iniSteven

Hi, if you're having a crash every time you load the aircraft then it is most likely an issue with the stability of your computer. Have you overclocked your computer at all? Are you running any other addons alongside the simulator? Other users have reported that reducing the speed of their RAM (either turning off EXPO/XMP or reducing the timings of their memory) has had a large effect on the stability of their sim. In the future, if you have a crash and you please follow the steps outlined here (especially with regards to the logging variables and they help immensely in tracking down the causes of crashes) The A350 is a complex aircraft and it is asking a lot of the simulator, unfortunately it is simply the nature of the plane that it is sensitive particularly to the stability of the memory on your PC - that said, it is one of the most flown aircraft in the simulator and so we know that it can be stable but there are a lot of variables that are beyond our control.

Hi, the update is in testing but we don't have any ETA to share at this time :)

I have loaded the A350-900 default cabin config at least a dozen times in the last week and not had this phenomenon. Can you confirm you don't have any light enhancement packages installed and that the aircraft is otherwise behaving as expected?

These artifacts are outside the boundaries of the edited terrain - just artifacts in the default photogrammetry and water mask

Hi, the different types of grass is actually accurate as some of the grass at EGLC is actually Astroturf - see the image here: As for the "why" the grass is modelled the way it is, it's because we've modelled the entire airport, including the base terrain and taxiways as a 3d object. MSFS's default terrain editing tools leave a lot to be desired, especially in areas with photogrammetry like London. In order to get around this, we've essentially placed a 'cap' on top of the terrain via a 3d model which allows much more fine adjustment of the elevation of the airport, smooth taxiways and runways, etc. The only downside is that 3d objects cannot use the same grass rendering technique as the terrain, so we've had to work around this ourselves.

You've enabled CFD visualization - you can turn it off from Settings -> Flight Interface -> Aerodynamic Visualizations

You need to restart the flight to reset these switches. I just want to clarify that just as in real life, these switches are irreversible, once they are pressed, they cannot be unpressed! In reality, it requires maintenance personnel to reset the hydraulic isolation valves on the ground manually. The pilot cannot, on the ground or in the air, reset these switches themselves.

Hi, the landing telemetry simply takes the vertical speed sim variable at the moment of touchdown - IAS, TAS, and G/S have no impact on the recorded vertical speed. Secondly, it should be expected that you will have a higher landing rate at high density altitudes. Because you are moving faster over the ground, you will also need to descend at a higher V/S in order to maintain the same geometric descent. Best, Steven

As I said, it's been noted and passed along...

You do not need to listen to the tones as an airbus pilot wether automatically or manually tuned, to be clear. Even in a Cessna with a modern GPS the navaids are automatically identified and pilots do not legally need to listen to the tones when this occurs. I have noted that the tones are not audible through the radio so I will pass that along.

Hi, we did make changes to the runways for the FS2024 version of the scenery and were able to get FSLTL to use the full length of the runway. BATC seemed to be dependent on other factors, but beyond our ability to control. Best, Steven

Hi, in the A340 and A350 there is no need under normal operation to listen to nav radio morse tones in order to identify them. They are automatically identified by the aircraft - when the LS or VOR identifier is shown on the screen, the navaid has been tuned and identified by the avionics.

Hi Mikai, regarding the GPWS sounds, there are actually several different soundsets that are used depending on the airline and specific equipment installed. We have even heard a boeing style "TWENTY-FIVE hundred" call in some recordings. The current recording are the highest quality and cleanest samples we have from an actual aircraft, so for now they are what we will stick with. Best, Steven

So what I'm asking is did the plane fly within RNP .3nm or did it deviate too far? For clarity the radius of that curve is approx .1nm, so again it depends on what exactly is in the database the aircraft is reading from, but for that specific leg it's within the approach specifications. Did you actually fly the approach?

I'd be curious what the leg is coded as in the Navigraph database, as what is depicted on the chart is not always what actually gets exported into the database - I will take a look. Regarding the actual approach, did the aircraft fly the procedure within acceptable limits?