If you’d like a straight answer from the iniBuilds team, your best bet is to post your question over on their own support forum. You can register and drop your question here: https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/27909-winwing-mcdu/
1 Like
Surely you will have also pointed this out to the thread creator 
Just for the sake of completeness. I didn’t post my contribution here; it was moved here ;-).
I can’t find any reference to this issue on Winwing’s website. Can someone share the link?
It’s not a Winwing issue. Inibuilds does not expose FMS display data for Winwing’s SimAppPro or Spad.Next or any external programs to use, at least for the A350 and A300 fleet. The A350 might be too graphical to display on WW’s current hardware lineup, but the A300 is old-school text and should be possible. I can’t speak for their other planes, as I only have those two.
Fenix’s Airbus fleet, PMDG’s Boeing fleet, and TFDi’s MD11 all expose their data so that Winwing can display it.
(Aside: I’ve pinged Just Flight to see if they can expose their FMC data as well for their Avro RJ and 146 Professional.)
2 Likes
This table was there long time ago and nothing has changed since then. The ball lies in iniBuilds’ court (as they themselves acknowledge). Winwing approached them to get the above mentiones API, and they don’t refuse to implement it, it’s a matter of time, the question is how long. And I think that it is Microsoft which sets priorities regarding default content (and therefore that’s why I opened this thread).
3 Likes
Because both EFIS and FCU by WW work well with A320neo V2, I imagine they have what they need to enable MCDU as well.
the fcu needs way less data than the mcdu and the needed data for the mcdu is apparently not exposed in the current iteration of the inibuilds default aibus planes.
1 Like
Currently you can map every input/output from the FCU and EFIS easily. With the MCDU you can map the inputs too (I did it the same day I received the unit). The problem comes with the output, because as @dSAFDancer said it is not exposed. If WW had used a video input for the display, you could simply popout the screen and display it in the MDCU (as, for example the GNS units do). But that’s not the case, so they have to be able to read what it is showing in the screen in accesible vars… and that’s what we would like iniBuild’s to provide.
Once they do so, you could even uninstall SimAppPro and use Mobiflight, or AAOs, SpadNext…
Sadly it does not look like winwing will be adding support shortly, so we can only hope this wish gets enough votes so it gets done.
If we don’t keep reminding them in the linked thread below, they might even start thinking we forgot about the lack of compatibility between Inibuilds aircraft - which we paid for - and Winwing MCDU 
3 Likes
Yep, in that thread they seemed more willing to provide compatibility…
. IniBuilds only looks out for iniBuilds and what is easier for them. They are notoriously bad when it comes to supporting 3rd party peripherals. The problem is they don’t broadcast the data for something like winwing to work. They have lied in the past about bringing support for their own products and never followed through. They made an announcement in their discord a year ago about partnering with aviaworx to allow for a web MCDU for the A300. They then never provided the API for aviaworx to actually develop the product. My best guess if they won’t do it for their own 1st party products they aren’t bringing it to their products unless MS forks over some $.
1 Like
Thanks for the information about iniBuilds - I’ve never really looked into the topic in depth before. I really hope iniBuilds reconsiders their stance if they want to stay in good standing with the MSFS community, because I doubt they want to end up being talked about like the infamous Captain S*am.
Thankfully, we’ve got some fantastic free aircraft like the A320 and A380 from FBW (great job, guys!)
1 Like
So I’ve just been down that road…purchased the MCDU,WinWing does NOT make the compatibility list readily available but rather you have to dig for it. I’m using msfs2024 and the FBW A320 stable which is the only free version supported by winwing, is NOT flyable in 2024 due to bugs. So you are left to purchase the Fenix. I was not happy about that because I’m fine with the Inibuilds planes. According to Winwing, support for Inibuilds will be available down the line…buyers be ware.
Specifically, the issues with the stable version FBW A320 in msfs2024 is that you can’t start the engines from cold and dark and even if you start from the runway, sometimes they go off. This affecting 2024 only. If anyone has found a workaround, I would love to know. I really don’t want to buy the Fenix because I don’t believe I need it.
FBW does not provide support yet (but they say they will) to MSFS2024. However, I’ve been flying for months their A320 (Developer version) without problems. And there are youtuber evidences that the A380 (again, Developer) can also be flown even in long haul.
I found the compatibility list on the product page without any problem.
https://eu.winwingsim.com/view/goods-details.html?id=945
That’s not true - I’m currently testing developer version of the FBW A320 and it’s working without any issues.
I’m also testing SU3 with dev. version of the FBW A32NX and I haven’t encountered any major issues. The A32NX is working just as well as it did in MSFS 2020.
Nope 
1 Join SU3 beta.
2 Install FBW A32NX Dev.
3 Launch MSFS 2024_SU_3_Beta
4 Select A320 by FBW
5 Run simbridge and Simapp pro
6 Fly safe
Or just fly in SU2 with the developer version of the FBW A320.
I feel the same - I don’t need the Fenix either and definitely won’t be buying it in the future. The FBW team is doing an excellent job with their A320/A380.
As I mentioned above, developer version is working without any issues with the Winwing MCDU in MSFS 2024 SU3.
Thank you. Yes, I know the dev version works ok with 2024 but I tried and it doesn’t support the MCDU. I’m on SU2 and will not be installing SU3 because it’s beta and if run into other issues with it, I can’t go back. But I’ll try the dev version again with the MCDU. I doubt that it has to do with SU2/SU3