MS FS2020 and A320Neo, flying online?

[Diego Vasquez]

After a couple of partially successful flights using the MS FS2020 A320Neo, ive not yet dared to connect but I am anticipating the issues I will face when I do.

The expectation gap with regards to premium Aerosoft and PMDG airliners and my online simming style is enormous:

1, MCDU/FMC is mostly a display item of the settings you setup prior to departure, the options to interact with the loaded route after the fact is limited.

2. Limited VNAV: Maybe its just me doing it wrong, the ability to moderate the autopilot for vertical navigation is simply not there.

3. Flight Planning is limited to whatever the default planner offers; its even more limited than FSX id' say. No common format to import/export, which compounds #1 above.

4. MISSING AIRPORTS! I am biased because my home is not there, but this limits greatly the ability for people to participate in events.

All in all, i think that VATSIM ATC will have to be very understanding with whoever reports using the new sim, and I anticipate a lot of asking for vectors and help with profiles?

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2020 at 08:27 PM by Diego Vasquez

[Robert Shearman Jr]

Additionally, taxiway lettering at most US airports is completely missing, completely wrong, or some combination of the two.  BWI is missing one of its major runways.

For VFR and especially back-country bush-style flying, this sim is a godsend.  For GA and airline IFR, the airport scenery needs some polishing and we'll probably need to wait for some payware aircraft in order to see proper behavior from complex avionics. 

[Koen Meier]

For missing airports: if the data is missing in bing then it won’t be in the sim.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

Correct.  The Bing map of BWI shows one of their major runways under construction.  It was a project that took around a month and was completed approximately 7 years ago.  Yet it shall live forever in FS20 and BWI will have to operate without one of its two primary arrival/departure runways, until it's corrected.  I'm praying that it gets corrected in the base scenery package and doesn't require all VATSIM pilots to install a scenery add-on in order to fly into BWI, because otherwise, you know that 90% of VATSIM pilots won't be aware of the issue until they're cleared to land on 33L and find only a giant mound of dirt there.

[Andrew Ogden]

A multitude of reports have been made to the Zendesk about missing airports. A member of the forum team has also said that the more issues there are about the same thing, the more it gets prioritised, so report all the airports you believe are missing 🙂.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/missing-airports-sent-to-zendesk/165814

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/reporting-on-airport-issues/121695/118

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/missing-airport-list/171994

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/welcome-to-stuttgart-airport-edds/130202/2

 

The main problem with Bing is its treatment of airports that are either part- or full-time military bases. It censors them all and thus they don't appear in the sim.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

Ouch. 

Yeah I sent a ticket for BWI 33L and also one for general taxiway sign shenanigans.  We'll see what happens! 

[Spender Vondel]

What the OP stated is exactly the reason I started out with VATsim using X-Plane 11 and a good payware airliner. It would be a horrible mess for a beginner like me to try and do the same with the A32NX in its current WIP state and MSFS' problematic flight planning. The Working Title CJ4 is probably the best free addon plane that could work efficiently with VATsim, or the CRJ 550/700 payware addon. Both of course are less automated than the average Airbus so it would still be harder.

Since I started flying in X-Plane I've been able to just fly and focus on radio communication, instead of having to cope with WIP planes and simulation quirks

Edited August 2, 2021 at 02:43 PM by Spender Vondel