DeeJay

Meh, it's there now in my A340, too 🫣 I'll have to check if there are circumstances where that problem crops up or if it has been solved with v1.0.2

Hey! I've noticed there's no "parking brake" message on the ECAM page as I know it from the A320. Is that real? Or is this a bug? I was a bit surprised that there was no topic about this so far. Regards, Dominik

I slowly get the feeling that the Honeycomb throttles have problems with ALL aircraft and there's always anything that doesn't work as it should. For example: My HC Bravo throttle only works properly in most aircraft when the "throttle 0-100%" axis is selected. Most addon designers tell you exactly NOT to do that. The "normal" throttle axis within the MSFS menu either gives me half of the throttle range only (physical 0% starts at 50% in the sim, lower isn't possible), in the sim the throttles only start moving when the physical throttles are at 50% or higher (so: 50% physical for 100% in the sim). FSUIPC either either gives me the same results or full range, but inverted (the FSUIPC setting where you cannot set inverted). The only way for some aircraft (including the A340) for me is to set "throttle 0-100%" in the MSFS menu and then adjust in the individual calibrating system in the addon aircraft, if available. Never had such problems with earlier throttles.

Me too. And the "Restore RAT" function of the EFB doesn't work in that case. You can still continue flying. But from the outside, you seem to be flying a prop^^ Plus the EICAS message "RAM min speed 140 kts" continues to appear.

I got the feeling that flying characteristics at landings have improved with the new version. Is it only an impression, because the sounds now support the double main gear touchdown a bit better? Or has something really been changed? BTW: I've seen a video of a young new A340 first officer being trained by an experienced captain. The captain told him after landing: "That was a good one. You could also have engaged the thrust reversers directly after the first contact of the main wheels." And the FO answered: "Well, then the second touchdown is a little harder. That is why I've waited for the full main landing gear to touchdown." So, it can definitely be activated before the nose wheel touch the ground and that is seen pretty often. It's not an MD-80 where the reverse mechanism could be smashed by the runway surface by touching the runway on high pitch angles on the ground with those tail mounted engines.

Partially... it's highly subjective wheather you like Michael Jacksons' voice, John Robinsons' drum sound,... or the style of their music. But which chords and how many BPM are used in a certain song of them, and that they are able to perform well, is pretty much objective and can be clearly analyzed, independant from the quality of the sound speaker. Now, for the flight sim: the pitches and intervals between certain sound files that have been recorded from a real plane, correspond to the chords in a song in this comparison, for example, not to the general preferences of the sound as a whole construct.

Great, I've heard in v1.0.2 the engine sounds have been reworked. The spool and the buzzsaw sound a lot better and more realistic now in contrast to each other. I think the pitch of both is slightly too high (about a great second, for neards 😉 ), but a big effort though and the interval between them is rather correct now, as well as the volumes. I think you're the first sound developer that has understood and corrected this problem (pretty much), after not matching it in the first place. Thanks a lot for that!! In the past, I only saw developers who didn't understand the problem at all and tried to "talk it away" with cheesy arguments (Aerosoft, Carenado,...).

Hard to make a triple landing if you can't feel neither hear the double touchdown of the main wheels in the inibuilds A340. They promised to improve that (no idea why it hasn't been modelled from the beginning like their A330 perfectly does), but so far, it still just makes "boom" a single time when landing the mains.

Made 3 long haul flights without a problem. Now on the 4th flight, I get exactly this freeze on the way back from Dehli to Frankfurt shortly before arrival. Very frustrating! I only know that from the ATR before.

No, RW pilots such as "A330 driver" (youtube) have confirmed that these clunks are just A320 specific. They are not audible in the A330/A340 cockpit. Other characteristic "electric startup" sounds don't exist in the widebody Airbuses either.

OK, but the pitch difference may be the most significant one, I would say. Thanks a lot in advance for working on it. And no, I don't agree with the sounds being "just" bad. I think with some tweaks at the right places they could be really good.

