Yes, you don’t need original manufacturer documentation. Usually, technical documentation that an airline uses for maintenance and flight operations is enough to reverse engineer most of the systems. To my knowledge Fenix didn’t get the original Airbus docs but the ones from an specific airline. Could be wrong about this though
No. That would be illegal and impossible to go to market without painful legal repercussions.
Fenix website states:
“The future of high-fidelity airliner simulations, officially licensed by Airbus.” (and only for private non-commercial use. It can not even be used on home cockpits. And of course not in commercial settings.)
The license is simply because they wanna use the “Airbus” name. That doesn’t necessarily mean they get all the technical information about the aircraft. The home cockpit restriction is because they license it from prosim, which is an expensive, commercial simulation of the A320 systems. They obviously don’t want to give away their licensees for cheap, hence the restriction to make it usually only for home entertainment.
1 Like
Exactly, and maybe also take a look at DCS. I am pretty sure that most countries do not let the manufacturers hand out documents for any of their military stuff to foreign and possibly adversary countries. And still heatblur and the like manage to create pretty detailed fighter jets from many different countries.
The F14 A and B has been unclassified for years, its documentation is publicly available, afaik even the Phoenix missile and the 9L is out there. And so are the F4 versions they are about to release. Large parts of the F18C and F16C are unclassified, the versions of the Sparrow that we have are pretty well known.
What‘s mostly guesswork is the Amraam and the 9X and pretty much everything on the russian and chinese side as well as anti radiatiom and jamming technology. A huge amount is just made up and nobody cares, most people don‘t know why they burn anyway.
Same in the civil sim. Much can be done fairely well for the sake of PC simulation. It doesn‘t really matter how exactly an A350 fly by wire system is coded as long as it‘s plausible in the PC sim. We don‘t have to know how exactly a cockpit door operates and we certainly shouldn‘t be told. There is a LOT we as home pilots don‘t care about and don‘t need to know about as it doesn‘t affect us at all. There is a lot we can take quite easy. Precision and realism in the simulation is always good but many things are just not important at all.
So has it been long enough since the Hartmann ATR that you can restart your actual high fidelity one now? Would love this plane still from blackbird, won’t touch the MS version
2 Likes
LOL. Is the Asobo version really that bad? I thought a lot of stuff was fixed over time.
Schrödinger has joined the conversation.
I love this place.
1 Like
Mine is also collecting dust. The real aircraft is one of my favorite aircraft, but the Asobo version just doesn’t do it for me.
1 Like
It‘s an okay addon for the masses, at 20$ it‘s fine I guess. But if we compare it to the Milviz Kingair and look at what now-Blackbird CAN do with all the possibilities they have after all the sim updates I think it‘s not what the P3D-Milviz-customer wants. As one of the very few aircraft I still fly the Kingair in P3D. The system fidelity is just beyond anything that Asobo ATR could ever provide, no matter how many updates it gets. I and many others would highly appreciate a Blackbird version but I get it‘s up to Colin and his team to decide if it‘s worth it. I don‘t have high hopes for MSFS 2024 to be a technically better and more openminded sim but IF it is I really hope for Colin to get back to the ATR/80R or whatever.
2 Likes