All,
I’m aware these are basically skins for the default A320neo but have LVFR done anything to reflect real-world performance differences, such as the reduced thrust offered by the older CFM and IAE engines, or the characteristics of the shorter (319) and longer (321) fuselages?
Thanks.
LVFR is not a “study level ” plane dev. Those are basically asobo type planes. If u are looking for what u asked, stick with pmdg, Fenix (that’s so far what we have for payware study level developers ). Tfdi is coming out with md-11 end of year possibly, bluebird with 757/767 next year . As far as an A320neo or A321ceo/Neo …you’d have to wait to see if fenix makes it or fslabs brings over their airbus family (in which fslabs did mention they are ). Anytime u see an announcement of some dev whipping out a study level plane within 6months is bogus . It’s literally taking these devs to make they 2-3 yrs out .
Thanks. I have the PMDG 737. I’m aware LVFR’s 32X aren’t study level but I’m on Xbox and there’s no ceo alternative. However if they’ve done anything at all to differentiate them from the stock 320 then I’m interested due to the current discount. The exterior model looks nice and I think there’s a sound pack included - I just want a half-decent A320ceo in my sim.
Your gonna have to wait either for fslabs or aerosoft. Don’t think fenix will go xbox because of the outside apps it uses to run fenix . Their is no payware study level a321 a319ceo for pc . I don’t use the fbw A320neo because its not study level like fenix . Gotta just wait till the devs release the upcoming. Rather have the devs take longer and planes be done right than a bunch of aircraft released and done 1/2 right but charging a fortune . Take xplane for example
I am not an aeronautical engineer so I cannot comment on the technical aspects. I’ve flown each of the LVFR models (but not each variant) and they all seem to perform differently. The A318 IRL is the largest airliner certified for steep approaches into airports such as London City. The first thing I tried with the A318 was to fly an approach into London City. The A318 performed exceptionally well. Also, the A319 CJ-CFM is supplied with long range tanks. The additional weight makes a difference in takeoff performance. The improvements made by LVFR go beyond different skins. The EFB is an excellent, helpful tool not in the stock A320neo. Also, for me, the different skins make a difference. On the older variants, the cockpit looks worn from years of use. It is not “factory fresh”. Even though this is very subjective, I feel like I am flying an older aircraft.
I don’t like “study-level” aircraft because once I learn most everything about the aircraft, I’ll move on to something else and lose the study-level knowledge that I can only retain if I only fly that one aircraft all the time. I’ve found the LVFR aircraft to be an excellent compromise between “study-level” and stock aircraft. Just my opinion.
Whilst not the level of fidelity of the PMDG and Fenix, LVFR is bringing us Xbox’ers a more functional 320 family than the stock Neo. Tomorrows update(if released) will have Simbrief/Navigraph, VNAV plus some other things.
Thank you, all. An example of what I’m concerned about: the 321 is of course considerably longer than the 320 — if I just about tailstrike the LVFR 321, will it not initially register due to the sim ‘thinking’ I’m flying the stock 320?
Hi All - I’ve only flown the A318, into EGLC as a test for the steep approach ability. It seems the T/D function is only available via the EFB on the descent calculation page, so you have to use VPA of -3.o degrees to maintain proper glide down. Is it the same with all of LVFR’s airbus jets? Of course, 5.5 degrees is the necessary final approach angle for that airport. Other than the glaring absence of automatic T/D and descent profile, it’s a pretty cool jet!