OK, thanks a lot for the quick reaction and for caring so much. Sorry, I discribed it a little more exactly in another thread. But if we have the chance to talk to you as the sound designer, I try to discribe the problem even very exactly by video. I'm rather sure it is NOT a problem of the recordings, but of how the numbers in the configuration file handle them. So, I catched a short video of the spool up of the A340 in my simulator with some comments at the times when problems show up: - When increasing thrust from idle, the idle sound increases in pitch and decreases in volume, until it slowly disapears with increasing power %, which is both correct. - At the same time, the "whine" sound comes in, becomes a little louder and increases in pitch, which is also correct. BUT: The pitch increase is way too small! To be precise, from the first apprarence just above idle to full power, it increases by just a fourth (to speak in music intervals). In reality, it increases by about a great sixth to a small seventh, which is a lot more. - Shortly before full power (or even any FLX power), the buzzsaw comes in - also correct. The buzzsaw sound itself is very correct concerning the pitch and general sound. BUT: The fact that the whine sound, which is still present at full power, is way too low on pitch, gives the wrong intervall between the idle sound and the buzzsaw at full or FLX power. And that is what makes people think the whole buzzsaw would sound unrealistic. But it's just the "whine part", and maybe its volume. BTW, the pitches/tones do not depend on the microphone, nor on the position of the microphone, but just on the amount of power. A recoding of a tone pitch on a cheap cellphone mic will have the same tones than a high end studio mic, but just wouldn't sound as nice. And the difference between a lower FLX power and full power isn't that significant concerning the pitch. Of course you can tell the difference with some experience, but the interval between the whine and the buzzsaw should be correct (and nearly the same) in both cases. Just the absolute pitches of each own of them is a little different. Furthermore, I find the whine sound just too low on volume. No matter which video, it's always a little more penetrant in comparison to the idle sound than in the current state of the inibuilds A340. Sorry for the excessive "music language". Music is a big part of my job. That's why I'm so focussed on the sounds. But let's be honest: Isn't an A340 sound a peace of music for many of us aviation enthusiasts?! 😉 In P3d times, there was a sound configuration called sound.cfg, which coordinated the single sound files (*.wav). There, besides the "vparams" which controlled the volumes of the original sound file at different power settings, we could find... ..."rparams=0.20, 1.0, 0.50, 2.0" (example) => which translates like: "At 0.2 (= 20%) power, the corresponing *.wav is played at 1.0 (= 100%) of its original pitch; and at 0.5 (= 50%) power, the same file is played at 1.5 (= 150%) of its pitch. In between the sound engine of FS/P3d slided the pitch accordingly. It just created a linear function of the pitch of the original file by defining 2 "power points" and assigning a 2 "pitch points" to them. As simple as that. And that was the main parameter that controlled the realism of the engine sound recordings - particually important for the spool sound. By just alterating the "rparams" (trial and error), I could solve a lot of "pitch problems" in some aircraft without any special audio app, whenever 2 files didn't have a good transition into each other, even in professional aircraft. The Piper 34 Seneca II from Carenado comes to mind. I think the A340 in the current state has got the same problem, assuming that there is at least one sound file for the "idle" sound, one for "spool" sound, and one for the "buzzsaw" sound: The percentage of the spool/whine sound has to be increased at the "upper" point, until it matches the proper interval at full power between the (still present) whine sound and buzzsaw sound. So much for the music theory 😛 However, I've got no idea, if these parameters and this configuratoion file still exist in MSFS. And even if it does, it's certainly encrypted, at least if we buy something from the MSFS store like this A340. I hope I could point out the obvious problem IMO a little more exact. No matter if the engines are modelled completely correct or don't: If the engine simulation remains what it is, it's "just" a matter of adjusting the pitch problem to make it sound more realistic. I think that is what flight simmers care about a lot more, as we are not CFM engeneers 😉 11:25 I'm not adressing the problem yet, that the sound in the cabin is currently the same in front of the engine as far behind the engine, because for me, the cockpit sound at this time is the most important thing for me personally. Best regards, Dominik

Absolutely! I'm curious why exactly for the newest airplane, the sounds are so underwhelming. The ones in the A350 are much better and even those in the A300. If you only take the cockpit sounds, even the engine sounds in the A330 sound a lot more credible "A330-like" from the cockpit.

First, congratiulations for a really good aircraft. I've just flown from FRA to BOS without a showstopper like a CTD or similar. Flew very nicely and smooth on FPS. But my far the biggest (and so far my only) thing I'm really disappointed of, are the sounds: 1) Engine sounds: As mentioned above, it just doesn't sound like an A340 from the inside. It's not about volume. I know you don't hear the engines too loud from the cockpit. But it's about the typical high pitch whine that is completely missing, and the typical roaring sound of the A340, that just sounds different. The idle sounds are fit in a little better, but still sounds quite strange when spooling up. In this matter, I find even the sounds of the free A330 matched a lot better. 2) Touchdown sound: Your A330 has been the first aircraft ever, where you could really feel the famous "double" touchdown of the main wheels of the A330/340 series: First, a light rattle when the aft main wheels touch down, and then a firm bump sound and a more intensive rattle when the front wheels of the main gear touch. I loved that so much in the A330, as it added so much immersion. Could you pleeeeease add this feature for the A340, too, especially as the knowledge of how to do that, seems to be there. That would add so much immersion while landing. Because at the moment, there is just one single "Boom" when landing the A340. Thanks.

Thanks a lot! I quickly tested my most important aicraft, among them your A300, 330, 350 and some other models and they finally seem to work fine now again 🙂 (even if switching back versions brings its own problems with the general controls). However, I didn't do a full flight so far.