Leaderboard

Hello everyone, It’s really great to see FSLabs making a comeback with the A321, and soon the NEO version as well. I truly hope it will be an excellent aircraft. But I’m here to ask about the A330-300 for MSFS2020. Every day, I check here hoping to find news about the A330, but so far I haven’t seen any definite confirmation that you’re working on it. The aircraft is truly underrepresented in MSFS2020, and the versions available from other developers, even those on 24, don’t really meet expectations. We’re looking forward to an A330 at FSLabs quality. I truly hope FSLabs takes into consideration all the simmers who have been eagerly waiting and asking about the A330. There have been many comments and questions, and it would really mean a lot to the community to receive a clear and honest response regarding whether the A330 is part of your plans or not. We’re genuinely looking forward to it, and thank you for your continued hard work.

Its further along than it was yesterday!

Hi Stephen, You are right - its not something I can say however a number of testers are happily using it currently in both sims.

Hi Savio, As you may have seen a couple of days ago Asobo made a release to 2024 which caused us - and several other developers, some heartache as they changed the location of the community folder. The reason it affected us is because we are actively testing our products in 2024. As soon as we have more info we will announce it.

The rumours are news will come the day after Hell freezes over!

That’s a terrible suggestion, you have no idea how long it’s been in development, to suggest they waste whatever resources they’ve spent on it is frankly ridiculous.

You can buy it. We wont be refunding the cost though

Put it this way, most of the young people I interact with recognise my Concorde tie pin without assistance and know something about it. When they discover I'm a bit of a geek they ask lots of questions. A percentage of them are already flying flightsims of some description though it has to be said most if not all are MSFS based and have no intentions of using P3D. Some of them have a certain, rudimentary version of Concorde in MSFS and when I point out the many inaccuracies they invariably tell me to do something about it and get FSLabs to make one for MSFS Obviously, I explain there is no telling when this will happen as I know as little as anyone else does.

I'm sure the team are hard at work

Quality takes time of course - I've just bought MSFS2024 just to gain a bit of familiarity with the interface. The next and only aircraft installation will be the FSLabs products.

There is a pattern of vaporware with these projects, and FSLabs does not issue any updates other than “work is ongoing and when we have something to share, we’ll share it”. I personally find the strategy of announcing such projects followed by years of radio silence on any meaningful progress updates a bit disrespectful to customers. We are all here because at the end of the day, we support FSLabs, their work and want them to do well, and underlining it all, we are all very passionate about aviation. This business of announcing/teasing a project followed by long duration radio silence leaves one to believe the project is either not going well, or that FSLabs is insensitive to the customer regard/passionate interest at play. Not to get too into psychology, but a dev that provides even modest updates is able to develop a rapport with their customer base such that years of delays are broadly tolerated by customers with understanding and support, and most importantly, calibrated expectations that it’s going to be a while. To answer your overall question, I believe the A330 is coming to MSFS, although I have zero SA on whether it’s months or years away.

Found this just now

That's the point, although the other developer is already about to deliver the NEO LEAP PW versions, it doesn't compare to the FSLAB dynamics, but as a customer I will obviously enjoy the other plane for a while, for the rest we don't know when it will be ready to be compatible with fs2024.

I think it's more a worry that some of us might not be alive to see it though.

So I see a lot of dissension in here, some of it borderline sarcasm and downright degradation. One of the major participants in FSLabs development, testing, and troubleshooting has posted several times in here-is his word not good enough? You see what their recent developments have been-FSLabs were the premier Airbus provider for P3D. Hands down. Why would they not want to relocate their Bus over to MSFS? It makes perfect sense. Concorde took a LONG time to build into P3D. Unfortunately its not a direct port-but I have a feeling they are well ahead of where most people think they are. Whether or not they share is up to them. FS Weekend happened this weekend. Maybe something happened there? If not-RELAX. FSLabs is a known quantity in the community in a good way. Spare me your "mailware" and "they don't communicate". When theres something to be released, youll know about it. Also-those pesky surveys-there is always some form of inherent bias against it...from a marketing/product development standpoint, I wouldnt hold weight to them.

Correct, there are many different communication styles. In FSLabs case, they simply don't. Now that's an exaggeration but not by much. And respectfully, it does not take much time to give your customers and potential customers a quarterly update as Ray mentioned above. Heck, even one every 6 months would be nice.

I did notice that a beta tester was flying the NEO on Vatsim last week . Hopefully won't be too long now .

An FSLabs A330... that would be DEFINITIVE! I can only imagine flying an FSLabs A330-300 Rolls Royce, haha... daydream!

So you expect a company to develop compatibility for a product of theirs which was developed basically 3 simulators ago (p3dV6,msfs2020) and current msfs 2024? thats the equivalent of asking microsoft and nvidia to release new drivers for your rtx5080 because you like windows 95 so much. I’m looking for common sense in your question but struggle to find it. the p3d line was developed in a different timeframe with limitations and expectations from a different era. my suggestion would be that if you want the goodies, grow with where the market is and leave legacy where it belongs, in the past.

