about potentially losing customers who could easily get a professional level equivalent of the A320 in their home cockpits or commercial fixed base trainers at a fraction of the cost.