dectenor1

You are not doing anything wrong, the loadsheet page is a mess. When you board with GSX all the values are wrong that it shows, but somehow it does get the ZFW correct according to simbrief.

I am sorry to say that I am now losing any hope of this aircraft living up to how it was marketed and how it was priced. We are many months after release, and have had countless updates but there are still so so many basic issues, whilst it seems the team have moved onto new products, which will no doubt have the same bugs as this one. The things I mention here are by no means exhaustive, but rather simple things that can be noticed by anyone on any flight, without any delving into deep systems behaviour. There is still a discrepancy between the number of passengers boarded by GSX and the number showing on the Loadsheet in the OIS. GSX shows the correct number according to Simbrief having boarded, the Loadsheet always shows a few fewer than this. Entered Fuel values for things such as TAXI RTE RSV ALTN and FINAL on the FUEL&LOAD INIT Page are still removed if the value for ZFW, ZFWCG and BLOCK are changed on the same page. Then we come to how the aircraft manages the vertical navigation side of things, on things such as the F-PLN page and the ND, which is still broken. Here you can see, according to the F-PLN page, the aircraft is predicting it will be at ZH580, which is O.5NM ahead at 110ft, even though it is already at 4170ft.... It also says it will reach that waypoint in 1hr 59 mins....? 1hr 59 mins to travel 0.5NM.... Then suddenly it goes back in time for the next waypoints?? Come on. Here the F-PLN page shows being at INPIP at FL260 and a magenta asterisk showing it will make the constraint. Yet on the ND it shows an orange circle around the waypoint showing it will not meet this constraint. It is not possible to both meet it and miss it. Where is the level off arrow indicating where the aircraft will reach FL260? It is both a constraint and FCU selected so it should be there... What is going on with the time predictions? How can have passed a waypoint behind, HALIF, at 16:16, and then be predicting to be at APPLE at 16:02, when the current time is 16:21???? Are we going back in time? Have I found a black hole? The Level-Off arrow has now appeared, but clearly it is in the completely wrong place, if, as according to the F-PLN, the aircraft will be at INPIP at FL260, why is the Level-Off arrow on the ND showing the aircraft reaching FL260 c.40NM beyond INPIP??? About 1000ft further into the descent. Where has the Level-Off arrow gone on the ND? Where have the circles around the constraints gone on the ND? The aircraft is now targeting a SPD in descent, 325KTS, why is this the FCU and FMA still saying MACH?? Now we have descended through FL270 it changed to SPD, but it's incorrect behaviour. If the aircraft is targeting a SPD, SPD is displayed, if a MACH, MACH is displayed, it is not based on passing some Flight Level. Again mismatch between F-PLN Page and ND. We are going to meet the constraint INPIP (though again incorrect behaviour here, the aircraft tries to level off at these constraints, adding thrust to do so, instead of just passing the waypoint at the constraint altitude still in descent, thus it adds thrust and then gets too high on the path and then needs to dive to meet the next constraint,) so why the orange circle on the ND? Then again at INREV, F-PLN page shows FL200 there and magenta, so why ND orange circle? The Level-Off arrow (when it is even shown) still does not obey the correct behaviour in the three modes of descent. Managed Descent - where it should show the point the aircraft will reach either a constraint or the FCU selected altitude on the route based on predictions from the F-PLN page, irrespective of current speed or vertical speed. Open Descent - where it should show the point the aircraft will reach FCU selected altitude based solely on current speed and current V/S. V/S Descent - where it should show the point at which the aircraft will reach the FCU selected altitude based on selected V/S and current speed rather an current V/S. Then there are lots of other bugs, this is by no means exhaustive, but just basic, basic things that should be correct. For example: Selecting AUTO for XDDR, puts TCAS straight into TA/RA. The HUD is broken, the aircraft flies nowhere near where the flight path vector indicates. LDG INHIBIT MEMO is still on when you arrive at the gate after taxiing. This is all really, really basic stuff that an aircraft that is supposedly a premium product (it certainly has a premium price..) and that supposedly has unparalleled realism, should be able to do. Even freeware aircraft can do this kind of basic stuff. I make no mention of the performance which is very bad in 2024 compared to other similar aircraft, or the flight model which still leaves a lot to be desired, for example the aircraft takes off like a helicopter. These things are by no means exhaustive, but rather just examples of very fundamental and rudimentary systems issues that should not be broken. They should have been correct on the very first release, never mind still broken months and months after. I am sorry for the negative tone of this, and I do appreciate the work of the developers, but it is just so disappointing to see the aircraft in such a poor state so long after the release. When will this basic stuff be finally fixed? Best.