As long as Concorde is guaranteed to come to MSFS I’m super happy

Gents- this is not going to be product-related... and it's not going to be customer-related either. As it's a nice Sunday evening and I am sure everyone is now enjoying their favorite sim aircraft, I'd like to give a small word of thanks to the people who are selflessly answering your questions, queries and support requests. Our staff of volunteers who could actually be doing something else on their Sunday but instead they are here. Helping. Answering. Configuring. Managing the forums. Posting replies on FB. John. Tim. Karl. Norm. George. Fritz. Simon. You guys are awesome and I want to thank you... you deserve all our gratitude. The entire FSLabs development and QA team loves you... and I personally bow before you. Thank you again!

Hello everyone, We are pleased to have now pushed our v293 update to our experimental channel within the FSL Control Center this afternoon for our FlightSimLabs A321ceo product line. This update reflects our ongoing commitment to enhancing the simulation experience by introducing new features and resolving a wide range of issues that have been reported by our dedicated community. Key Highlights in this update include a fix for some memory issues when the Weather Radar is active, a new way to set up Thrust Lever detents via our MCDU OPTIONS page making it much easier to configure by moving the lever to the appropriate position and a single-click on the appropriate gate (new documentation section included) and several other fixes for issues observed by our community. A non-exhaustive list for the fixes here: Weather Radar memory fix IR shutdown timing fix FMGC PROG PAGE RNP 0.0X format corrected FMGC Printer function page time out issues fixed LIGHTS Cabin lights fixed LIGHTS Landing Light fix for when Pin 1 is INOP TCAS Aural warnings inhibited when unpowered DU PANEL Default WX brightness set to 0.75 PANEL STATES Fix for panel state saving PITOT HEAT electrical system fixes PFD TCAS RA not showing fixed MMR/IR Fix for AP1+2 INOP when loading on APU state MMR Fix for Load on Rwy MMR fault XPDR Added ADS-B and XPDR 2 messages to ARINC MAINT bus MCDU OPTIONS – TLA gate set up now via single-click – Documentation updated to include Thrust Lever Detent config new logic PACKS sound updates for cockpit Currently, customers can access this update via the Flight Sim Labs Control Center, through the experimental channel (instructions here). To read the full version of the announcement and to see key highlights of this update, please visit this link: Update V11.0.1.293 - Flight Sim Labs As always, thank you for your continued support!

You perhaps also missed where we have said that Concorde, a very niche product, for us as a team is something of love. It matters not what a survey - which to be fair is very loaded, says when it comes to Concorde that passion comes first.

Sunk cost fallacy

IMO they should scrap the Neo now that Fenix is doing theirs and just focus on the A330

If you have a look at Norman’s post above, on the left side you can see what aircraft he has access to, looks like he’s keeping the NEO all to himself.

Is the A320neo in development?

it's available for early release for long term customers / and or also spent at least $42 IN STORE AND if then u get early buy access $30 and free msfs2024 support in future for limited time/ people. just installed it. gonna try it out. i been missing chase plane since p3d https://parallel42.com/products/chaseplane ChasePlane - Known Limitations The Reality of Limitations... ChasePlane breaks the mold of what an add-on can be in MSFS. As a result, we encountered a few simulator bugs and limitations that prevent some functions from working at 100%. Pay attention to the list below. Keep in mind that any future sim or ChasePlane update can add to or remove from that list. This is a living document. Please do not purchase if you think you will be affected by any of them. Tobii Eye Tracker Currently not supported. We are working to bring that compatibility in a future update. VR ChasePlane works in VR with the following limitations: The depth perception of the mouse cursor can be off (on the right eye) while in the cockpit if the view is moved from the default pilot position. We are currently working to resolve this issue. The mouse cannot be used to pan/tilt the camera. Control assignments must be used to perform those. We will keep researching how we can make this work. The Smart View will not work in VR. We are working to resolve this issue. In MSFS 2020, panels cannot be displayed while in external or world view. This is true without ChasePlane as well and cannot be mitigated. Xbox Controller as PRIMARY flight controls? ChasePlane cannot switch between allowing your Xbox controller to control the plane OR the camera. IF you use an Xbox controller to fly your plane/helicopter or drive your vehicle, we recommend a second controller to bind camera controls, drone, etc. Checklists You will lose the ability for the sim to move the camera when clicking a checklist item. Due to the way built-in checklists are integrated, the camera cannot be moved to a checklist item selected from the checklist panel.

No, I never worked on the real thing, apologies if that came across. I have had contact with a few that were there though.

For me, that's what it's all about. I know that many believe it to be a big learning curve (and it is if you've only used a magenta line...) but it makes the simulation even more realistic if a lot of people don't want to put the effort in to learn how to fly her. Certainly in BA there were a majority of flight crew that never wanted to join the Concorde fleet (a retired captain friend of mine included) because you had to be an enthusiast to put yourself through the course. One captain even fought the system to leave the fleet and go to another type after many years - I'm told he felt he'd done his time. The virtual crew system included with the current version reduces the learning curve to more realistic proportions for everyone. I know there are some very vocal posters who protest this but I'm saying this a someone who used to manage every switch myself - I think I'd rarely seek to turn it off now, even if I had the option. This has opened the simulation up to people who probably would have been very intimidated if just handed a Concorde and told to work it out for themselves, including those in the future generations demographic.

