AnkH

Same here, with my settings that aim for 36 baseline FPS with frame generation on to get 72FPS, I have no issues to maintain those 72FPS with the PMDG 777, while with the Ini A350, I struggle to get above 70FPS on many airports. Put it on a default airport with clear skies and no AI traffic, then yes, the performance is fine. Put it on a big addon airport with AI traffic, and the 350 shows considerably 20FPS less than the PMDG 777 when running unlimited FPS. And yes, I am already using the low res textures and the performance mode. It is a ressource hog...

Ok, then I am pretty sure it is because of this. The plane "thinks" that it should run at 1x because it was not changed via EFB. You find it in the same EFB page where you set max compression to 4x, if I am not mistaken, it is just one or two lines above and you can set it on "auto". The plane then increased the sim rate (if possible) to the amount you specified is max and automatically reduces it accordingly (as described above).

Ok, with this, you should be perfectly fine to run 4x, at least over the ocean for example. Do you use any simrate tool or do you have assigend a key on the command to increase or decrease sim rate? And even more basic: do you use the automatic sim rate option in the EFB or do you try to increase sim rate manually? I always only use the EFB option in the A350. Only using manual sim rate increase in planes not supporting automatic increase...

If the plane "detects" something that renders running at more than 1x impossible, e.g. too low FPS, steep turns, unable to hold AP paths etc., it automatically reduces the sim rate again to 1x (or whatever is suitable). Mine works flawlessly at 4x, sometimes it reduces it to 2x, but as soon as it is again just straight ahead flight, it switches back to 4x. My bet: your rig is not powerful enough to sustain 4x. What hardware do you use?

I use them, see no difference in the VC on my 4K screen. Also see no relevant gain in VRAM, so I could basically again switch to the regular resolution, but then, if I dont see any difference, why care. The performance of this bird is anyway abysimal compared to other addon planes, so...

Yeah, but at least we can print now...

Almost a month later, nothing...

But you have a printer now... /sarcasm off

The same answer you gave months ago already, so why not be honest and state that it is so low on the priority list it might never get fixed? Inbetween, PMDG released another plane with perfectly working three axle main gear bogie. So it CAN be done right for sure...

Just that you are aware of: MSFS2024 has a bug (potentially fixed with SU3, who knows) that prevents the ingame time from being accelerated accordingly, so even if you use 4x or 8x in your A350, ingame time will still only progress with 1x. Which results in annoying time mismatches on destination. But there is a small tool on flightsim.to that fixes this, drawback: another tool that needs to run alongside the sim...

Same here, shadows only look good using ray traced shadows. Again a bummer other addons do not show...

Could you try this once: before doing anything with GSX (except maybe a reposition), fire up the electric systems of the plane and ask for boarding using the default ATC command. Do the jetways then move? Because I have exactly this issue with GSX moving jetways (or rather not moving them) on the new YSSY update from FlyTampa and RKSI from PacSim. No solution so far...

Still nothing?

I just did as I have exactly the same issue...

Of course not. GSX will use the data from the plane and airport stop positions can be defined only on the basis of the info from the plane.

Thanks Eddie, I guess this is the same issue:

This is not a Inibuilds A350 bug, but a general MSFS2024 bug (see: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/global-time-not-progressing-at-the-increased-sim-rate/669206) With this little tool, you can workaround this issue: https://flightsim.to/file/86894/sim-time-rate-adjuster-for-msfs-2024 Just another example of how bad the state of MSFS2024 was on release, it is supposedly fixed in SU3... while not even SU2 is released yet...

Hi there, strange observations when using the A350 with GSX and addon airports. It happens again and again that when I use the option "reposition" aircraft, the aircraft is moved way to much to the front (in direction terminal). Sometimes. Sometimes it does not. And it gets placed initially pretty ok. What I think is linked to this strange bug/issue is the fact that when using FSHUD, FSHUD always thinks that the A350 is not positioned correctly at the gate and it also then needs to be moved by FSHUD but that results in chaos as well. Asking this specific problem, someone on the FSHUD discord channel told me that the position of the A350 is bugged. Is this a known issue? What could be the problem?

The "problem" is that one of yours wrote in the discord channel that it was a bug unintentionally slipped into the release version because it was not like this in internal testing. That is why the "easy" comes from. Obviously, this was not the whole truth then, cant be that complicated to get something working again when it was already working prior release. But hey, in the end it is just the landing gear, no? 😉

You know flightsim.to, right? There you go: https://flightsim.to/file/89610/vietnam-airlines-vn-a892-inibuilds-a350-900

Same here, on approach of LEPA, correct numbers dialed in and systems show both ILS courses and glideslope. But it never captured, had to hand fly the landing.

Do you pull the VHF1 knob that it is white and the button above it pressed that it is green?

Very strange observation in my case: because I was aware that it is not working, I was manually tuning all the time. Until I went away from the PC and thought it might be wise to select both "auto tune frequency" and "auto respond" in BATC. And bam, all of the sudden, frequency changed worked automatically. It even continued to work after I again disabled "auto respond". Strange, no? No time to verify if it is still the same as I rarely have time for simming those days...

Had the same issue until I found that it somehow defaults not to the left, not to the right, but to the "middle" mouse "button" (which is actually a wheel in my case, but clickable). Took me some time to figure out...

Are you guys in the SU2 beta? It is a known issue in the beta...