Look, were are totally in the same boat here! And again, I apologise for my rough tone here, that was caused by other threads and topics here (so not your post, which is way “on the reasoable side of things”!).
I too was disappointed. But that’s only because I am looking forward so much for this airplane! There is an issue? Okay. They let us know (admittedly the “for weeks” also was a bit of a surprise to me ;)), and that’s all I - as a consumer - need to know.
And yes, there are (ongoing) issues with updates in general. But what people often “overlook”: there has been made more progress than regress. And existing regress (issues) are tackled and acknowledged - and that’s all that counts (for me).
Sure, everyone as a very specific aspect of FS 2020 that is “very important to them” (some navigation system, properly placed buildings around airports, realistic behaviour of aircraft…).
I say: it is all about personal expectation management. Personally I never expected “fully simulated aircraft” in the base installation (I own the Premium variant, as a side note). Not even “100% truly to real life” behaviour. It is a game, after all. A “simulator” for 200$ (as an “upper boundary”).
But: it is also a “platform”. And I still expect 3rd parties stepping in and provide “study level aircraft” (I understand that the DC-6 is pretty close to this already - but since I don’t own it I cannot tell).
And above all: FS 2020 has set the new bar height for visual representation and scenery (the entire planet!), weather system and wind dynamics (again, I am just a layman myself: but even I do realise that there is a distinct difference in “flight dynamics” when you fly “next to a mountain” - is it realistic? I can’t tell! But it feels like realistic, and that’s all that counts for the majority of gamers, I’d say. And yes, I say “gamers” here!).
Again, I apologise for my tone, which was “build up” by other recent threads and postings here. I did not edit my original post, in order to make my apology “valid”.