Ive got normal fuel usage with apu on 320 v2, tried the 330 and got like 100kg/min on apu, but didnt remember the modification
I got WASM crash when on short final at NFTF with A332, even on a short haul flight. On latest SU6B. PLEASE do NOT use iniBuilds’ Airbuses until they fixed this.
iniBuilds will probably never fix them because those aircraft come as default with the simulator, and they’ve basically been abandoned. In the latest SU5, Asobo said it included a small improvement for the incorrect runway assignments that sometimes affect the A320 V2 and the A330-200/-300. The only aircraft that have been patched are the A350 and the A340. This week, the A220 is being released together with Synaptic, and in a few months, the A380 will follow
1 Like
Because their priority is their paywares like A380 and A350v2… Why Asobo choose ini to build their Airbuses?
I cannot imagine any other developer that would have been capable of doing better. Looking at the current market, the only other developers of high-end Airbus airliners use techniques that would be incompatible with being a default aircraft.
Additionally, no other developer is likely large enough to be able to sign-on to creating so many aircraft (iniBuilds currently has over 30 first party aircraft in the simulator - more than any other developer, including Asobo themselves) at even a remotely acceptable level.
4 Likes
Does the default iniBuilds A330 not have wiper sounds?
It’s not that iniBuilds is bad at developing aircraft—Asobo is even worse. And Working Title only develops Boeing aircraft, as far as I know. I don’t think I’ve seen them make any Airbus.
Then you have Fenix, which I absolutely love. In my opinion, Fenix makes the most complete and highest-quality Airbus aircraft.
Originally, iniBuilds developed the A320 V2 for MSFS 2020, and Microsoft and Asobo decided to let them handle the A320 because it was much more complete than the default Asobo version.
The problem is that the iniBuilds aircraft included with the simulator—the A320, A321, and A330—weren’t sold as standalone products. Since they come bundled with the simulator, they’ve basically been left as they are and have received very few updates.
4 Likes
Not unlike all the rest of 1st party aircraft except a few aviator ed’s
They’ve been updated with every single sim update with maybe one exception.
EDIT: Decided to procrastinate the start of my office week here and quickly skim the release notes for the first five Sim Updates - here’s the final breakdown of which iniBuilds Airbuses have received updates when:
| SU1 | SU2 | SU3 | SU4 | SU5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A400M | X | X | X | X | |
| A310-300 | X | X | X | X | X |
| A320neo | X | X | X | X | |
| A321LR | X | X | X | X | X |
| A330 | X | X | X | X | X |
| Beluga XL | X | X | X | X |
7 Likes
I think it’s important to note that the aircraft included in MSFS2024 are the most advanced default aircraft ever included in any sim. Are they study-level? No. But they sure are better than any default aircraft included in previous titles. I think they’ve gone above & beyond with their default aircraft and I think you’re completely right - that Asobo would not have been able to do this themselves, and there are very few, if any, besides iniBuilds that could have achieved what they did.
8 Likes
Absolutely - and anyone expecting them to be equal to their counterparts which often cost as much as the entire sim itself are just being unrealistic.
3 Likes
I think what people have been wanting is for iniBuilds to be able to offer an enhanced version with all the bells and whistles for an upgrade price. But that is all up to Microsoft.
4 Likes
Should we expect unencrypt the code from Asobo so that community can enhance this mod? Or should we wait for Aerosoft’s A330s?
It would be Microsoft, not Asobo - and no, I wouldn’t expect them to unencrypt anything more than it already is.
Why? If that, we should wait Aerosoft make a better A330, and they release NEO first…
And Asobo or iniBuilds doesn’t want to fix WASM bug, cause ini is focusing their A380 and 350v2 later…
Why shouldn’t we expect it? Because we’ve been given no reason to. Why aren’t they doing it? No clue.
This is false.
Why? My WASM crash bug is NOT fixed even SU6B, and still exists… And I wondering why they use WASM to using default aircraft, and used at carrier mode???
Maybe WASM crash experience is unavoidable for FS2024 users, as per PMDG’s RSR saying goes…
1 Like
Because a bug is not fixed does NOT mean they aren’t working on it, or that they don’t “want to” fix it. And WASM is necessary for bringing complex external code into the sim. Aircraft that don’t compile WASM in the sim either use default systems that are baked into the sim so don’t require it, or compile the WASM externally (I believe this is Fenix’s approach) and that obviously cannot work on default aircraft.
1 Like