I think it will all be compatible together, the NEO will arrive and it will also be compatible with fs24, at least we have to think that the amount of programming the plane has should not make it so easy to take everything to the next level, if the only thing missing is that they tell us the dates so at least we don't bother anymore. XD hahahahaha

@Fraser Gale, I believe there was a belated apology and acknowledgment the data came from FSL site. But access to any Concorde documentation would appear a moot point as it’s been retired over 20 years now and interest from the younger generation is limited. And given very little can be controlled in the 64-bit version using that information would seem to have limited usefulness. Norman is very helpful on the forum but access would be something only @Lefteris Kalamaras can decide. Just for info PMDG are still a successful business and any piracy doesn’t appear to have damaged them. The dangers of downloading a pirated copy is evident on what else might be placed on the user’s PC. Something very nasty possibly.

Are you aware some of the plans in the old Concorde forum were taken without permission and ended up on the Colimata forum for XP? Not much you can do about this type of “theft” if it’s considered as such. Just as anyone who bought Concorde for P3D and also bought the Colimata one could copy and paste all your technical documents you kindly provided. The internet is the Wild West. You can’t control it. But giving prospective MSFS Concorde customers read access to the relevant forums would be a good move in customer relations.

Hi Norman, We used to be able to access the Concorde Lounge but even this is not accessable anymore! Would it be possible to open all forums to users registered with other products as we have not pirated them and you can verify these users as genuine? As Ray has said it would reduce questions. Kind Regards Tim Marchant

There is also the issue of people from other forums (for other simulations) directly copying technical information that a few of us spent a lot of time researching and explaining, solely to assist loyal customers of FSLabs. This information could then be used for other purposes without any thought to the original author. I'm sure any prospective customers could ask pertinent questions here in the general forum and would receive answers from current customers or those of us who keep an eye on things where time permits, even although they can't expect official support. This does not extend to future developments incidentally, purely the current state of play. I'd personally like to see current customers focus on factual, evidence based information however, avoiding personal opinions or wish lists in order to provide useful and pragmatic information to all.

@Troy Kretzul, I create my own custom routes with PFPX. It remains an excellent planner. I also adhere to the rules regarding supersonic flight. Providing you have the freedom to add your own waypoints SimBrief should be fine. I always have my first waypoint as the SID exit point and last is the STAR entry point. That way the routes can be generic irrespective of runways in use. When you feed that plan into the HP200X the accel and decel points are determined by the software and one of its long standing bugs is the inability to fine tune them. Same with the decel point. Fortunately the accel enunciation is just that. Words without any aircraft systems changing. But the decel point will reduce thrust so if your own decel point is later I just hit F4 a few times to maintain full power. Irritating but it can be overridden. I have a few short favourites. Oslo- Heathrow, Manchester to Lisbon and Tampa to Houston. All no longer than 1.5hrs.

Surely piracy is pretty minimal these days with all the safeguards you put in place? PMDG have no restrictions and it doesn’t seem to be an issue for them.

I think FSL is the only producer that will make me move over to MSFS2024 hands down to FSL and the quality

I purchased the BBS FSL321 sound pack, which includes both CFM and IAE engine models. Overall, there's been a degree of change, but the fundamental sound logic is still based on the FSL core, so some sounds still have abrupt transitions, similar to the bugs reported in the forum's sound issue threads. Additionally, even after adjusting the volume as instructed, I find the wind noise during cruise to be harsh and unacceptable. Furthermore, the BBS FSL321 CFM sound pack at certain thrust levels sounds very similar to the 737 CFM sound, though I might be mistaken. Lastly, the frequency and magnitude of the vibration sounds during ground taxiing remain unchanged and are slightly rigid. I hope this helps.

You missed one out. Giving updates every few months 1) It takes little time to post info and 2) it’s frequent enough to satisfy most people. I suspect the current strategy satisfies only a tiny number who wonder if the aircraft they bought (Concorde in my case) is even being worked on to resolve the numerous issues raised in that forum. Knowing it is would make a world of difference to how FSL is perceived. PS. I notice you have bought Concorde. When did you last fly it if you don’t mind me asking?

One more appeared over the weekend.

Laguardia rwy 04 Cooked Goose depart over the Hudson :

Except it does. If a survey has a question then it is loaded in either the way it is written, or the potential answers available. For the record I'm a huge navigraph fan and have given them my hard earned cash evey single month from day 1. I'm, just not a fan of surveys, no matter what their subject.

@Maury Aymeric, I see you’re a new poster. These complex aircraft cannot be knocked up in a few months you know. A 64-bit Concorde has taken several years to build for P3D. The MSFS one should take less time but you don’t start work until it’s clear which sim will be the popular one. And as Norman has said it was a work of passion and the FSX Concorde was their flagship product. When you’re above 50,000ft over ocean I’m not sure any sim offers an advantage over the others.

It's been a long 4 years but finally back in the labs , Thanks for all the hard work guys.

VIE - OPO

TLV - VIE

CPH - VIE

VIE - CPH