David Cherrie

Sharing files is software piracy… you can’t recover it unless you purposely saved it yourself. Going to have to wait till a new update.

iniBuilds really needs to have the ability to rollback versions or pull their v1.0.8. I'm not going to update their aircraft anymore without taking a save of a working build.

You just have to look at the Cross the Pond data and the amount of people who started their flights in the A359/A35K did not complete their flights.

Have put in the suggestion being able to rollback updates since the rollout of 1.0.8 has created a huge hole in the stability of the aircraft. A lot of people reporting that they aren't getting CTD in SU2 beta which leads me to believe they have developed 1.0.8 using SU2 beta SDK which is not backwards compatible with the current live version of MFS.

A lot more than 260 started but never reached their destinations. Looking at the statistics from VATSIM is indicating a huge widespread problem with A350. Hundreds of connections flying the A359/A35K quickly dropped connection in the first two hours then eventually being overtaken by the B77W.

Very annoying when on VATSIM changing STAR at controllers request and then having absolutely no navigation...

Would be nice if they provided in the update release notifications that being on SU1 BETA for MFS2024 is required in the iniManager instead of having users to search the forums as to why the aircraft freezes the sim.

Why isn't the phrase "SU1 BETA for MFS2024 Required" not on the iniManager or product description page but only found on the forum. Wasted 2 hours of my life troubleshooting why 2024 no longer worked and cleared my WASM and followed what the iniManager said. Users would benefit much clearer messaging regarding important issues like this and your Discord and forums wouldn't be so flooded.

Are you getting the pink missing texture in 2024 on the wing?

Because iniBuild's liveries that are on the iniManager are not necessarily done by iniBuilds staff nor have approval from Asobo or the airlines they are representing.

I'm a professional modeler and I have spent the past 15 years re-creating 3D models and environments to represent the real world so I have as much of an eye to detail as anyone you would come across. You have posted photos of a screen (not screenshots) with different camera positions with different focal lengths with no other detail at all. I see differences between the Fenix A320ceo and the iniBuilds A320neo because they have different engines and different pylons because they are 2 different aircraft. If you can't be in any way constructive (and after reading your previous thread which also has no detail at all), how are developers or anyone who doesn't have telepathic powers supposed to address the issue? Take screenshots of your computer, and use red circles to point out and list the inconsistencies. You are the one coming to the forums in a rude manor with no explanation other than you think it is wrong and is in no way productive for anyone.

No idea what you are talking about but since you didn't give any detail at all but pictures of two different models of planes. If you have the correct specifications, what are they? Unless there are obvious differences, you can't go off of photos or screenshots, you need to compare the actual 3D models and specifications. For example the Asobo 747-8 is actually 1.8m shorter than the actual plane. You won't see that in photos and screenshots, only way you can see it is comparing the 3D model to the specifications.

I believe this is in the merge GLTF model provided for liveries. Will the fix mean that all liveries need to be updated? Or is this from the base product where an animation is not referenced?

Apparently to do with AIRAC update has bricked the aircraft. iniBuilds have said they are sending a hotfix to Asobo.

Is the paintkit no longer available...?