dectenor2

Yes it has had a lot of updates, but it’s still full of bugs and lots of systems errors which is really disappointing for how much we paid for the aircraft and how it was marketed to us. It’s not complaining. Some of us have spent an absolute tonne load of our own time reporting stuff to try and help the aircraft be better, and that will benefit all users. It’s great that there is a v2 in the works, and it will be interesting to see if this stuff that has been reported since release will be finally fixed.

Many thanks for sharing that.

Would be interested to see what was in here!

Thanks swisspilot. I really hope that we can finally begin to see some fixes for the still quite a lot of bugs that are outstanding. And my hope is that they will be able to easily transfer the same fixes to all the Airbus aircraft. It will really just lift the standard of the iniBuilds airbuses so that people interested in more than just the nice modelling and textures can enjoy them.

Weirdly I was able to go back and edit and it worked, feel free to delete these messages regarding the photos!

PS I don't know why two of the screenshots have just appeared as links rather than and embedded photos. I have always uploaded images in this exact way, and for some reason these two are just not showing but you should still be able to access them...

Hi all, Here are a few more bugs to add to my list of ones still present in 1.2.6 here: https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/36783-bugs-that-still-are-not-fixed-in-v126/ Sound The sound during flap/slat extension from the cockpit can only be heard with the camera right at the front of the flight deck really close to the glareshield. You can see and hear on this video as I move the camera back and forth the sound is cutting in and out. https://youtu.be/q2BkI9-sLvM Systems From the F-PLN page, if you click on a speed prediction to take you to where you would enter a restriction, clicking on the RETURN button does not take you back to the F-PLN page. Obviously in this video you cannot tell if I am clicking, but when I am clicking the button (and you can see my mouse over it) but it is not returning to the F-PLN page. https://youtu.be/pEruRkfEk4M CMS (Constant Mach Segment) is not working. In this video you can see that I am entering a value for a CMS but nothing changes when it creates a temporary flight plan, and then nothing changes when inserting this. You can see I tried to enter a CMS by doing it directly from a waypoint and also from the CRZ PERF page. You should be able to enter a value here, and then it will use that speed for the rest of the waypoints until it reaches the end waypoint of the CMS (which I should select from a prompt after selecting the starting waypoint for the CMS). https://youtu.be/Pq30jzQf6Sk PERF Pages: The formatting of the speeds on the PERF pages is incorrect. Firstly on the CLB page, in the image below there should be no MACH value in the MANAGED line, the aircraft is just targeting 250KT(as under 10000ft) this will never be converted to MACH as at 10000ft the aircraft will accelerate to the ECON climb speed on 313KT, which it will then hold until that equals .84 MACH at which point it will target that. When it does this, the value for 313KT should not be shown on the CLB page as the aircraft is simply targeting .84. It should also state if this speed target is due to a SPD LIM or Constraint. (As shown on the DES page in reference photo below) On the DES page: The aircraft is now targeting a SPD (as shown on the FCU - although the logic for when the aircraft is showing SPD or MACH is bugged - see my previous reports), and this can also be seen on the PFD, the aircraft is targeting 325KT which is currently equal to .764M so clearly the aircraft has descended through the Mach to SPD transition. On the DES page therefore, the .84 should not appear and should be dashed out (as in the reference images at the bottom) The .84 is irrelevant as the aircraft will simply target 313KT until it decelerates for the 250@10000 SPD LIM. Whilst on this page, a reminder that the logic for SPD LIM shown on this page is bugged. At the moment the aircraft shows the final constraint rather than the next one. (In the case above it is correct by accident as the there were no further constraints and so the final one was also the next one if that makes sense.... Furthermore, whilst on speed restrictions, for some reason, as can be seen below, the aircraft decided to target 295KT, there is no reason for this, there is no constraint, as can be seen on the F-PLN page, and on the DES page it is still showing 325KT (and erroneously 0.84, as this should be dashed out as previously discussed. There is also a lack of a SPD LIM waypoint on the F-PLN page, the aircraft targeted this spurious 295KT until reaching exactly 10000ft when it changed to target 250KT. This is incorrect as it should begin the deceleration earlier. The point at which is does this should be shown by a SPDLIM pseudo waypoint on the F-PLN page, sequenced at, and indicating the altitude at which it will begin the deceleration. Here, once the aircraft is targeting 250KT (as below 10000ft), again the .84 should not be shown and it should simply show 250KT. And again, in the box where it says managed it should also show SPD LIM to indicate that this target is a SPD LIM not an ECON speed. Below is a reference image showing the MACH dashed out where not applicable, and the SPD LIM in the box with managed indicating that this speed is a SPD LIM rather than an ECON speed. Many thanks for your continued work!