Yeah the aircraft takes off like an helicopter...

Yep, still an issue with v.1.1.4 I don't know why things are released like this that are clearly completely broken. The HUD as is is just a total gimmick.

VSD is showing terrain over 40000 ft flying across the UK, but nothing on the terrain radar.. on PNF VSD and terrain radar there is nothing at all. Bit of a mess really. Best

I have made various reports on issues relating to VNAV stuff, F-PLN page predictions and how these are displayed, managed speeds, and again how these are displayed, constraint behaviour etc., etc. Please feel free to reach out for any info that may help in this regard. VNAV related things need a LOT of work currently! Best

Just to clarify pretty much all of these bugs are still present with v1.1.2. And I think I forgot to mention the CAB V/S is constantly fluctuating between 0 and 50 FT/MIN during cruise.

Great thanks @Eddie As always, if you want/need any further info, examples to demonstrate, info from the FCOM, etc., just let me know. Best

Thanks, I deleted the WASM folders before updating as I usually do, but thanks anyway.

Yeah beyond that, was still appearing and disappearing as I reached the gate, which was well after 1 minute.

The sounds when using reversers on landing roll need some work. The mixing is pretty bad. It is like all other sounds are completely killed and you then get this muffled reversers sound. Just needs a remix really, with more ambient stuff at that point. If the team thinks the reversers completely dominate the soundscape at this point, then fine. But then the reversers need to be much louder, with the other sounds still in the background but just the reversers are so loud that you can't hear anything else. At the moment it kinda feels like 'oh we think you should only be able to hear the reversers at this moment, so let's just kill all other sounds and so you can hear the reversers, but let's not make the the reversers that loud themselves'. No, if you can only hear the reversers then they need to be louder than anything else, not just remove the other sounds. Hope that makes sense. In fact, I think this applies to all iniBuilds aircraft across the board really. It is like there is always the same volume, and other sounds are dropped out to make room for what the team think should be the dominant sound at any point, rather than increasing the sound of something that should be dominant and keeping the background sounds that should be at a consistent volume in the mix. As if there is a constant aim to keep the aircraft at the same decibel level no matter what. Almost as if the sounds have been taken from some cheap recording that has been auto equalised or something. The sounds themselves are good I think, just the mixing is really not. Sorry ended up a bit of a long post, and hope it is understood! Anyway, thanks for the continued work as always.

Another regression with v1.1.1 is the LDG INHIBIT ECAM memo that comes up whilst taxiing after landing. Seems to be related to the brakes somehow.

VNAV seriously needs a proper look at and an update dedicated to it. There are so many issues relating to how the aircraft targets constraints and speeds. How it displays these targets and predictions, how the F-PLN page target speeds, relate to the PERF pages and indications on the PFD, ND, like the level - off arrow, like magenta and orange dots around waypoints etc., etc. Level-Off Arrow in OP DES for example, it just most off the time in the completely wrong place on the ND. Makes doing continuous descents so much harder than it needs to be for example. How it calculates descents etc. Like here, as can be seen, there are no constraints before EGNUG, but the aircraft is planning to be at EGNUG, 3000ft too high. It should simply start the descent sooner to meet this constraint. There are no speed, or altitude restrictions that mean it can't do this. It should simply start the descent sooner to make this constraint.

Sadly still all an issue with 1.1.1.

Same issue here, and the fix above did not work!