For me personally, something that really “ruined” this new aircraft for me is the fact we only have the CFM Leap engines to fly. While these are some nice engines, I was really hoping I’d get a chance to fly an A320neo with the PW engines. I made a list of some routes I was planning to do with this new jet, and maybe 90% of that list were all operators who use PW engines on their neos.
To cut straight to the chase, please consider developing the -271, Pratt and Whitney engine variant, of the A320neo. It really sucks having to limit the realism/flights you can do because the other engine variant isn’t available for us to use. It’s time like these that honestly make me wish Airbus went with only one engine option for the 320neo. I can be very certain the entire community, as a whole, would love to see Pratt’s on this new and beautiful looking A320neo.
1 Like
Absolutely agreed. Airlines such as:
-Spirit
-Lufthansa
-Volaris
-Vueling
-LATAM
-Wizz
-Indigo
-Cebu Pacific
And countless others also use this engine option. Frankly, other than differed modelling in some areas such as the glareshield, I would almost still see it fitting to stay with Flybywire’s product until a PW variant is released. I hope Asobo and Ini take this into consideration.
Regardless, the efforts on this aircraft thus far are still greatly appreciated.
4 Likes
The original A320neo has LEAP, was hoping we’d get PW here. Maybe they have data on that and not the GTF because it’s a beast of an engine, gear ratios and all.
1 Like
Thought to bring this one up as on the last developer stream Jörg told he’ll talk with iniBuilds about that. Might not be something done within the next weeks but sounded like worth considering to add the other engine option down the line 
Besides engines another thing would honestly be nice to have: the new light design option on recent Neos which combinates runway turnoff, taxi and landing lights into a single wing root housing with LEDs:
2 Likes
Next to the P&W engine options it would also be nice if they added WiFi antennas, new landing lights, and maybe even the newer radio panels 
2 Likes
Sorry if it’s a dumb question, but why is the engine option such a big deal in such a highly automated aircraft. I wouldn’t expect them to behave differently and only look remotely different
For me it is immersion, flying Austrian where it says CFM Leap in the MCDU is odd 
But technically I assume there is also a difference as the PW is a geared Turbofan
It would be nice to have all these new features , engines , lights , etc. however I doubt they will be able to do more than that with a default plane , they have limits from Microsoft I think , a standard to meet , however you never know
Oh ok. Well I guess as a GA flyer I’m not that much into the details there. Honestly I don’t care if my Stearman has a Wright or P&W radial. However I’m not reminded of it in the cockpit either, so I can definitely see your point.
On the other hand I think it’s a lot to ask from a free addon to represent all the variations available especially if they don’t alter the plane significantly. The next might complain that the seating arrangement or door configuration is wrong for a specific airline. 
It is not really a demand it is more of putting it to Microsofts Attention so letting them decide how they want to handle it. And that worked quite well as Jorg said in the Developers Livestream that they will look into it after the initial release and see if there is a demand for it
I agree with this.
Recently I saw in inibuilds discord as another user mentioned that Asobo is considering it and will analyze it if they see interest on it.
It sure would be a very nice addition to the sim.
There’s a few FM differences and system differences between PW & LEAP engines. It’s more for the realism of flying carriers with generally the right configs. Doesn’t feel right, in my personal example, to fly a Cebu Pacific aircraft with LEAPS… it just doesn’t look right haha.