Great thanks. I’ll get a video tonight. Also found an issue with a return ‘button’ on the MCDU not working so I’ll get that as well.

Pretty self-explanatory - the CMS still does not work. Hopefully we can see a fix for this and the other outstanding bugs soon. It will be especially sad if the A380 is released whilst all these issues are still present. That will be the A340, Tristar, (A220), and A380 all released whilst there are still so many bugs outstanding on the A350. Best

No problem! Any time, getting a bit cooler for a few days so I can do a bit more! It’s always annoying that the updates come out and so I try them out and then notice stuff ha. I wish I had the sixth sense to do some flying in these aircraft whilst the updates are being prepared!

Sorry, yet another thing. I have set the aircraft to be completely empty. There is no payload and no fuel. So surely the ZFW and the GW should be exactly the same as GW = ZFW plus fuel. Here there is an extra 160kg somehow. This is messing up the aircraft weight calculations, and also at odds with simbrief, because the profile gives the empty weight as 80000, but the actual empty weight is 80161.7kg. Maybe it is including two pilots in this 80.16 GW, but the pilots should be factored in to the OEW and thus the ZFW. So if you want to simulate the weight of the pilots, the OEW and thus ZFW with no payload needs to be 80.16 and then the simbrief profile will need updating. At the moment we are always getting a 160kg discrepancy. You can see the actual ZFW and GW using Any2GSX, so you can tell that the aircraft itself is reading the ZFW incorrectly. Hope this makes sense. Thanks

In addition. Here there is a SPD Limit of 180 at EMA9 But the aircraft is then trying to accelerate afterwards to 210 at IEM82, where there is no SPD restriction (but even if there was, it would stay at 180, as 180 still satisfies MAX 210. You can also see that the (SPD)(LIM) waypoint is in the wrong place. The aircraft does not need to slow to 250 for 10000ft at all because there is a waypoint VELAG with a speed restriction of 250kts at FL123, so the aircraft will already be at 250 for 10000ft. Therefore no deceleration required. So the (SPD)(LIM) pseudo waypoint should not even be there at all. If the aircraft does need to slow to 250kts at 10000ft (because there is no waypoint with a restriction of 250kts that the aircraft will be at before it reaches 10000ft) then the (SPD)(LIM) waypoint should be at the point in the flight plan when the aircraft will begin to decelerate. This altitude will depend on the calculated econ descent speed before it needs to decelerate but generally around FL120-FL105. So the (SPD)(LIM) waypoint should be sequenced in the flight plan between the two waypoints that have a predicted altitude immediately above and below the altitude at which it will begin the deceleration. (Sorry that is quite hard to explain in words, much easier when you can speak it and point to the F-PLN page)! Thanks.

There are still numerous issues with the F-PLN page that have been reported for a long time. The predicted speed for waypoints in cruise are still given in IAS rather than MACH. There are duplicate (T/D) pseudo waypoints. 3 way switches still have inconsistent scroll wheel behaviour. For example compare the BRK A/SKD or the LDG Light switches with the FD/FPV and CONSOLE FLOOD LT switches. For the first two if you scroll up the switch moves up, but with the last two, if you scroll up the switch moves down. It is really annoying. The level-off arrow and the banana on the ND also need work just like all the other airbus aircraft in your fleet. Clicking on the LSK to Auto Populate the ZFWCG does not work. Below is a video showing that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k8hp714E_U Many thanks for your continued work on this aircraft. I must say it hand flies very nicely, the best flight model of your aircraft by far I think in terms of hand flying!

Yeah have noticed this. I just use the onscreen keyboard on the OIS that you can pop up to avoid any conflicts.

Excellent many thanks for this! Many of these that are not a350 specific things are also present in the a340. I.e. the constraint stuff, level off arrow, PERF page and f-pln page speed mismatch, f-pln page altitude predictions etc.