ClaasKrause

I get these exact "atrocious" ground textures as well, but I don´t even own the Tristar yet ... so

XSX? what is that

Considering the price of the current 5090, all VRAM demanding aircraft are honestly unbearable and unrealistic.

I had this very bug with the A330 (default msfs 2024) and the A340-300. seems to be ok right now. but good to know. I think by now I have disabled all the MSFS crash systems as well ...

Very interesting. My rig (arriving tomorrow) will be very similar to yours. Ryzen 7 9800X3D, 64, 5080 ... Are you running ultra / high settings with AutoFPS and textures on? - high or ultra? 4K Display? Thanks a lot, warm regards, Claas

it has to be said that right now - the A350 perfoms very well - it´s night and day compared to the earlier builds. so I suppose it would be lovely to translate the insights gained back then into the development of the A380 🙂

Thanks for opening up this discussion. If the core features are in place from the start, I’d already be very happy. One thing I’d strongly encourage you to prioritise, though, is a stable way to stream the A380’s KCU / "MCDU" to a browser, so it can be used on a tablet or iPad. That would make a huge difference in day-to-day usability. #remoteMCDU&OIS Other features—like offsets and additional refinements—can absolutely come later. What really matters most, in my view, is solid, reliable performance. When the A340 was first released, performance felt quite acceptable. It may have degraded somewhat over time, but hopefully that can be improved again. In any case, I’d really urge you to ensure that the A380 doesn’t end up being a performance-heavy aircraft like the A350 was at release. #performance

any news on this? 🙂

Someone mentioned that Microsoft would probably be happy for you to keep updating the aircraft, but wouldn’t necessarily want to pay invoices for that. Of course, I have no real insight into how those contracts actually work. That said, Microsoft / Asobo have reported small, incremental updates to your default aircraft before, right? So does that mean they were actively contacting or commissioning you for those improvements? Thanks a lot in advance—and if this is a sensitive topic that can’t be discussed openly, I completely understand. I just wanted to add that your default aircraft are really great for what they are. The A330 in particular has a special place for me—it’s simply the best A330 available right now, looks fantastic, and is honestly a very welcome change from the A350 and A340. On top of that, all of your default aircraft run incredibly smoothly, which makes it such a pleasure to enjoy them alongside heavier iniBuilds sceneries. Thanks again for the communication!

I had a similar issue, and in my case it seemed to be caused by having too many different “game gear calibrations” in SimApp Pro (the ones at the bottom, not the top menus). I ended up deleting all of them and saving one clean, single-stroke calibration—and since then it’s been working seamlessly across all my Airbuses. I’d definitely recommend using the manual mapping chart provided by Fenix, as those mappings should work consistently across all Airbuses. That said, it does take a bit of fiddling to find what works best for you. Some YouTubers suggest deleting all the game gear calibrations entirely, but that didn’t work for me personally. Also, when I tried the Winwing calibration file, a few important switches—like the engine switches—were mapped incorrectly, so I had to adjust those manually. In the end, it’s a bit of trial and error, but I’m sure you’ll get there. And by the way, I totally get your inclination towards flying the default ini Airbuses. For me, they just offer the smoothest performance, especially when using heavy payware sceneries—no stutters or performance issues. Sure, the systems depth is a bit limited, but they look fantastic and honestly get the job done really well.

Yes — both Fenix and FSLabs have already set the benchmark by implementing robust browser-based HTML/JS bridges, enabling seamless integration between the aircraft systems simulation layer and external interfaces. Their use of lightweight web technologies to expose avionics data, SimVars, and custom events through local web servers or WASM-backed bridges has significantly expanded interoperability with third-party tools, EFBs, and remote clients. iniBuilds, this is your opportunity to demonstrate that you operate at the same level of technical maturity. A properly implemented HTML bridge — with structured APIs, real-time data binding, and low-latency event handling — would not only enhance your aircraft ecosystem but also empower advanced users and developers to build around your platform. Think beyond static EFBs: open up access to LVars/HVars, expose aircraft state via WebSockets or REST endpoints, and enable bidirectional communication for hardware integration and external displays. In today’s flight simulation landscape, extensibility and openness are no longer “nice-to-haves” — they are expected in high-fidelity addons. Matching (or exceeding) what Fenix and FSLabs have delivered would send a clear message about your commitment to serious, study-level simulation. grazie mille!

I think this bug is still present. doesn´t me bother too much since I follow the strict order in which things have to go down with GSX. but yeah, the integration and interaction between the A350, GSX and simbrief could be more robust

I had that very same bug few months ago.

it would be nice to get a paid "Enhanced" upgrade for the default iniBuilds A330. iirc this wouldn´t bother microsoft?

Apparently the event-codes for the KCCU (350 MCDU) have changed? the always perfectly working stream deck profile doesn´t respond for the letter buttons and numerals and FPLAN / PERF / etc. ... did you change these?