ClaasKrause

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?

hmm ok ...

in the end - I think we should get a web UI via a http:// - link for the A359 KCCU ... (MCDU) ... like Fenix and FSLabs have ... and these are smaller companies! and ... a lot of dedicated simmers who can afford it have the winwing mcdu, but especially for the A359 there is a greater need for peripheral access to it ... please please

This would be HUGE. Being able to use the Winwing MCDU, FCU and EFIS properly with the default iniBuilds / Microsoft A320 and A330 would be an absolute game-changer. Win Ctrl (when will we get used to that haha) says they’re working on it, so fingers crossed 🤞

will any deviations from this given procedure as kindly written down by PassengerFlight (I prefer disabling gsx-remote-control as well) result in the 1 Pax error?

ah interesting ... are such mobiflight profiles to be found on flightsim.to? recently I had the problem that mobiflight won´t recognize my winctrl hardware so I had to count on simapp pro itself ... THANK YOU! Looking forward what the team says 🙂

would be too cool ...

Dear community, hope you’re all having a great day. I usually prefer to disable the GSX Remote Control, as I actually enjoy using the GSX toolbar in-sim a bit more. Also, the flashing orange indicator in the OIS was starting to get a bit nerve-wracking. However, since doing this I keep running into an issue where GSX only detects 1 passenger, even though my SimBrief flight plan shows the correct (and much higher) pax count. My ideal workflow would be: – set fuel to instant via the aircraft / EFB – then load passengers progressively via GSX Has anyone found a reliable way to do this with the iniBuilds A350 in MSFS 2024? Or is this a known limitation / bug when the GSX Remote is disabled? Would love to hear how others are handling this. Thanks a lot and warm regards, Claas

do you use say intentions / have a subscription?

Hi dear iniBuilds team, first of all: huge props for the SU4 performance improvements on the A350. The gains in smoothness and stability are very noticeable, especially on longer sectors and in complex scenery. It’s clear a lot of deep, unglamorous work went into that, and it really shows. Now that performance has taken such a solid step forward, I’d like to suggest two features that would meaningfully push immersion and workflow realism to the next level, especially for users with more advanced setups. 1) Physical Printer Support (POS 80 / similar) Support for a physical cockpit printer (e.g. POS 80–style thermal printers) would be a fantastic addition. Use cases: ATIS printouts OFP / loadsheet Weather and route revisions Clearances or operational notes Several aircraft already show how powerful this can be for immersion, and the A350—with its strong procedural focus—would benefit enormously from it. 2) Remote KCCU / OIS (Tablet / Browser / Networked Device) A remote KCCU / OIS interface, similar in concept to what Fenix or FSLabs offer, would be a major quality-of-life improvement. Potential benefits: Entering FMGS data from a tablet via a browser Interacting with the OIS (charts, performance, documents) outside the main sim view Cleaner workflows for users without perfect mouse access to the cockpit Given the A350’s real-world architecture (KCCU + CDS + OIS), a remote implementation feels both technically appropriate and highly immersive. Why now? With SU4, the aircraft feels like it has reached a performance baseline where deeper interaction features become viable without compromising stability. These two additions would not just be “nice extras,” but meaningful steps toward a more complete, modern long-haul simulation environment. Thanks again for the work you’ve done so far — the A350 is already an impressive piece of engineering. I hope you’ll consider these ideas for a future update. Best regards, thanks, Claas

Dear iniBuilds Team, Hope you’re all doing well! I just wanted to say how much I’m enjoying your aircraft right now—especially after the huge performance boost you delivered for both the A350 and A340. They were already smooth, but the latest updates really took things to the next level in MSFS 2024. I’m a big fan of using CPDLC, PDC, and all the related datalink features, so I wanted to ask: Do you have plans to add physical printer support in the near future? Fenix and FSLabs have had this for quite a while, so I’m hoping it might be on your roadmap as well. I even picked up a POS-80 (Epson) thermal printer specifically to use with your aircraft—would love to get it rolling soon! Thanks a lot for your amazing work, and warm regards, Claas

sounds interesting. will this technology enable remote control of some units (OIS or MCDU) via a browser / iPad?

Hey dear team, First off — holy wow. The A350 performance boost in SU4 is insane. I genuinely didn’t expect a heavy, systems-rich airliner to run this smoothly, but you absolutely nailed it. Huge kudos! Since you clearly have some magic going on under the hood: like many simmers, I’ve got the Winwing MCDU, and once you get used to using a real hardware CDU, it’s hard to fly without it. It would be amazing if the A350 MCDU and/or EFB supported external access — e.g., via an iPad or a web interface. Please please ... If you could add native remote MCDU/EFB support, that would take the A350 to the next level and really justify the premium tier. 😉 Thanks for all the hard work!

the FCU + EFIS (L+R) are working seamlessly at the moment which is nice.